DOJ-OGR-00010340.jpg

714 KB

Extraction Summary

2
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
5
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court filing / judicial opinion / order
File Size: 714 KB
Summary

This document is page 17 of a court order regarding the validity of the trial verdict in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, specifically addressing 'Juror 50'. The Court credits Juror 50's testimony that he failed to disclose his own history of sexual abuse on the jury questionnaire because he was distracted by a recent breakup, felt rushed by the environment, and did not believe he would be selected. The text argues that his failure to disclose was not intentional deceit but a result of lack of focus and the specific wording of the charges.

People (2)

Name Role Context
Juror 50 Juror / Witness
Subject of the court's analysis regarding his conduct during jury selection and failure to disclose sexual abuse hist...
The Defendant Defendant
Ghislaine Maxwell (implied by case context and charges mentioned); faced six counts involving travel to engage in cri...

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
The Court
The judicial body evaluating Juror 50's testimony and credibility.
DOJ
Department of Justice (indicated by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR).

Timeline (2 events)

2021-11-16
Oral Voir Dire
Courthouse
Unknown
Jury Selection / Questionnaire Completion
Courthouse

Locations (1)

Location Context
Location where Juror 50 waited in security lines and filled out questionnaires.

Relationships (1)

Juror 50 Juror/Defendant The Defendant
Juror 50 was a potential juror in the Defendant's trial.

Key Quotes (5)

"I didn’t have a phone, I didn’t have a book, I was sitting there twiddling my thumbs thinking about the break up that just happened a few weeks prior and sitting in my feelings and not very focused."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010340.jpg
Quote #1
"just got out of a relationship and I didn’t want to see anything regarding them"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010340.jpg
Quote #2
"felt rushed"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010340.jpg
Quote #3
"sheer volume of people that were there."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010340.jpg
Quote #4
"This explanation coheres with Juror 50’s testimony that his sexual abuse history was not a salient or front-of-mind consideration as he completed the questionnaire."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00010340.jpg
Quote #5

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (2,153 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 653 Filed 04/01/22 Page 17 of 40
by several factors, among them the several hours that he had to wait in the courthouse’s security line, to wait in the room to hear the Court’s instructional video, and then to begin answering questions. And while he waited, he says, he was distracted by his thoughts on the recent end of a romantic relationship. Id. at 14 (“I didn’t have a phone, I didn’t have a book, I was sitting there twiddling my thumbs thinking about the break up that just happened a few weeks prior and sitting in my feelings and not very focused.”). That explanation is not only consistent with his other hearing testimony, but also with his sworn statements months earlier at oral voir dire. See Nov. 16, 2021 Voir Dire Tr. at 133 (stating that he “just got out of a relationship and I didn’t want to see anything regarding them”).
Distractions continued, and increased, as he neared the end of the questionnaire. Juror 50 testified that he was seated near the table where prospective jurors dropped off their completed questionnaires. As more potential jurors completed their questionnaires, the noise and bustle at that table increased. And as more potential jurors completed their questionnaires, he “felt rushed” to finish so that he would not be the last to turn in a questionnaire. Hearing Tr. at 18. Moreover, the Court credits Juror 50’s candid admission that he was not concerned with following the Court’s instructions, and did not proceed with “diligence,” because he had concluded that he would not be selected as a juror given the “sheer volume of people that were there.” Id. at 13, 18; see also id. at 40.
This explanation coheres with Juror 50’s testimony that his sexual abuse history was not a salient or front-of-mind consideration as he completed the questionnaire. He repeatedly testified that he does not often think about his sexual abuse. See, e.g., id. at 16, 22. The summary of the charges, which do not use the terms “abuse” or “assault” but explained that the Defendant had been charged with a total of six counts that involved “travel to engage in criminal
17
DOJ-OGR-00010340

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document