Harvey Weinstein's third Manhattan trial on a rape charge ended Thursday with a mistrial after jurors told the court they were hopelessly split and no one would budge. Nine of the twelve panelists were ready to acquit the disgraced movie mogul, while three male jurors held out for conviction, the New York Post reported.

Justice Curtis Farber declared the mistrial after receiving a note from the jury that left little room for ambiguity.

"We feel no one is going to change where they stand."

The collapse leaves Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg's office facing an uncomfortable question: Does it try Weinstein a fourth time on the same allegation, or does it finally let the charge go? The answer carries real stakes for the credibility of the prosecution, for the accuser, and for a legal saga that has become a symbol of the #MeToo era's promises and limits.

What the jury saw and why it stalled

The charge at issue was third-degree rape. Jessica Mann alleged that Weinstein raped her in 2013. This was not a new accusation. It was the same allegation that led to Weinstein's 2020 conviction, which a New York appeals court later overturned. A subsequent retrial left the rape charge unresolved after deliberations broke down, AP News reported.

So this was round three. And the jury's verdict was the same as round two: no consensus.

Juror Sarae Perez offered a blunt assessment of what drove the majority toward acquittal.

"The ultimate doubt, a lot of us felt that we found a lot of holes in her cross-examination versus the direct. That was the main deciding factor."

That statement matters. It signals that the defense's cross-examination of Mann created substantial credibility problems in the eyes of most panelists. All four women on the jury reportedly sided with acquittal. The three holdouts for conviction were all men.

A conviction Weinstein already carries

The mistrial does not mean Weinstein walks free. He was convicted in a separate proceeding in June 2025 of one count of criminal sex act involving Miriam Haley, though the same jury found him not guilty of assaulting another woman, Kaja Sokola, NBC News reported. Weinstein faces up to 25 years in prison when sentenced on the Haley conviction.

He also remains behind bars because of a 16-year sentence handed down in California for rape and sexual assault, a conviction he is currently appealing. Even if the Manhattan DA declines to retry the Mann charge, Weinstein is not going anywhere.

That practical reality may factor into Bragg's calculus. The DA said his office will consult with Mann and consider what happens at Weinstein's upcoming sentencing before deciding whether to pursue a fourth trial. A hearing is set for June 24.

The procedural maze behind three trials

For readers trying to keep track, the timeline matters. In 2020, a Manhattan jury convicted Weinstein on charges that included the Mann rape allegation. That conviction was later thrown out on appeal, with the court finding that the trial judge had allowed prejudicial testimony from women whose accusations were not part of the charged conduct. The ruling forced prosecutors to start over.

The retrial split the charges. The Haley count produced a conviction. The Mann count produced a deadlock. Prosecutors then brought the Mann charge back for a standalone third trial, which ended Thursday in another deadlock. Manhattan has seen its share of high-profile cases testing courtroom procedure in recent months, but few have demanded this many trips through the system on a single allegation.

Justice Farber told the courtroom it was clear the jury was "hopelessly deadlocked." He thanked the jurors and discharged them.

Bragg's dilemma: a fourth bite?

Alvin Bragg now faces a decision that will draw scrutiny from all sides. Retry the case and risk a fourth failure, or drop it and face accusations of abandoning a high-profile accuser. The DA's statement was carefully noncommittal. He said his staff would consult Mann about another trial and weigh the sentencing outcome on the Haley conviction before making a call.

That framing gives Bragg room to walk away without saying so outright. If Weinstein receives a lengthy sentence on the Haley count, prosecutors can argue that justice has been served without subjecting Mann to yet another trial. If the sentence is lighter than expected, the pressure to retry could intensify.

The decision also raises broader questions about prosecutorial resources. Weinstein is already serving a 16-year California sentence. He faces up to 25 more years in New York on the Haley conviction. At some point, the marginal value of a fourth trial on a charge that three juries have now failed to resolve unanimously becomes difficult to justify. Other prominent Manhattan prosecutions have forced similar hard calculations about when to press forward and when to accept the outcome the system has produced.

What this means for Mann

Jessica Mann has now testified against Weinstein in multiple proceedings spanning years. Each trial required her to recount the same allegations under cross-examination designed to undermine her credibility. The toll of that process is not trivial, and Bragg acknowledged it implicitly by saying he would consult with her before deciding on a fourth attempt.

Mann's willingness to testify again may be the single most important variable. Without her cooperation, a fourth trial is functionally impossible. With it, prosecutors would still face the same evidentiary challenges that left nine jurors unconvinced this time around.

Weinstein's legal landscape

Even with the mistrial, Weinstein's legal exposure remains enormous. The Haley conviction alone could keep him behind bars for decades. His California appeal is ongoing, and that 16-year sentence stands unless overturned. The cases have drawn the kind of sustained public attention typically reserved for the most consequential criminal prosecutions, much like other headline-dominating cases that have captivated the country in recent years.

Weinstein, now 74, has maintained that any sexual encounters with Mann were consensual. His defense team has consistently attacked the credibility of the accusers and the prosecution's reliance on testimony from women whose claims were not part of the charged conduct. The appellate court's 2024 reversal of the original conviction validated at least part of that argument.

The June 24 hearing will be the next inflection point. At that proceeding, prosecutors are expected to signal their intentions on the Mann charge, and the court may address scheduling for Weinstein's sentencing on the Haley conviction. Readers who follow major criminal cases know that significant New York prosecutions often hinge on procedural decisions made far from the spotlight.

The bigger picture

Weinstein's prosecution was the legal engine of the #MeToo movement. His 2020 conviction was celebrated as proof that powerful men could be held accountable. The appellate reversal complicated that narrative. The subsequent retrial partially restored it with the Haley conviction but left the Mann charge dangling. Now, after a third jury has failed to reach consensus, the dangling has become a pattern.

Three juries. Three chances to convict on the Mann allegation. Zero unanimous verdicts. That record speaks for itself, regardless of what Bragg decides next.

When the system gives prosecutors three shots at a conviction and the jury splits every time, the question stops being whether to try again. It becomes whether anyone in the DA's office is willing to admit what the evidence has been saying all along.