DOJ-OGR-00009036.jpg
645 KB
Extraction Summary
8
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
645 KB
Summary
This legal document argues that Ms. Maxwell is entitled to a new trial. The basis for the argument is that a juror, identified as Juror No. 50, provided false answers during the jury selection process (voir dire) by denying he had ever been a victim of a crime or sexual abuse. The document asserts that the juror later admitted to media outlets that he was a victim of childhood sexual abuse, and that this dishonesty was material to his ability to serve as an impartial juror, thus satisfying the legal test for a new trial.
People (8)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Dyer | Party in a lawsuit |
Mentioned in the case citation 'Dyer v. Calderon, 151 F.3d 970, 983 (9th Cir.1998)'.
|
| Calderon | Party in a lawsuit |
Mentioned in the case citation 'Dyer v. Calderon, 151 F.3d 970, 983 (9th Cir.1998)'.
|
| Colombo | Party in a lawsuit |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Colombo, 869 F.2d 149, 152 (2d Cir. 1989)'.
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
The subject of the legal argument, who is argued to be entitled to a new trial due to a juror's false statements.
|
| Juror No. 50 | Juror |
A juror in Ms. Maxwell's trial who allegedly did not truthfully answer questions during voir dire about being a victi...
|
| Stewart | Party in a lawsuit |
Mentioned in a case citation 'Stewart, 433 F.3d at 303' regarding the basis for a challenge for cause.
|
| Sampson | Party in a lawsuit |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Sampson, 820 F. Supp. 2d 151, 172 (D. Mass. 2011)'.
|
| McDonough | Party in a lawsuit |
Mentioned in the context of the 'McDonough test', a legal standard for determining if a new trial is warranted due to...
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States | government agency |
Mentioned as a party in the legal cases 'United States v. Colombo' and 'United States v. Sampson'.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Voir dire (jury selection) for Ms. Maxwell's trial, during which Juror No. 50 was asked Questions 25 and 48 and allegedly gave false answers.
The criminal trial of Ms. Maxwell, for which a new trial is being requested.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Abbreviation for the District of Massachusetts, mentioned in the citation for 'United States v. Sampson'.
|
Relationships (1)
The document argues that Juror No. 50's failure to truthfully answer questions during voir dire about his past as a victim of sexual abuse was material to his ability to be an impartial juror in Ms. Maxwell's case, thereby entitling her to a new trial.
Key Quotes (1)
"[C]ourts cannot administer justice in circumstances in which a juror can commit a federal crime in order to serve as a juror in a criminal case and do so with no fear of sanction so long as a conviction results."Source
— United States v. Colombo
(Quoted to support the argument that juror misconduct undermines the justice system.)
DOJ-OGR-00009036.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,685 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 613 Filed 02/24/22 Page 35 of 66
2d at 468 (quoting Dyer v. Calderon, 151 F.3d 970, 983 (9th Cir.1998) (en banc)).
“[C]ourts cannot administer justice in circumstances in which a juror can commit a
federal crime in order to serve as a juror in a criminal case and do so with no fear of
sanction so long as a conviction results.” United States v. Colombo, 869 F.2d 149, 152
(2d Cir. 1989).
“[C]ourts cannot administer justice in circumstances in which a juror can commit a
federal crime in order to serve as a juror in a criminal case and do so with no fear of
sanction so long as a conviction results.” United States v. Colombo, 869 F.2d 149, 152
(2d Cir. 1989).
Argument
I. Ms. Maxwell is entitled to a new trial.
This Court must order a new trial if Ms. Maxwell can make two showings: First,
that Juror No. 50’s voir dire response was false and second, that the correct response
would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause. Stewart, 433 F.3d at 303.
Even without an evidentiary hearing, Ms. Maxwell has made that showing here.
that Juror No. 50’s voir dire response was false and second, that the correct response
would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause. Stewart, 433 F.3d at 303.
Even without an evidentiary hearing, Ms. Maxwell has made that showing here.
A. Juror No. 50 did not truthfully answer material questions during voir
dire, including Questions 25 and 48.
dire, including Questions 25 and 48.
There is no reasonable dispute that Juror No. 50’s voir dire responses were false.
Juror No. 50 has told several media outlets that he was a victim of sexual assault and
sexual abuse as a child. Necessarily, then, Juror No. 50 did not provide truthful answers
when he denied being the victim of a crime (Question 25) or being a victim of sexual
harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault (Question 48).
Juror No. 50 has told several media outlets that he was a victim of sexual assault and
sexual abuse as a child. Necessarily, then, Juror No. 50 did not provide truthful answers
when he denied being the victim of a crime (Question 25) or being a victim of sexual
harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault (Question 48).
And because being a victim of sexual assault or sexual abuse is material to an
individual’s ability to serve as a fair and impartial juror in a case about sexual assault and
sexual abuse, Ms. Maxwell has satisfied the first prong of the McDonough test. See
United States v. Sampson, 820 F. Supp. 2d 151, 172 (D. Mass. 2011) (“[A] matter is
individual’s ability to serve as a fair and impartial juror in a case about sexual assault and
sexual abuse, Ms. Maxwell has satisfied the first prong of the McDonough test. See
United States v. Sampson, 820 F. Supp. 2d 151, 172 (D. Mass. 2011) (“[A] matter is
28
DOJ-OGR-00009036
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document