DOJ-OGR-00010345.jpg
737 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
737 KB
Summary
This legal document analyzes the motivations of Juror 50 for giving post-trial media interviews in which he disclosed his own past sexual abuse. Juror 50 explained he was inspired by the victims in the trial and believed not using his full name would limit the attention from his personal circle. The court concludes that his actions, including a social media interaction with Annie Farmer, do not suggest he intended to deceive when he completed his juror questionnaire.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
The central figure discussed in the document, whose post-trial interviews and disclosure of sexual abuse are being an...
|
| Annie Farmer |
A person who interacted with Juror 50 on Twitter by sharing an article containing an interview with him.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Court | government agency |
The judicial body that questioned Juror 50 about his social media interactions.
|
| Government | government agency |
A party in the legal case, suggesting Juror 50's actions were naive.
|
| company |
The social media platform where Annie Farmer shared an article about Juror 50.
|
Timeline (3 events)
Relationships (1)
The document states that the Court asked Juror 50 about his social media interaction with Annie Farmer, where she shared an article containing an interview with him on Twitter.
Key Quotes (4)
"wasn’t using [his] full name,"Source
— Juror 50
(Explaining his belief that his post-trial interviews would not draw a connection to people who knew him.)
DOJ-OGR-00010345.jpg
Quote #1
"would be a known fact in the world."Source
— Juror 50
(Acknowledging that his interviews would make the fact that he was abused publicly known.)
DOJ-OGR-00010345.jpg
Quote #2
"[a]fter sitting on this trial for several weeks and seeing the victims be brave enough to give their stories, [he] felt” that he could too."Source
— Juror 50
(Explaining his motivation for making a conscious decision to disclose his own abuse.)
DOJ-OGR-00010345.jpg
Quote #3
"I’m also not ashamed about it. It’s something that happened, and it’s something that is relatively common that happened to multiple people throughout the world."Source
— Juror 50
(Further explaining his feelings about disclosing his past abuse.)
DOJ-OGR-00010345.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,219 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 653 Filed 04/01/22 Page 22 of 40
interviews he “wasn’t using [his] full name,” which Juror 50 apparently understood reduced the
chance that people that knew him would draw the connection. Id. at 42. And, further, he
explained that several friends that contacted him after the trial were unaware of the trial
occurring, so he assumed his post-trial media interviews would not attract substantial attention.
chance that people that knew him would draw the connection. Id. at 42. And, further, he
explained that several friends that contacted him after the trial were unaware of the trial
occurring, so he assumed his post-trial media interviews would not attract substantial attention.
Second, Juror 50 simultaneously acknowledged that because of his interviews, the fact
that he was abused “would be a known fact in the world.” Id. at 24. He explained that he had
made a conscious decision in favor of disclosure because, “[a]fter sitting on this trial for several
weeks and seeing the victims be brave enough to give their stories, [he] felt” that he could too.
Id.; see also id. at 42 (“I’m also not ashamed about it. It’s something that happened, and it’s
something that is relatively common that happened to multiple people throughout the world.”).
that he was abused “would be a known fact in the world.” Id. at 24. He explained that he had
made a conscious decision in favor of disclosure because, “[a]fter sitting on this trial for several
weeks and seeing the victims be brave enough to give their stories, [he] felt” that he could too.
Id.; see also id. at 42 (“I’m also not ashamed about it. It’s something that happened, and it’s
something that is relatively common that happened to multiple people throughout the world.”).
In short, Juror 50’s willingness to disclose his sexual abuse changed to some extent
between November 4, 2021, and January 2022. He made a conscious decision to share the fact
of his sexual abuse with a wider circle of people than he had prior to the time that he completed
the questionnaire. At the same time, he presumed—in hindsight, mistakenly—that his
interviews, given without his last name and predominantly to international media outlets, would
not be seen by his friends or family in his life who, he believed, had not followed the trial up to
that point. That explanation of partial public disclosure is further consistent with the fact that in
his interviews he related only the fact that he had been abused, not any details of what had
occurred. Juror 50’s wishful thinking—or as the Government suggests, naivety—with respect to
his post-trial interviews does not suggest that when he completed his questionnaire, he intended
to deceive. See Government Post-Hearing Br. at 10 n.4, Dkt. No. 648.
between November 4, 2021, and January 2022. He made a conscious decision to share the fact
of his sexual abuse with a wider circle of people than he had prior to the time that he completed
the questionnaire. At the same time, he presumed—in hindsight, mistakenly—that his
interviews, given without his last name and predominantly to international media outlets, would
not be seen by his friends or family in his life who, he believed, had not followed the trial up to
that point. That explanation of partial public disclosure is further consistent with the fact that in
his interviews he related only the fact that he had been abused, not any details of what had
occurred. Juror 50’s wishful thinking—or as the Government suggests, naivety—with respect to
his post-trial interviews does not suggest that when he completed his questionnaire, he intended
to deceive. See Government Post-Hearing Br. at 10 n.4, Dkt. No. 648.
The Court also asked Juror 50 about his social media interaction with Annie Farmer. On
Twitter, Farmer shared an article that contained an interview with Juror 50 and she said that
Twitter, Farmer shared an article that contained an interview with Juror 50 and she said that
22
DOJ-OGR-00010345
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document