**Harvey Weinstein Faces Retrial with Majority-Female Jury as #MeToo Case Revisits Court**

Jury Selection Highlights Gender Shift from Previous Conviction

A seven-woman, five-man jury was finalized Tuesday for Harvey Weinstein’s retrial on rape and sexual assault charges, marking a shift from the five-woman, seven-man panel that convicted him in 2020. Six alternates, including a final addition Tuesday, will standby. The selection process saw hundreds excused for biases or logistical barriers, with one dismissed juror calling Weinstein a “pig.”

Appeals Court Overturned 2020 Verdict Over Testimony Concerns

New York’s highest court overturned Weinstein’s 23-year sentence in 2023, citing improper admission of prejudicial testimony. The retrial, overseen by a new judge, focuses on allegations from three women: an aspiring actor who alleges a 2013 rape and two others accusing forced oral sex in 2006. One accuser did not testify in the original trial.

Retrial Jury Composed of Diverse Professional Backgrounds

The main jury includes a physics researcher, therapist, investment bank software engineer, and others spanning fields like social work and fire safety. During selection, prosecutors and defense probed jurors’ ability to remain impartial. Mike Cibella, defense attorney, asked one juror, “Would hearing [graphic allegations] indicate Mr. Weinstein must be guilty?” The juror, later selected, replied “no.” Prosecutor Shannon Lucey emphasized setting aside #MeToo sentiments, with all potential jurors affirming they could do so.

**Legal Challenges and Public Scrutiny Intensify**

Weinstein’s retrial reignites debates over accountability for sexual violence and judicial fairness. The inclusion of a new accuser and a more female-heavy jury may influence public perception, though legal experts note the overturned conviction underscores procedural risks. Simultaneously, Weinstein contests a separate 2022 Los Angeles rape conviction, complicating his legal battles. The case’s outcome could further shape #MeToo’s legacy, balancing survivor advocacy against due process concerns.