DOJ-OGR-00021537.jpg

643 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

3
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal court filing / brief
File Size: 643 KB
Summary

This document is a page from a legal brief filed by the prosecution on February 25, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It argues against the Defendant's motion for a new trial based on alleged juror misconduct (specifically regarding 'Juror 50' and a 'second juror' lying during voir dire). The text cites Federal Rule of Evidence 606 and the Supreme Court case Warger v. Shauers to argue that juror testimony regarding internal deliberations or personal experiences is inadmissible and does not constitute 'extraneous prejudicial information.'

People (3)

Name Role Context
Ghislaine Maxwell Defendant
Referred to as 'The Defendant' and via citations to 'Maxwell Br.' and 'Maxwell Reply'. The text discusses her legal a...
Juror 50 Juror
A juror in the Maxwell trial who allegedly made false statements during voir dire.
Second Juror Juror
Another juror mentioned in comparison to Juror 50 regarding alleged false statements and undisclosed experiences.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
Supreme Court
Cited as the legal authority rejecting the defendant's reading of Rule 606.
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Indicated by the footer stamp 'DOJ-OGR'.
District Court
Referred to as 'this Court' regarding instructions given to jurors.

Timeline (2 events)

2022-02-25
Filing of Document 620 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN
US District Court
Ghislaine Maxwell US Government
Unknown
Voir Dire
Courtroom

Relationships (1)

Ghislaine Maxwell Legal/Adversarial Juror 50
Maxwell's defense is arguing that Juror 50 (and a second juror) made false statements warranting a new trial.

Key Quotes (4)

"Rule 606(b) applies to juror testimony during a proceeding in which a party seeks to secure a new trial on the ground that a juror lied during voir dire."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00021537.jpg
Quote #1
"The Defendant’s one-sentence attempt to dismiss Warger because it involved a civil rather than a criminal case is unavailing."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00021537.jpg
Quote #2
"Information is “extraneous” when it is “external to the jury”—that is, “publicity and information related specifically to the case the jurors are meant to decide,” rather than “the general body of experiences that jurors are understood to bring with them to the jury room.”"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00021537.jpg
Quote #3
"jurors are expected to bring their “reason, experience, and common sense” to bear in evaluating witnesses’ credibility"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00021537.jpg
Quote #4

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document