DOJ-OGR-00009150.jpg

698 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

5
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court filing / legal opinion
File Size: 698 KB
Summary

This page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) discusses the legal standard for 'Inferred Bias' in jurors. It argues that even if 'Juror 50' had disclosed a history of sexual abuse during voir dire, the Court would not have automatically dismissed him for cause without further questioning to establish actual partiality. The text cites precedents like *Torres* and *Greer* to support the trial court's discretion in these matters.

People (5)

Name Role Context
Juror 50 Juror
Subject of a bias inquiry regarding non-disclosure of sexual abuse history.
The Defendant Defendant
Relies on the Torres case precedent (Ghislaine Maxwell, based on case number 1:20-cr-00330-PAE).
Torres Legal Precedent Subject
Referenced in case law (United States v. Torres) regarding inferred bias.
Greer Legal Precedent Subject
Referenced in case law regarding trial court discretion.
Ploof Legal Precedent Subject
Referenced in case law regarding empanelling of a jury.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
District Court
The court handling the current trial and retaining discretion on juror dismissal.
2d Cir.
Second Circuit Court of Appeals (legal citation source).
DOJ
Department of Justice (indicated by footer stamp DOJ-OGR).

Timeline (2 events)

2022-02-24
Filing of Document 615 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE.
Court Record
Court Defense Prosecution
Unknown (Past)
Voir Dire / Jury Selection
Courtroom
Juror 50 The Court

Relationships (1)

Juror 50 Legal/Juridical The Court
Court evaluates Juror 50's potential bias and history of sexual abuse.

Key Quotes (3)

"Here, the record refutes any suggestion that, had Juror 50 disclosed a history of sexual abuse, the Court would have struck him based on a finding of inferred bias."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009150.jpg
Quote #1
"the record is clear that the Court would have in fact conducted targeted follow-up questioning and, absent some indication in such questioning that would have permitted an inference of bias, the Court would not have struck him."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009150.jpg
Quote #2
"[A] finding of inferred bias is, by definition, within the discretion of the trial court."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009150.jpg
Quote #3

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document