DOJ-OGR-00021764.jpg
705 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
4
Events
1
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
705 KB
Summary
This legal document argues that Juror 50 should have been disqualified from jury duty due to his failure to disclose his own history of child sexual abuse during voir dire. The document details how Juror 50's traumatic experiences, revealed in a post-verdict hearing, significantly paralleled the abuse described by the government's key witnesses at trial, suggesting he was incapable of being impartial.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
The central figure of this document page, whose past trauma as a victim of child sexual abuse is argued to be grounds...
|
| Juror 50's stepbrother | Family member / Abuser |
Mentioned as one of the people familiar to Juror 50 who sexually abused him.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Government | government agency |
Mentioned in reference to "the Government’s four key victim witnesses at trial."
|
Timeline (4 events)
A trial where four key victim witnesses for the government testified about abuse.
Government
four key victim witnesses
Child sexual abuse of Juror 50, which occurred when he was a minor, on multiple occasions over several years, by his stepbrother and two friends.
Relationships (1)
The document states that Juror 50 was "sexually abused by someone familiar to him, namely his stepbrother."
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,701 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 87, 07/27/2023, 3548202, Page22 of 35
p28. Juror 50’s pretrial selective false answers only to questions that would have elicited his child sexual abuse, his post-verdict activity, and his patently false and contradictory explanations in the post-verdict hearing should have disqualified him for service as a juror in this case.
B. Had Juror 50 Disclosed in Voir Dire his Traumatic Experience as a Victim of Child Sex Abuse, the Information Would Have Established a Valid Basis for a Cause Challenge
At the hearing, Juror 50 disclosed the facts of his sexual abuse, which significantly paralleled the abuse described by the Government’s four key victim witnesses at trial. Like the four accusers, Juror 50 (i) was sexually abused as a minor; (ii) was abused on multiple occasions over the course of several years; and (iii) delayed reporting the abuse. A267-268. Like the four accusers, Juror 50 was abused by two people who were friends and who each had participated in the abuse. A267. Furthermore, Juror 50 was not abused by a stranger or sexually assaulted by someone he did not know. Like the four accusers, he was sexually abused by someone familiar to him, namely his stepbrother. These similarities are significant and contrast sharply with other jurors who answered “Yes” to Question 48 and were not struck for cause, but who disclosed incidents that were not directly analogous to the facts presented at trial. In this situation, where Juror 50 experienced the same traumatic childhood sexual abuse that the trial victims had experienced, with many of the same surrounding circumstances, he was not capable of setting his experiences aside and
16
DOJ-OGR-00021764
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document