DOJ-OGR-00021714.jpg

Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page67 of 93

54

sexual harassment or abuse), and 49 (whether he or a friend or family member had been accused of sexual harassment or abuse). He explained that, when he was nine or ten years old, he was sexually abused by a stepbrother, who he no longer considered part of the family, and the stepbrother’s friend. He explained that he answered Question 49 “no” because he no longer considered the stepbrother part of his family, although he should have answered “yes.” He also acknowledged that he should have answered “yes” to Question 25 because he was a crime victim, although he read the question at the time to inquire about robbery, mugging, or similar crimes. (A.267-68).

Juror 50 also testified that his failure to disclose this experience was an inadvertent mistake. He explained that he “completely skimmed way too fast” when completing the questionnaire. (A.270-71). He did so, he explained, in light of the context: he started the questionnaire after several hours’ waiting in security lines and after technical issues with the instructions. He was preoccupied with his own recent romantic breakup and with disruptions in the jury room. And he rushed to complete his questionnaire because he thought it virtually impossible that he would be selected as a juror given the number of people completing the questionnaire. He did not generally think about his personal history of sexual abuse, and it did not occur to him while carelessly speeding through the questionnaire. (A.269-72).

At oral voir dire, Juror 50 had not been asked the questions Judge Nathan posed to prospective jurors who answered affirmatively to questions 25, 48, or 49,

DOJ-OGR-00021714