DOJ-OGR-00021715.jpg

644 KB

Extraction Summary

3
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
1
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 644 KB
Summary

This legal document details the District Court's decision, specifically Judge Nathan's denial of Maxwell's motion for a new trial. Judge Nathan's ruling was based on her assessment of Juror 50's testimony during a hearing, where she found his answers credible and concluded that his personal experiences did not compromise his impartiality, and that he would not have been struck for cause.

People (3)

Name Role Context
Judge Nathan Judge
Examined Juror 50, denied Maxwell's motion for a new trial, and provided a detailed written opinion on her decision.
Juror 50 Juror
Was examined by Judge Nathan regarding his experiences and ability to be impartial. His testimony was central to the ...
Maxwell Defendant (implied)
Filed a motion for a new trial which was denied by Judge Nathan.

Organizations (1)

Name Type Context
The District Court government agency
The court whose decision to deny Maxwell's motion is being described.

Timeline (2 events)

A hearing where Judge Nathan examined Juror 50 in detail about his experiences and ability to be an impartial juror.
The District Court
Judge Nathan denied Maxwell's motion for a new trial in a detailed written opinion.
The District Court

Relationships (2)

Judge Nathan professional Juror 50
Judge Nathan examined Juror 50 during a hearing and assessed the credibility of his testimony.
Judge Nathan professional Maxwell
Judge Nathan presided over Maxwell's case and denied her motion for a new trial.

Key Quotes (1)

"Juror 50’s credible responses [to those questions] under oath at the hearing established that he would not have been struck for cause if he had provided accurate responses to the questionnaire."
Source
— Judge Nathan (Part of Judge Nathan's conclusion in her written opinion explaining why she would not have granted a for-cause challenge to Juror 50.)
DOJ-OGR-00021715.jpg
Quote #1

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,651 characters)

Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page68 of 93
55
and therefore was not asked any questions about sex- ual abuse. At the hearing, Judge Nathan examined Ju- ror 50 in detail, and Juror 50 emphasized that his ex- periences did not affect his ability to be fair and impar- tial, his ability to fairly assess the credibility of victim- witnesses, or his ability to impartially judge Maxwell’s guilt. (A.268, 270, 276-77).
4. The District Court’s Decision
Judge Nathan denied Maxwell’s motion for a new trial in a detailed written opinion. (A.318). First, Judge Nathan concluded that Juror 50’s answers were not deliberately inaccurate, crediting Juror 50’s testi- mony in light of his demeanor and consistent, logical answers to her questions. (A.333-35). Second, Judge Nathan concluded that she would not have granted a for-cause challenge to Juror 50 had he provided accu- rate information. At the hearing, Judge Nathan asked Juror 50 the questions she asked other jurors who in- dicated a personal experience with sexual assault or abuse. She concluded that “Juror 50’s credible re- sponses [to those questions] under oath at the hearing established that he would not have been struck for cause if he had provided accurate responses to the questionnaire.” (A.340). As Judge Nathan explained, other jurors who answered the questions similarly were not even challenged for cause, and she would not have granted a challenge had one been made. (A.344- 45). She also rejected the notion that mere similarities between Juror 50’s life experiences and the issues at trial required her to excuse Juror 50 for cause. (A.346).
DOJ-OGR-00021715

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document