Two jurors who voted to convict Harvey Weinstein have expressed that they felt coerced into their decision due to pressure from fellow jurors, according to statements provided by Weinstein’s legal team.

In affidavits submitted in a Monday court filing, these jurors claim that they were subjected to yelling and threats from other jury members during the tense deliberations that led to Weinstein’s conviction on one of the charges in June.

“I regret the verdict,” one anonymous juror stated in their affidavit. “Without being intimidated by other jurors, I think the jury would have been deadlocked on the Miriam Haley charge.”

Weinstein, 73, was convicted of criminal sex act for assaulting TV and film production assistant and producer Miriam Haley in 2006.

He was acquitted on a second criminal charge involving Polish psychotherapist and former model Kaja Sokola. A mistrial was declared on the most severe rape charge of former actress Jessica Mann.

“If I could have voted by secret ballot, I would have returned a not guilty verdict on all three charges,” one juror’s affidavit reads, Bloomberg reported.

The juror claimed fellow panel members screamed: “We have to get rid of you.”

When the foreperson asked for civility, another juror got in his face, pointed a finger at him and threatened, “You don’t know me. I’ll catch you outside,” according to the affidavit.

“When I arrived home, I called two family members and told them to come look for me if they didn’t hear from me, since something was not right about this jury deliberation process,” one of the juror affidavits states.

“I was so afraid of the repercussions and feared for my physical safety that I ultimately voted with the majority.”

One of the juror affidavits alleged that one panel member accused a fellow juror of accepting bribes from Weinstein. 

That allegation “shifted deliberations from an even 6-6 split to a sudden unanimous verdict,” the affidavit states.

At the trial in June, the jury deliberations were marked by “playground drama” infighting that spiraled out of control — with the foreman of the jury telling the court that he was bullied and that another juror had threatened him.

“Sometimes jury deliberations become heated. I understand this particular deliberation was more heated than some others. That’s unfortunate,” Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Curtis Farber said before finding a mistrial on the rape charge.

Two jurors disputed the foreman’s accounts after the trial, the Associated Press reported.

Juror No. 10 dished to The Post about the foreman of the unruly jury.

“Everything he did was sneaky,” Chantan Holmes-Clayborn said outside Manhattan Supreme Court after the trial ended.

Weinstein was convicted of sexual assault at his second New York trial in June after an earlier verdict was overturned on appeal. He has yet to be sentenced for the June conviction.

A mistrial was declared on the rape charge that the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has said it’s ready to retry.

Weinstein’s lawyers are seeking to overturn his conviction for first-degree criminal sex act and are also appealing a separate case in California.

With Post wires