Harvey Weinstein jury has partial verdict, judge tells them to keep deliberating – USA TODAY

NEW YORK – The jury in the Harvey Weinstein sex-crimes trial told the judge Friday that they are unable to reach a verdict on the two predatory sexual assault counts against him but are unanimous on the other three counts. The judge told them to keep deliberating about a half hour before they were dismissed for the weekend.

Deliberations will resume Monday morning for a fifth day since the jury got the case on Tuesday. Since then they have sent out multiple notes asking questions and seeking read-backs of testimony. Their last note on Friday confounded the courtroom. 

“We the jury ask if we can be hung on counts one and three, and unanimous on the others,” said the note read by Judge James Burke.

Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Joan Illuzzi immediately asked the jury to continue deliberating on counts one and three. “We’re not willing to accept” a partial verdict, she said. 

“This is kind of a big decision that we need to discuss with Mr. Weinstein,” said defense attorney Damon Cheronis. 

All of the lawyers huddled with the judge at the front of the courtroom. Burke then instructed the jury to return to deliberating. 

“I have your note. Any verdict you return on any counts must be unanimous, so I will ask you to resume your deliberations,” Burke said.

“Just remember that you are in a critical stage,” Burke told the jurors as he dismissed them at 3 p.m. “All deliberations must cease and not continue until you are all in the jury room Monday at 9:30 am.” 

Weinstein is charged with five sex crimes, including rape and predatory sexual assault, involving two women, Miriam “Mimi” Haleyi, who says he forced oral sex on her in a hotel room in the summer of 2006, and Jessica Mann, who says he raped her in a hotel room in 2013.

Counts one and three are the most serious: predatory sexual assault of those two women, plus a third woman, “Sopranos” actress Annabella Sciorra, who says Weinstein raped her 27 years ago and whose allegation is too old to prosecute. 

Sciorra’s testimony was presented by the Manhattan prosecutors to support their assertion that Weinstein is a serial “predator,” which required them to demonstrate he assaulted more than one woman even if he wasn’t charged.

That, in turn, would allow a stiffer sentence if he is convicted, making the predatory counts the toughest of the charges against Weinstein.

But the jury said they can’t agree unanimously on those two counts.

It is unclear if they are unanimous on the other three counts for either conviction or acquittal. Those counts are: Sexual assault involving Haleyi, first-degree rape involving Mann and third-degree rape involving Mann.  

Sciorra continued to be the focus of the jury as deliberations crawled into a fourth day on Friday.

The seven men and five women of the jury began another day of deciding Weinstein’s fate by listening to a read-back of a major portion of Sciorra’s testimony almost a month ago as the first accuser witness for the prosecution. After about an hour-and-a-half, the jury stated they’d “heard enough” and left the courtroom to deliberate behind closed doors.

Sciorra, 59, says Weinstein raped her after pushing his way into her New York apartment following a dinner in the winter of 1993-94. 

The jury have also requested a list of people that Sciorra spoke to about her allegation, and asked for a read-back of testimony by her friend, actress Rosie Perez, who corroborated that Sciorra told her about the alleged rape.

And they sought emails that Weinstein sent regarding Sciorra, including ones to the Black Cube private Israeli investigative agency he hired to track some of his accusers and journalists in 2017.

Sciorra tearfully testified that Weinstein overpowered her. “I was punching him, I was kicking him, I was trying to get him away from me,” she said. “I was trying to fight him, but I couldn’t fight anymore because he had my hands locked (over her head).”

A few weeks later, she testified, Weinstein warned her in a “menacing” and “threatening” way not to tell anyone. 

During cross-examination, the defense asked her why she opened her door to an unexpected knock at night and questioned how Weinstein could have gotten past the doormen in the lobby of her building.

Defense lawyers also showed a 23-year-old clip from an interview Sciorra did with David Letterman during a press tour for the movie “Cop Land” in 1997. The clip showed her joking with Letterman: “I’ve been caught lying a lot in the past few years.”

Meanwhile, as lawyers and journalists wait for a verdict, speculation mounts about whether the time the jury is taking is an indication of which way they’re leaning. 

Best not to waste any time peering at inscrutable tea leaves, advises New York trial attorney Benedict Morelli. Based on the questions they’ve asked so far, he doesn’t see a pattern pointing to a clear direction. 

“While there is no direct link between the time a jury takes to deliberate and the direction of their verdict, a lengthy deliberation does reflect unanswered questions and potential uncertainty,” Morelli told USA TODAY. “For that reason, the longer the deliberations take, the more optimistic the defense will become.” 

Weinstein, 67, pleaded not guilty to all the charges and denies any non-consensual sex. 

Let’s block ads! (Why?)