DOJ-OGR-00021811.jpg
632 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / court filing (appellate)
File Size:
632 KB
Summary
This document is page 17 of a legal filing (Case 22-1426) dated September 17, 2024. It addresses an appeal argument by Ghislaine Maxwell, who contends she deserves a new trial because 'Juror 50' failed to disclose a history of sexual abuse during jury selection. The text outlines the legal standard of 'abuse of discretion' and cites precedents indicating that courts are reluctant to investigate jurors post-verdict and grant new trials only in extraordinary circumstances.
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| District Court |
Denied Maxwell's motion for a new trial after a special evidentiary hearing.
|
|
| 2d Cir. |
Second Circuit Court of Appeals, cited in footnotes for legal precedent.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice, indicated by the Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
Timeline (3 events)
Unknown (prior to document)
Key Quotes (3)
"Maxwell contends that she was deprived of her constitutional right to a fair and impartial jury because Juror 50 failed to accurately respond to several questions related to his history of sexual abuse"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021811.jpg
Quote #1
"We have been extremely reluctant to 'haul jurors in after they have reached a verdict in order to probe for potential instances of bias, misconduct or extraneous influences.'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021811.jpg
Quote #2
"While courts can 'vacate any judgment and grant a new trial if the interest of justice so requires,' ... they should do so 'sparingly' and only in 'the most extraordinary circumstances.'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021811.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document