DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
710 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
5
Events
2
Relationships
8
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
710 KB
Summary
This legal document is a court ruling from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on April 1, 2022. The Court rejects the Defendant's (Maxwell's) post-hearing argument that Juror 50 was biased because he failed to follow instructions on a questionnaire. The Court found that while the juror admitted to being distracted during the questionnaire, he was attentive and followed all instructions during the more critical phases of voir dire, the trial, and deliberations, and was therefore able to serve as an unbiased juror.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
The subject of a post-hearing argument by the Defendant, who claimed the juror was biased for failing to follow instr...
|
| The Defendant | Defendant |
Argued in a post-hearing briefing that Juror 50 was biased and unable to serve as an unbiased juror.
|
| Maxwell | Defendant |
Cited in 'Maxwell Post-Hearing Br.' as the source of the argument against Juror 50.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Court | government agency |
Rejected the Defendant's argument about Juror 50's bias, analyzed the juror's testimony, and confirmed he followed in...
|
Timeline (5 events)
Defendant's post-hearing briefing arguing Juror 50 was biased.
Relationships (2)
The Defendant made a post-hearing argument attempting to have Juror 50 disqualified for bias.
Key Quotes (8)
"absolutely not"Source
— Juror 50
(Describing his level of concern with following the Court's instructions when filling out the questionnaire, as cited by the Defendant.)
DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
Quote #1
"super distracted"Source
— Juror 50
(Explaining why he was unconcerned with following instructions while completing the questionnaire.)
DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
Quote #2
"different situation"Source
— Juror 50
(Testifying that the voir dire process was different from the questionnaire session.)
DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
Quote #3
"sitting there for hours . . . thinking about [his] ex."Source
— Juror 50
(Describing his state of mind during the questionnaire, contrasting it with his focus during the in-person voir dire.)
DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
Quote #4
"can become distracted"Source
— Juror 50
(Testifying under oath about his tendencies.)
DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
Quote #5
"had no effect"Source
— Juror 50
(Testifying that his tendency to be distracted had no effect on his ability to serve as a juror and listen to the evidence.)
DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
Quote #6
"listening to all the evidence given during the trial."Source
— Juror 50
(Part of his testimony that his distractibility did not affect his service.)
DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
Quote #7
"carefully"Source
— The Court
(The Court's confirmation that Juror 50 followed its instructions during voir dire and trial.)
DOJ-OGR-00010361.jpg
Quote #8
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,145 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 653 Filed 04/01/22 Page 38 of 40
3. The Court rejects the Defendant’s additional post-hearing argument that Juror 50 was biased because he failed to follow instructions.
In her post-hearing briefing, the Defendant argues that Juror 50’s testimony that he was “absolutely not” concerned with following the Court’s instructions when filling out the questionnaire is an additional ground for concluding that Juror 50 was unable to serve as an unbiased juror. Maxwell Post-Hearing Br. at 11–12 (quoting Hearing Tr. at 18). The Court disagrees.
Juror 50’s testimony established that his lack of diligence was limited to the questionnaire session. Juror 50 showed up for trial on time every day and appeared to the Court that he was attentive throughout trial. There is no indication that Juror 50 failed to follow this Court’s instructions during voir dire, trial, or deliberations. Juror 50 explained that he was unconcerned with following the Court’s instructions while completing the questionnaire because he was “super distracted” and believed that there was no possibility that he would be selected for the jury. Hearing Tr. at 40. Voir dire, he testified, was a “different situation.” Id. at 41. When he answered the Court’s questions in person at voir dire, he had not been “sitting there for hours . . . thinking about [his] ex.” Id. He felt confident that he accurately answered all of the Court’s questions. This included affirming that he was able to follow the Court’s instructions as to the presumption of innocence and the law generally, the prohibition on consuming media on the case or any other extraneous information, and his ability to put any prior knowledge to the side and decide the case based on the evidence, or lack of evidence, presented at trial. Voir Dire Tr. at 128–31. Under oath, he testified that although he “can become distracted,” that “had no effect” on him serving and “listening to all the evidence given during the trial.” Hearing Tr. at 41. The Court confirmed that Juror 50 “carefully” followed the Court’s instructions during voir dire and trial. Id.
38
DOJ-OGR-00010361
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document