You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
DOJ-OGR-00021125.jpg
665 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
665 KB
Summary
This legal document argues that the defendant, Maxwell, was denied her constitutional right to a fair trial. The basis for this claim is that a juror, identified as Juror 50, made false statements on his juror questionnaire and later revealed in interviews that he used his personal history as a victim of child sexual abuse to persuade other jurors to convict. Although the court held a hearing on the matter, it found the juror's testimony credible and denied the defendant's motion for a new trial.
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Supreme Court | government agency |
Mentioned in the context of the "controlling Supreme" requirements that the Defendant failed to satisfy.
|
Timeline (3 events)
Relationships (1)
Key Quotes (1)
"DEFENDANT WAS DENIED HER CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JURY BECAUSE A JUROR MADE FALSE STATEMENTS IN VOIR DIRE AS TO MATERIAL FACTS THAT, IF KNOWN, WOULD HAVE PROVIDED A VALID BASIS TO REMOVE HIM FOR CAUSE."Source
— The document's author (representing the Defendant)
(This is the main heading for Point III, summarizing the core legal argument of this section of the document.)
DOJ-OGR-00021125.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,428 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 59, 02/28/2023, 3475902, Page78 of 113
POINT III
DEFENDANT WAS DENIED HER CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO A FAIR AND IMPARTIAL JURY BECAUSE A JUROR MADE FALSE STATEMENTS IN VOIR DIRE AS TO MATERIAL FACTS THAT, IF KNOWN, WOULD HAVE PROVIDED A VALID BASIS TO REMOVE HIM FOR CAUSE. U.S. Const. amend. VI.
A. Introduction
After the trial concluded, a juror gave multiple interviews in which he disclosed that he actively used his own self-described traumatic experience as a victim of child sexual abuse to convince certain members of the jury to overlook issues of credibility surrounding the victims and to convict Maxwell. Defendant moved for a new trial, contending that the juror’s presence on the jury violated her Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury. Dkt 613, 642. The court ordered an evidentiary hearing limited to questions concerning Juror 50’s false statements on the juror questionnaire. A239.
At the hearing, Juror 50 gave a patently absurd explanation for his failure to give truthful answers to multiple questions on the juror questionnaire. Nevertheless, the court found that Juror 50 testified credibly at the hearing and that Juror 50 would not have been stricken for cause even if he had answered each question on the questionnaire accurately. Accordingly, the court concluded that Defendant failed to satisfy the demanding requirements of the controlling Supreme
63
DOJ-OGR-00021125
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document