DOJ-OGR-00021865.jpg
607 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / court filing (appellate)
File Size:
607 KB
Summary
This page from a legal filing (Case 22-1426) discusses a Rule 33 motion for a new trial based on 'Juror 50's' alleged erroneous responses during jury selection (voir dire). The text argues that the District Court correctly applied the 'McDonough' standard, finding the juror's errors were not deliberate and that accurate answers would not have led to a dismissal for cause. It also notes that Ghislaine Maxwell did not challenge other jurors who had disclosed histories of sexual abuse.
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| District Court |
Applied the McDonough standard and ruled on the Rule 33 motion.
|
|
| Supreme Court |
Cited in footnotes regarding judicial standards.
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Indicated by the Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Key Quotes (3)
"Under McDonough, a party seeking a new trial 'must first demonstrate that a juror failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire, and then further show that a correct response would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause.'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021865.jpg
Quote #1
"Juror 50’s erroneous responses during voir dire were 'not deliberately incorrect'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021865.jpg
Quote #2
"Maxwell did not challenge the inclusion of other jurors who disclosed past experience with sexual abuse, assault, or harassment."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021865.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,542 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 197-1, 01/17/2024, 3665887, Page 18 of 26
broad discretion to decide Rule 33 motions based upon its evaluation of the proof produced” and is shown deference on appeal.30
A Rule 33 motion based on a juror’s alleged erroneous response during voir dire is governed by McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. Greenwood.31 Under McDonough, a party seeking a new trial “must first demonstrate that a juror failed to answer honestly a material question on voir dire, and then further show that a correct response would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause.”32
The District Court applied the McDonough standard, found Juror 50’s testimony credible, and determined that Juror 50’s erroneous responses during voir dire were “not deliberately incorrect” and that “he would not have been struck for cause if he had provided accurate responses to the questionnaire.”33 In fact, as the District Court noted, Maxwell did not challenge the inclusion of other jurors who disclosed past experience with sexual abuse, assault, or harassment. This is
30 United States v. Gambino, 59 F.3d 353, 364 (2d Cir. 1995) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted).
31 464 U.S. 548 (1984).
32 Id. at 556.
33 A-340 (emphasis added). The Supreme Court reminds us that “[t]o invalidate the result of a [ ] trial because of a juror’s mistaken, though honest response to a question, is to insist on something closer to perfection than our judicial system can be expected to give.” McDonough, 464 U.S. at 555.
18
DOJ-OGR-00021865
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document