Trial judge dismisses Harvey Weinstein's request for a retrial following juror's complaint.
A JUROR ON TRIAL:
In the heart of New York city, things took an interesting turn during Harvey Weinstein's sex crimes trial. A juror asked the judge to let him out, claiming that his fellow jurors were treating one of their colleagues unfairly. But the judge, not convinced, told him to tough it out.
Judge Curtis Farber dismissed the defense's request for a mistrial, believing the juror's complaints were merely a result of tension during heated deliberations. He hinted that the young age of the juror might be the culprit, making him uncomfortable in the face of conflict.
The intense deliberations, stretching over two days, ended without a verdict. The jurors were scheduled to return to court on Monday. They spent their time revisiting Weinstein's accusers' testimonies and examining various evidence, including medical records and emails.
Twice, the juror requested a chat with the judge without his peers. He wanted to exit the trial, citing the unpleasant behavior towards another juror as the reason. However, Farber denied the request, stating that finding an alternate juror was impossible, and his concerns weren't strong enough for dismissal.
The persistent juror maintained his position, calling the treatment "unfair and unjust." Yet, he also described the tension as typical playground politics, with some jurors intentionally avoiding a fellow juror and gossiping about them behind their back.
Weinstein's lawyer, Arthur Aidala, argued that the judge should put a halt to the deliberations to investigate the concerns. He criticized the judge's handling of the situation, labeling his questions as weak.
On the other hand, Manhattan prosecutor Nicole Blumberg supported the judge's actions, reminding everyone about the expectations for jurors—to keep the case confidential unless all members are deliberating. She believed the issue was not causing any significant disruption to the jury's work.
The #MeToo movement gained momentum following sexual misconduct allegations against Weinstein. The jury, comprising seven women and five men, is currently weighing two counts of criminal sex act and one count of rape against the 73-year-old Oscar-winning producer. Weinstein has pleaded not guilty.
In case you or someone you know is struggling with sexual assault or trauma, there are resources available in Canada. According to reports, dealing with alleged bias or unfair treatment among jurors during deliberations involves several procedures, such as jury selection processes, investigations, interventions by the judge, and remedies.
Resources for sexual assault survivors in Canada:
- Call 911 if you are in immediate danger or fear for your safety.
- Visit the Canadian Association of Sexual Assault Centres (CASAC) website for a list of sexual assault centers offering information, advocacy, and counseling.
- Check out the Ending Violence Association of Canada's website for helplines, support services, and locations providing sexual assault kits.
- Contact the Indian Residential School Survivors Society at +1 866 925 4419 or +1 800 721 0066 (24/7).
- Reach out to the Toronto Rape Crisis Centre at +1 416 597 8808 (24/7).
- Dial the Canadian Human Trafficking Hotline at +1 833 900 1010 (24/7).
- Call the Trans Lifeline at +1 877 330 6366.
- Contact the Suicide Crisis Helpline at 988 (24/7) via call or text.
- Access the Sexual Misconduct Support and Resource Centre for current and former Canadian Armed Forces members at +1 844 750 1648.
- Learn about your rights as a victim on the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime website.
- The intense political debate arose when Weinstein's lawyer requested a halt in the trial's deliberations, accusing the judge of handling the concerns about juror misbehavior weakly and proposing defense of the general-news and crime-and-justice categories.
- Amidst the heated deliberations in the Weinstein sex crimes trial, the issue of unfair treatment among jurors emerged, highlighting the need for strong defense measures and emphasizing the importance of following protocol in politics and courtroom procedures, particularly in high-profile general-news and crime-and-justice cases.
