DOJ-OGR-00009755.jpg
659 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing / legal brief (page 56 of internal document, page 63 of 66 in filing)
File Size:
659 KB
Summary
This document is page 63 of a legal filing (Document 642) from March 11, 2022, in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It argues that submissions by 'Juror No. 50' should remain sealed because they lack merit, the juror has shown a 'lack of reliability' and 'appetite for publicity,' and releasing them could compromise an ongoing investigation into juror misconduct. The document concludes with a legal argument regarding the importance of *voir dire* in ensuring an impartial jury.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror No. 50 | Juror / Subject of Investigation |
Accused of misconduct, questionable merit in submissions, lack of reliability, and appetite for publicity.
|
| PAE | Judge (Paul A. Engelmayer) |
Implied by Case ID 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
|
Timeline (2 events)
2022-03-11
Filing of Document 642 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
Court Docket
Defense Counsel
Prosecution
Court
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Cited in case law (Northern District of New York).
|
Relationships (1)
Text mentions 'ongoing investigation by the parties and the Court into juror misconduct.'
Key Quotes (4)
"Juror No. 50 has demonstrated a lack of reliability and an appetite for publicity."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009755.jpg
Quote #1
"The submissions by Juror No. 50 have questionable merit, have not been ruled upon, and implicate an ongoing investigation by the parties and the Court into juror misconduct."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009755.jpg
Quote #2
"Documents regularly remain sealed where public release would “compromis[e] the interest in the integrity and security of [an] investigation”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00009755.jpg
Quote #3
"The purpose of voir dire is “to expose bias or prejudice on the part of veniremen,”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00009755.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,719 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 642 Filed 03/11/22 Page 63 of 66
The submissions by Juror No. 50 have questionable merit, have not been ruled
upon, and implicate an ongoing investigation by the parties and the Court into juror
misconduct. Certainly, at least at this stage of the proceedings, the submissons are not
“judicial documents” and until the issues around Juror No. 50’s motion for intervention
and discovery have been resolved they should remain sealed. If the Court believes Juror
No. 50’s requests merit judicial document status the seal should remain. The requests
would be afforded the lowest presumption of public access and compelling reasons to
maintain the sealed status exist.
upon, and implicate an ongoing investigation by the parties and the Court into juror
misconduct. Certainly, at least at this stage of the proceedings, the submissons are not
“judicial documents” and until the issues around Juror No. 50’s motion for intervention
and discovery have been resolved they should remain sealed. If the Court believes Juror
No. 50’s requests merit judicial document status the seal should remain. The requests
would be afforded the lowest presumption of public access and compelling reasons to
maintain the sealed status exist.
Juror No. 50 has demonstrated a lack of reliability and an appetite for publicity.
Should the documents be released the sotto voce comments regarding Juror No. 50’s
intent, state of mind, and actions will be fodder for the media and may influence the
memories of other potential witnesses. Documents regularly remain sealed where public
release would “compromis[e] the interest in the integrity and security of [an]
investigation,” In re Sealed Search Warrants Issued June 4 & 5, 2008, No. 08–M–208
(DRH), 2008 WL 5667021, at *5 (N.D.N.Y. July 14, 2008).
Should the documents be released the sotto voce comments regarding Juror No. 50’s
intent, state of mind, and actions will be fodder for the media and may influence the
memories of other potential witnesses. Documents regularly remain sealed where public
release would “compromis[e] the interest in the integrity and security of [an]
investigation,” In re Sealed Search Warrants Issued June 4 & 5, 2008, No. 08–M–208
(DRH), 2008 WL 5667021, at *5 (N.D.N.Y. July 14, 2008).
Conclusion
The purpose of voir dire is “to expose bias or prejudice on the part of veniremen,”
and there “there must be sufficient information elicited on voir dire to permit a defendant
to intelligently exercise not only his challenges for cause, but also his peremptory
challenges.” Barnes, 604 F.2d at 139. “Voir dire [thus] plays an essential role in
protecting the right to trial by an impartial jury.” Daugerdas, 867 F. Supp. 2d at 468.
and there “there must be sufficient information elicited on voir dire to permit a defendant
to intelligently exercise not only his challenges for cause, but also his peremptory
challenges.” Barnes, 604 F.2d at 139. “Voir dire [thus] plays an essential role in
protecting the right to trial by an impartial jury.” Daugerdas, 867 F. Supp. 2d at 468.
56
DOJ-OGR-00009755
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document