DOJ-OGR-00005215.jpg
732 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
732 KB
Summary
This legal document, filed on October 13, 2021, argues for the necessity of individual, sequestered voir dire (jury questioning) for a high-publicity case involving a well-known defendant. The filing contends that the sensitive and inflammatory nature of the charges, specifically sexual abuse of minors, makes it unlikely for jurors to be candid in a group setting, thus hindering the ability of both the defense and prosecution to identify biases and ensure a fair trial.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| jurors | Potential members of a jury |
The document discusses the need to question prospective jurors about sensitive topics to ensure a fair trial.
|
| defendant | Accused party |
Mentioned in the context of a 'well-known defendant' in a high-publicity case.
|
| counsel | Legal representatives |
Mentioned as a party to whom jurors' answers must be acceptable.
|
| defense | Legal team for the defendant |
Party that needs to conduct in-depth questioning of jurors to uncover biases.
|
| prosecution | Legal team for the government |
Party that needs to conduct in-depth questioning of jurors to uncover biases.
|
Timeline (1 events)
The document argues for the necessity of individual and sequestered voir dire due to the sensitive nature of the charges (sexual abuse of minors) in a high-publicity case.
Federal jury trial
Relationships (1)
The document states that 'both the defense and prosecution can uncover what is needed' through in-depth questioning of jurors, identifying them as the two opposing parties in the legal proceeding.
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,173 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 342 Filed 10/13/21 Page 10 of 17
answers that seem acceptable to the Court and counsel. For example, in this case it is necessary to ask jurors if they or a family member have ever been a victim of sexual abuse—a question that most jurors will not be inclined to answer in public. In a case that has received media attention or involves a well-known defendant, a larger jury panel is often assembled in an attempt to increase the odds of obtaining a fair jury. The paradox is that a larger panel can mean that jurors are even less inclined to speak up in front of a large group. Accordingly, in a high-publicity case such as this, q questionnaire alone is insufficient.
B. Individual Sequestered Voir Dire is Necessary Due to the Sensitive Nature of the Charges
The nature of the charges in this case poses special problems for jury selection rarely encountered in the average federal jury trial. The crimes charged (concerning sexual abuse of minors) are particularly inflammatory and of great concern to communities from which jurors are drawn. The charges tap into strongly held moral, ethical, and religious beliefs concerning appropriate, inappropriate, and immoral behavior and conduct, and can produce visceral and emotional reactions leading to more severe judgments based on preconceived viewpoints rather than on admissible evidence presented at trial. As such, prospective jurors’ opinion and beliefs regarding the nature of the crimes charged will need to be addressed through procedures that maximize juror openness, honesty, and candor.
It is only through in-depth questioning and exploration of jurors’ views on these issues that both the defense and prosecution can uncover what is needed to pursue challenges for cause and to intelligently exercise peremptory challenges. The experiences and backgrounds of jurors could have significant bearing on the potential biases that they have. A variety of potential experiences, both general (e.g., being a victim of a crime or closely related to a victim) and specific (e.g., harassment, molestation, unwanted sexual contact, sexual assault, rape, domestic
9
DOJ-OGR-00005215
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document