DOJ-OGR-00009111.jpg

825 KB

Extraction Summary

7
People
5
Organizations
1
Locations
4
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court filing (legal brief/motion)
File Size: 825 KB
Summary

This is page 4 of a legal filing (Document 614) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues that modern jurors in high-profile trials are incentivized to lie during voir dire to gain fame and profit, contrasting this with historical adherence to oaths. It cites interviews with jurors from the Derek Chauvin and Harvey Weinstein trials as evidence of jurors seeking media attention.

People (7)

Name Role Context
Charles L. Brieant Former Chief Judge (S.D.N.Y.)
Quoted regarding the history and erosion of the sanctity of the oath in court.
Donald Blackwell Author
Cited for article 'Has The Time Come To Dispense With The Testimonial Oath?'
John Marshall Chief Justice (Historical)
Cited in footnote 1 regarding United States v. Burr (1807).
Aaron Burr Defendant (Historical)
Cited in footnote 1 regarding his treason trial.
Derek Chauvin Defendant (Reference)
Mentioned in footnote 2 regarding media interviews with his jurors.
George Floyd Victim (Reference)
Mentioned in footnote 2 as the person killed by the police officer (Chauvin).
Harvey Weinstein Defendant (Reference)
Mentioned in footnote 2 regarding media interviews with his jurors.

Organizations (5)

Name Type Context
United States District Court
Implied by 'this Court' and case number.
CNN
Cited for interview with Derek Chauvin jurors.
CBS Morning
Cited for interview with Weinstein juror.
Inside Edition
Cited for interview with Weinstein juror.
Department of Justice
Indicated by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00009111.

Timeline (4 events)

2020-02-25
Inside Edition interview with Weinstein juror
Media
Weinstein Juror Inside Edition
2020-02-28
CBS Morning interview with Weinstein juror
Media
Weinstein Juror CBS Morning
2021-10-28
CNN interview with Derek Chauvin jurors
Media
Derek Chauvin Jurors CNN
2022-02-24
Document 614 filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
Court Record

Locations (1)

Location Context
Location of the court filing and the quoted Judge Brieant.

Relationships (1)

Derek Chauvin Adversarial/Criminal Case George Floyd
Footnote 2 mentions jurors who convicted a police officer of killing George Floyd.

Key Quotes (3)

"never before have jurors been as incentivized to lie."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009111.jpg
Quote #1
"Prospective jurors now have more reason to lie than they did in the past because they know that sitting as jurors in a high-profile trial may bring them fame, prestige, and even profit."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009111.jpg
Quote #2
"We live in an age of reality television in which the “true crime” genre is dominant. Jurors often find themselves instant celebrities."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009111.jpg
Quote #3

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (2,653 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 614 Filed 02/24/22 Page 4 of 12
Since the beginning of our Republic, sensational high-profile trials have complicated
efforts to eliminate bias from the jury through voir dire,¹ but never before have jurors been as
incentivized to lie. In the past, coupling voir dire with prospective jurors swearing an oath to tell
the truth was a powerful way to eliminate bias, but the oath no longer carries the force that it once
did. As a former Chief Judge of this Court remarked:
When our judicial system was established and the requirement of an oath or affirmation
on the part of a witness was borrowed from the British common law, the swearing of an
oath meant something—namely, that the court could be fairly sure that a witness would
tell the truth. In the time of our Founding Fathers, witnesses believed that they would be
subject to severe and perhaps immediate Divine retribution if they lied under oath on the
witness stand, based on the Ninth Commandment’s proscription, handed down by God to
Moses that “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor” (Exodus, Ch. 20,
Verse 16 (King James Version)). Unfortunately, the sanctity of the oath taken by
witnesses at trial has been significantly eroded and laced with skepticism in recent years.
United States v. Ianniello, 740 F. Supp. 171, 179 (S.D.N.Y. 1990) (Brieant, C.J.), rev’d in part,
United States v. Salerno, 974 F.2d 231 (2d Cir.1992); see, e.g., Donald Blackwell, Has The Time
Come To Dispense With The Testimonial Oath?, 36 No. 4 Trial Advocate Quarterly 28, 29-30
(2017) (noting that prospective jurors now frequently lie during voir dire).
Prospective jurors now have more reason to lie than they did in the past because they know
that sitting as jurors in a high-profile trial may bring them fame, prestige, and even profit. We live
in an age of reality television in which the “true crime” genre is dominant. Jurors often find
themselves instant celebrities. They are interviewed by the press and talk shows,² and often seek
_________________________________________________________________
¹ See, e.g., United States v. Burr, 25 F. Cas. 49, 52 (C.C. Va. 1807) (Marshall, C.J.) (concluding
that an impartial trial for Burr’s alleged treason could be chosen through voir dire).
² See, e.g., Derek Chauvin Jurors Speak Out For The First Time, CNN (Oct. 28, 2021) (interview
with seven jurors who convicted a police officer of killing George Floyd); Weinstein Juror Reflects
On Witness Testimonies, CBS Morning (Feb. 28, 2020); Juror On Weinstein Case Explains How
Verdict Was Reached, Inside Edition (Feb. 25, 2020).
3
DOJ-OGR-00009111

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document