A New York judge declared a mistrial on May 15, 2026, after a jury failed to reach a unanimous verdict in Harvey Weinstein's third rape trial [1, 2].
The outcome leaves the legal status of the 74-year-old [1] former media mogul in limbo as prosecutors weigh whether to pursue a fourth trial. This deadlock follows years of litigation and previous attempts to secure a conviction in the Manhattan Supreme Court [1, 4].
Judge Curtis Farber ended the proceedings after it became clear the jury was deadlocked [1, 4]. According to reports, all four female jurors voted to acquit the defendant [1, 4]. Because New York law requires a unanimous decision for a criminal conviction, the split among jurors made a verdict impossible.
The trial centered on allegations from plaintiff Jessica Mann regarding a rape that allegedly occurred in 2017 [3]. The proceedings were the third attempt by the state to try the case in New York City [2].
Prosecutors now face a deadline to determine the next steps for the case. They have 30 days to decide if they will seek a fourth trial [3]. This decision will determine if the state continues to allocate resources toward a new jury selection, and trial process.
Weinstein has remained a central figure in the global conversation regarding sexual misconduct in the workplace. The repeated failure to reach a verdict in this specific case highlights the complexities of achieving unanimity in high-profile sex crime trials — especially those involving decades-old allegations and a polarizing defendant.
“All four female jurors voted to acquit.”
The mistrial underscores the high legal threshold of unanimous jury verdicts in New York. With a specific pattern emerging where female jurors voted to acquit, the prosecution may struggle to find a balanced jury in future attempts. A decision to proceed with a fourth trial would signal the state's commitment to a conviction despite the repeated inability to secure a consensus among jurors.
