The judge overseeing the sex-crimes trial of former movie mogul Harvey Weinstein declared a mistrial on a final charge against him, after the jury foreman said he was unwilling to return to deliberations. Fordham Law Professor Cheryl Bader explained to The New York Times what was unusual about this instance.
On Friday, a juror said he had overheard others on the jury — in an elevator and outside the courthouse the day before — talking about another member of the group. He said he believed what he had heard amounted to misconduct. Later, he unsuccessfully asked the judge to dismiss him from the case.
And on Monday, the foreman raised his concerns for the first time. He said he was being pressured to change his vote, and that some of the other jurors were also talking about Mr. Weinstein’s past — apparently including details not included in the trial testimony.
By Wednesday, his concerns had grown, and he again requested to speak to Justice Farber in private.
The foreman said he had been met with verbal threats as he refused to change his vote.
What made the jury’s deliberations unusual was that members were able to reach unanimous verdicts on two of the counts and then “unraveled to a degree that a juror refused to continue,” said Cheryl Bader, a law professor at Fordham University.
“But it is not so unusual to have a jury reach a verdict on one charge and be hung on another, especially when the charges involve separate incidents with separate witnesses and evidence,” she said.
Read “Judge Declares Mistrial on Final Weinstein Charge” in The New York Times.
