DOJ-OGR-00008984.jpg
650 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
0
Organizations
0
Locations
4
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
650 KB
Summary
This legal document provides the factual background for a motion by 'Juror 50' to intervene in a case. After a verdict on December 29, 2021, Juror 50 gave media interviews alleging personal experience with sexual abuse, which prompted the Defense Counsel to send a letter to Judge Nathan seeking a new trial. The judge subsequently issued an order giving Juror 50 until January 26, 2022, to decide if he wants to be heard on the matter.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
Served on the jury, gave post-verdict interviews about personal experiences, and is the subject of the motion to inte...
|
| Judge Nathan | Judge |
Issued an order giving Juror 50 an opportunity to be heard on the issue of an inquiry.
|
| Defense Counsel | Defense Counsel |
Sent a letter to Judge Nathan claiming grounds for a new trial based on Juror 50's interviews.
|
Timeline (4 events)
2022-01-05
Defense Counsel sent a letter to Judge Nathan seeking a new trial.
2022-01-05
Judge Nathan issued an order giving Juror 50 an opportunity to be heard.
Relationships (2)
Defense Counsel sent a letter to Judge Nathan as part of the legal proceedings.
Juror 50 served on a jury in a case involving Judge Nathan, who later issued a court order specifically addressing Juror 50.
Key Quotes (2)
"incontrovertible grounds for a new trial under rule 33"Source
— Defense Counsel
(Claim made in a letter sent to Judge Nathan after Juror 50's post-verdict interviews.)
DOJ-OGR-00008984.jpg
Quote #1
"wishes to be heard on the issue of the appropriateness of an inquiry"Source
— Judge Nathan
(Quoted from an order issued by Judge Nathan, describing the opportunity given to Juror 50.)
DOJ-OGR-00008984.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,891 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 609 Filed 02/24/22 Page 5 of 13
Intervention in this action by Juror 50 would not prejudice either party to this action. If granted, intervention would also not delay resolution of the issue subject to a possible inquiry, on the merits.
For these reasons and those further set forth below, the technical requirements for intervention are satisfied here. Additionally, the principles of justice, fairness and common-sense weigh strongly in favor of allowing Juror 50 to intervene. As such, Juror 50’s motion to intervene and for the release of the sealed Jury Questionnaire and voir dire materials should be granted, as requested herein
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Juror 50 served on the jury in the case sub judice, which reached a verdict on December 29, 2021. After the verdict was reached Juror 50 gave interviews, which were reported in both print media and televised news reports. In the media reporting on the interviews given by Juror 50, he is alleged to have discussed his personal experience(s) with sexual abuse. See Prosecution Letter dated Jan. 5, 2022. ECF # 568.
On this basis, and on the basis of information filed under seal, Defense Counsel sent a letter to Judge Nathan, which was also published in the media, claiming “incontrovertible grounds for a new trial under rule 33”. See Defense Letter dated Jan. 5, 2022. ECF #569.
Thereafter, Judge Nathan issued an order giving Juror 50 the opportunity to determine if he “wishes to be heard on the issue of the appropriateness of an inquiry” and to submit a brief by January 26, 2022, if he determines that he does desire to be heard on such issue. Order at 1. Jan. 5, 2022. 20-CR-330.
Juror 50 seeks a copy of his Jury Questionnaire, as he does not recall answering questions regarding his prior experience with sexual assault. Juror 50 indicated the same to the media,
5
DOJ-OGR-00008984
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document