Jessica Mann's Grotesque Testimony — Just What Is Wrong With Harvey Weinstein's Penis?
Her words first stunned jurors in 2020 — and as the retrial unfolds, the same descriptions are back at the center of the case.
Jessica Mann is once again at the center of Harvey Weinstein’s ongoing New York retrial – with her testimony reviving one of the most shocking and widely discussed elements from the original proceedings.
The former actress returned to the stand yesterday to recount her allegation of a 2013 assault, as prosecutors sought to reintroduce details about Weinstein’s body that first entered the record during his 2020 New York trial.
Prosecutors referenced Mann’s prior 2020 testimony when arguing for limited questions about the scarring she observed, with the judge allowing one leading question on her observations of scarring but restricting further details on the specific “looks like a vagina” characterization.
What followed was not just a legal argument about admissibility, but a reminder of why her earlier testimony continues to define how the case is understood.
During the 2020 trial, Mann described her first encounter with Weinstein’s body in terms that immediately reverberated far beyond the courtroom.
“The first time I saw him fully naked, I thought he was deformed and intersex. He has an extreme scarring that I didn’t know – maybe [he] was a burn victim … He does not have testicles, and it appears that he has a vagina.”
In that 2020 testimony, Mann explained the comment in context: upon first seeing the severe scarring in the pelvic and genital area during the alleged 2013 encounter, the appearance initially led her to believe the area resembled a vagina with no visible testicles and loose/empty skin.
She later acknowledged he had a penis but described the overall tissue as heavily scarred and irregular.
Mann also said at the time that she initially felt a sense of compassion upon seeing the extent of the scarring, not understanding its origin, and later questioned whether he was physically capable of normal intercourse due to the apparent damage.
Prosecutors have continued to frame those descriptions – originally given under oath in 2020 – as critical to the case, arguing they are not isolated observations but part of a pattern repeated across multiple trials.
In opening statements during the 2022 Los Angeles trial, later referenced in proceedings, prosecutor Paul Thompson said:
“Because of an infection, his testicles were actually taken from his scrotum and put into his inner thighs. That surgery caused pretty noticeable scarring.
“None of the Jane Does will describe his anatomy perfectly, but most of them will be able to describe these abnormalities that they observed during the assaults.”
The testimony has once again drawn attention as the retrial unfolds, with the same details – first introduced years earlier – being revisited before a new jury and debated as both corroborative evidence and potentially prejudicial material.
Legal observers have noted that once such descriptions enter the record, they tend to shape how jurors process the broader case, regardless of when they were first given.
The physical condition described in court has been tied to a 1999 medical emergency in which Weinstein underwent surgery following a severe infection, resulting in lasting changes.
Across multiple trials – New York in 2020, Los Angeles in 2022, and now the 2026 retrial – other accusers have described “extreme scarring” across the lower abdomen and pelvic region, often comparing the tissue to burn damage and noting loose or “empty” skin where a normal scrotum would be.
Those details were further explored during the 2022 Los Angeles trial, where additional accusers testified about similar observations.
One accuser, identified as Jane Doe #2, testified in that trial:
“His penis was disgusting. It looked like it had been chopped off and sewn back on, like something wasn’t right about it.”
Jennifer Siebel Newsom, also testifying in the Los Angeles proceedings, said:
“I didn’t really see a full sack. I literally just saw a penis. I was disgusted.”
She also described the penis as “kind of fish-like” and noted that “something was distorted in the testicles.”
Several accounts referenced the impression that the testicles had been displaced, aligning with medical explanations presented by prosecutors.
To support those claims, full-frontal photographs taken after Weinstein’s 2018 arrest were introduced in both the New York and Los Angeles trials and shown privately to juries. Courtroom reports at the time described jurors reacting with visible discomfort, including wincing, shifting in their seats, or quickly passing the images along.
Weinstein has consistently denied all allegations of non-consensual conduct and has maintained that all encounters were consensual.
As the retrial continues, Mann’s testimony remains central – not because it is new, but because of how powerfully it has carried across multiple proceedings.
What jurors are hearing now is testimony that has already shaped the case once before – and continues to do so years later. It is not new evidence. But it is evidence that has proven impossible to ignore – in court, in coverage, and now again in retrial.