NEW YORK — Chaos in the jury room led a judge Thursday to call a mistrial for the one remaining charge against disgraced film mogul Harvey Weinstein, a rape allegation by one-time actress Jessica Mann a day after he was found guilty of sexually assaulting her in his Manhattan retrial.

After an eight-week trial in Manhattan Supreme Court, jurors found Weinstein, 73, guilty of criminal sex act against former TV production assistant Miriam Haley, but acquitted him of the same charge against a second accuser, Polish model Kaja Sokola.

But the jury couldn’t reach a decision on the third accuser, one-time actress Jessica Mann, and the jury foreman refused to rejoin his fellow jurors after reporting Wednesday that he felt threatened by one of them telling him he’d “see me outside.”

The mistrial means prosecutors will have to decide whether to pursue Mann’s allegations at a third trial, again subjecting her to days of direct testimony and cross-examination on the witness stand. Mann testified at Weinstein’s 2020 trial as well.

But Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg told reporters Thursday that they’ve conferred with Mann and are set on a new trial, and Mann said on Thursday she’s ready for round three.

“I will never give up on myself and making sure my voice – and the truth – is heard,” Mann said in a statement Thursday. “I have told the District Attorney I am ready, willing and able to endure this as many times as it takes for justice and accountability to be served. Today is not the end of my fight.”

Assistant District Attorney Nicole Blumberg also said in court prosecutors are ready, unless Weinstein wants to “take responsibility” and plead guilty.

“We are ready to proceed and ready to retry,” she said.

When asked why prosecutors wouldn’t drop Mann’s allegations, Bragg said, “It’s about the survivors. Yes, Harvey Weinstein is going to be held accountable for his conduct as to Ms. Haley, and he’s facing a very significant term of imprisonment for that. But the jury was not able to reach a conclusion as to Jessica Mann, and she deserved that.”

Deliberations went off the skids when it came to Mann, with the jury foreman asking on three separate occasions to speak to the judge and attorneys away from his fellow jurors.

The foreman on Wednesday told Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Curtis Farber that another juror had threatened him, “You gonna see me outside” during a shouting match, because he wouldn’t change his position.

That led to calls for a mistrial by Weinstein’s lawyer, Arthur Aidala, who said the juror was the victim of a crime and the judge should call 911.

Farber released the jury for the day and asked them to return Thursday, but not before asking if they had reached a verdict in any of the charges — and they had, regarding Haley and Sokola.

Later Wednesday, the foreman told Farber that the jury had reached a decision on Haley and Sokola days earlier, on Friday, and their decision was unanimous. When the judge asked him if he’d been coerced, he said “no,” and responded, “My own decision.” He said that one of the jurors confronted him outside as they all left the building Wednesday.

The foreman said he’d be willing to return to the court building, but didn’t commit to rejoining his fellow jurors in the jury room.

On Thursday, he made that decision final.

“Yesterday we know was a stressful day. … I’m going to ask you, are you willing to go back into the jury room today and continue deliberations?” Farber asked.

“No, I’m sorry.” the foreman responded.

Aidala told Farber that he was planning to appeal, and said that his team would “be the prosecutors now” to determine what happened in the jury room.

“We have very powerful evidence that there was gross juror misconduct at this trial,” he told reporters outside the courthouse. “None of us ever heard of where a juror is so intimidated, a grown man who was in good physical shape in his late 30s saying, ‘I’m afraid to go back in to deliberate. If that doesn’t cast doubt on the verdicts here, I don’t know what would.”

Outside the courtroom, jurors gave differing accounts of the turmoil during deliberations, with two of them putting the blame squarely on the foreman, saying he didn’t want to stick around, possibly because of family issues.

“It wasn’t as bad as he made it seem,” one juror, Chantan Holmes-Claborn told reporters. “He wasn’t willing to work. He’s been trying to get out of it since day one. … Everything he did was sneaky.”

She said that jurors were split down the midle on Mann’s case, but the foreman didn’t want to go through with deliberations.

“He just let us know that, listen, by 2 o’clock, y’all better vote… . And we told him, you can’t tell people what to do by 2 o’clock.”

Juror no. 1 said the foreman told them he wouldn’t be open to changing his mind. “We didn’t finish deliberating. … We didn’t finish talking,” he said.

Another juror, no. 7, who didn’t give his name, attributed the tensions to “cabin fever,” but backed up some of the foreman’s statements. “I’m sure the foreman saw things he wanted to record. I agree with him. … Should it have been overblown? No.”

No. 7, who on Friday told the judge about a “playground” conflict between the jurors, confirmed that someone told the foreman to meet him outside. “But it wasn’t, you know, it’s not like that a fight was gonna break out. No, obviously not. I think it was just high tension.”

He added that the jury was inching toward a conviction regarding Mann’s allegations before deliberations blew up.

Mann accused Weinstein of raping her in 2013, but said she maintained a complicated relationship with the film producer for years after. Haley and Sokola said Weinstein forcibly performed oral sex on them in separate incidents in 2006.

All three of the interviewed jurors said their decisions with Haley and Sokola were clear-cut, with no. 7 saying that Sokola’s private alcohol recovery journal, which listed other people who she said sexually assaulted her but only listed Weinstein as someone “promising help” — but “nothing came out of it.”

Weinstein was charged with third-degree rape regarding Mann, which is punishable by up to four years in prison.

The criminal sex act charge he was convicted up is a far more serious offense, and carries a maximum 25-year sentence. Criminal sex act, which used to be called sodomy, involves forced anal or oral sex.

Mann and Haley also took the stand in Weinstein’s 2020 trial, which ended in a guilty verdict and a 23-year prison sentence. But last year, the New York State Court of Appeals overturned that conviction, saying the trial judge should have never allowed other women whose allegations were not included in the charges to testify against him and establish a pattern of predatory behavior.

Regardless of the trial’s outcome, Weinstein wasn’t going to go free — he was sentenced to 16 years behind bars after his conviction at a 2022 trial in Los Angeles on separate rape and sexual assault charges.

-------------

©2025 New York Daily News. Visit at nydailynews.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.