After the verdict, Juror No. 50 gave multiple media interviews to promote himself, which is being used as evidence that his answers on the questionnaire were intentionally false.
This legal document, part of case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, argues that Juror No. 50's claim of not remembering a questionnaire question about personal experiences with sexual assault is not credible. The filing cites the questionnaire's explicit purpose of ensuring impartiality and points to the juror's post-verdict media interviews about his own victimhood as evidence that his omissions were intentional.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein communication