Manhattan prosecutors are dismissing claims of jury misconduct in the Harvey Weinstein case as "inconsistent and implausible". The prosecutors are urging a judge to uphold Weinstein's June sexual assault conviction, arguing that the defense's claims lack legal basis.

Weinstein's legal team had filed affidavits from two jurors who stated they regretted their decision to convict, alleging they were bullied by other jurors during the five days of deliberation. The defense argued that "threats, intimidation, and extraneous bias" marred the verdict and that Judge Curtis Farber mishandled juror complaints. The two jurors stated they felt overwhelmed and intimidated by other jury members who were pushing for a conviction for the charge that Weinstein forced oral sex on Miriam Haley, a former production assistant and producer, in 2006. Weinstein's lawyers are asking Justice Farber to set aside the verdict due to supposed misconduct including physical threats reported by jurors during deliberations, as well as what Weinstein describes as the judge's inadequate response under New York law.

Prosecutors Matthew Colangelo, Nicole Blumberg, Shannon Lucey, and Becky Mangold asserted that Weinstein's attempt to overturn his first-degree criminal sex act conviction "utterly fails, on both the law and the facts, to meet the standard necessary to set aside the guilty verdict". They cited a centuries-old rule, affirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court, that protects the finality of verdicts and prevents jurors from being "harassed or annoyed by litigants seeking to challenge the verdict". The Manhattan District Attorney's Office argues that the court appropriately addressed "scattered instances of contentious interactions between jurors" during trial, and post-trial testimony from two jurors cannot be used to impeach the guilty verdict. Prosecutors said the court correctly addressed notes submitted by two jurors during deliberations by instructing them to "listen to other jurors, consider each other's views carefully, deliberate respectfully, and rely only on the evidence admitted at trial".

Notably, prosecutors pointed out inconsistencies in one juror's statements, who initially described "threats" and "intimidation" in an affidavit, but had previously told the judge he only witnessed "playground stuff". Furthermore, immediately following the trial, this juror told reporters, "it's not like a fight was going to break out. No, obviously not".

In response to the allegations, the prosecution stated they declined to interview any jurors, fearing it would "cause the very harms" the aforementioned rule was designed to prevent.

Weinstein's spokesperson, Juda Engelmayer, countered that the prosecution's filing "avoids the core issue raised in Mr. Weinstein's motion — that several jurors reported being pressured, intimidated, and even verbally attacked into changing their votes. This isn't about second-guessing deliberations; it's about the integrity of the process itself".

Judge Curtis Farber has set a ruling date for December 22.

Weinstein was convicted in a June retrial in New York Supreme Court of sexually assaulting Miriam Haley, a former "Project Runway" assistant, and acquitted of a similar crime against another woman. Justice Farber declared a mistrial on a third charge after one juror refused to continue deliberating with the others.