Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)

Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)

Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)

Manhattan’s district attorney on Thursday dropped one of six criminal charges against Harvey Weinstein — after prosecutors found a written account by Lucia Evans of her encounter with the movie mogul that suggests it was consensual.

During a hearing in Manhattan Supreme Court, Justice James Burke granted the defense request to dismiss the count related to allegations by Evans.

In an expose published in The New Yorker a year ago, Evans accused Weinstein of forcing her to perform oral sex on him when they met in his Tribeca office in 2004 to discuss her fledgling acting career when she was a 21-year-old college student.

She is one of three women whose allegations of sexual assault are being prosecuted by Manhattan DA Cyrus Vance Jr.’s office.

Assistant DA Joan Illuzzi-Orbon told the judge that prosecutors wouldn’t oppose dismissal of the count involving Evans — insisting that the rest of the case was strong.

“In short, your honor, we are moving full steam ahead,” she said.

As The Post reported exclusively Wednesday, a prior employer of Evans turned over the personal writings she’d left on the company computer, which appear to contradict her grand jury testimony.

“The writings indicate it was consensual, friendly,” a source told The Post. “It has caused a split [in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office], some believe the charges should be dropped and that there’s a problem [with this complainant].”

In a statement, a lawyer for Evans said she was disappointed by the DA’s decision to “abandon” her, according to The Associated Press.

“Let me be clear: the decision to throw away my client’s sexual assault charges says nothing about Weinstein’s guilt or innocence. Nor does it reflect on Lucia’s consistent allegation that she was sexually assaulted with force by Harvey Weinstein,” said attorney Carrie Goldberg.

“It only speaks volumes about the Manhattan DA’s office and its mishandling of my client’s case,” she added.

On Thursday, the judge also lifted the protective order that allowed prosecutors to file damning disclosures under seal to the defense outlining issues with Evans’ case.

In a letter dated Sept. 12 to Weinstein’s defense lawyer, Ben Brafman, Illuzzi-Orbon wrote that on Feb. 2, Detective Nicholas DiGaudio interviewed a friend of Evans.

He told the DA that the friend was reluctant to cooperate but she eventually told prosecutors about six months later that she was with Evans at a Manhattan bar in the summer of 2004 when Weinstein offered the women “cash if they exposed their breasts to him.”

Evans told her friend when they walked home that night that she had exposed her breasts to Weinstein in the hallway of the restaurant.

She later told her friend that she had gone to Weinstein’s office, “where the Defendant told her, in substance, that he would arrange for the Complainant to receive an acting job if she agreed to perform oral sex upon him.”

She told her friend she then performed oral sex.

The friend said she described her recollections to the detective in a phone call while her attorney was present – adding that a fact checker from The New Yorker had called to confirm Evans’ account of the sexual assault.

She said she didn’t disclose the details of what happened to the mag.

The detective told her, she said, that “going forward ‘less is more,’ and that the Witness had no obligation to cooperate.”

Evans, in a follow-up interview, denied her friend’s account and insisted she was forced to perform oral sex on Weinstein.

In an interview with prosecutors, the detective denied telling Evans’ friend that “less is more” — but admitted she told him the same account she had told prosecutors and that he failed to turn the information over.

Prosecutors then obtained a draft email that Evans wrote to her husband (then her fiancé) in 2015, in which she recounted the incident with Weinstein.

“The account describes details of the sexual assault that differs from the account the Complainant has provided to our office,” the letter states.

She let her husband read the draft email, though she previously told investigators that she never told her husband about the alleged assault.

On Thursday, Brafman told the judge that he believed Evans had lied to the grand jury.

He also said he believed a lead police detective had corruptly tried to influence the case by discouraging a witness, who contradicted Evans’ account, from coming forward.

“The integrity of these proceedings has been compromised,” he said.

Brafman also raised the allegation of Evans having committed perjury in her testimony to the grand jury that led to his client’s indictment in May.

A prior employer of Evans turned over the personal writings she’d left on the company computer, which appear to contradict her grand jury testimony, a law enforcement source has said.

“The writings indicate it was consensual, friendly,” a source told The Post on Wednesday. “It has caused a split [in the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office], some believe the charges should be dropped and that there’s a problem [with this complainant].”

Weinstein’s attorneys and prosecutors had been wrangling over the part of the indictment concerning to Evans’ allegations over the last few weeks in closed-door meetings and sealed court papers.

The pervy producer — who has denied all allegations of non-consensual sex — still faces charges over allegations that he raped an unidentified woman in his hotel room in 2013 and performed a forcible sex act on another woman in 2006.

The former Miramax boss faces up to life in prison on charges of rape, predatory sex assault and criminal sex acts for the alleged attacks. He has pleaded not guilty and is free on $1 million bail.

The judge set the next hearing in the case for Dec. 20. Defense attorneys have until Nov. 2 to file additional motions to dismiss.