DOJ-OGR-00009054.jpg
728 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing / court brief (motion for new trial)
File Size:
728 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal filing (Document 613) in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues that Ms. Maxwell was denied a fair trial because 'Juror 50' failed to disclose that they were a victim of sexual abuse during voir dire, preventing the defense from using a peremptory challenge to remove them. The document cites legal precedents regarding the Sixth Amendment and the importance of peremptory challenges.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the legal argument; argued to have been denied a fair trial due to inability to exercise peremptory challe...
|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
Accused of making material misstatements and neglecting to disclose history of sexual abuse.
|
| Second unidentified juror | Juror |
Mentioned in the section header as also having made material misstatements.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Federal Courts |
Jurisdiction mentioned in legal citations.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (indicated by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR).
|
Timeline (2 events)
Relationships (1)
Argument that Juror 50's non-disclosure harmed Maxwell's defense strategy.
Key Quotes (3)
"Juror 50’s material misstatements (and those of the second unidentified juror) prevented Ms. Maxwell from exercising her peremptory challenges, denying her a fair trial."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009054.jpg
Quote #1
"Proper voir dire plays a vital role in assuring a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009054.jpg
Quote #2
"Had Juror 50 disclosed any of these issues, Ms. Maxwell would have used a peremptory challenge against this juror and not as to any of the other remaining jurors."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009054.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,958 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 613 Filed 02/24/22 Page 53 of 66
E. Juror 50’s material misstatements (and those of the second unidentified juror) prevented Ms. Maxwell from exercising her peremptory challenges, denying her a fair trial.
Proper voir dire plays a vital role in assuring a defendant’s Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury. Without an adequate voir dire the trial judge's responsibility to remove prospective jurors who may not be able impartially serve cannot be fulfilled.
“Similarly, lack of adequate voir dire impairs the defendant's right to exercise peremptory challenges where provided by statute or rule, as it is in the federal courts.” Rosales-Lopez v. United States, 451 U.S. 182, 188 (1981) (citation omitted).
The role of peremptory challenges in a criminal trial cannot be overstated:
Peremptory challenges have been an integral aspect of criminal trial procedure for over six hundred years and continue to be universally employed throughout the country. The underlying thesis is that, with the exception of challenges for cause, the suitability of a particular juror is counsel's decision and not the court's. Consistent with that thesis and subject to constitutional strictures, a peremptory challenge can rest on a good reason, a bad reason, or no reason at all.
State v. Scher, 278 N.J. Super. 249, 263, 650 A.2d 1012, 1019 (App. Div. 1994) (cleaned up).
Fed. R. Crim. P. 24 entitles a number of peremptory challenges to prospective jurors. Here, Ms. Maxwell exercised all of her peremptory challenges and, whether for cause or peremptory, would not have knowing allowed a juror who: (1) claimed to be a victim of sexual abuse; or (2) neglected to disclose that the juror had been a victim of sexual abuse; (3) [REDACTED]. Had Juror 50 disclosed any of these issues, Ms. Maxwell would have used a peremptory challenge against this juror and not as to any of the other remaining jurors.
46
DOJ-OGR-00009054
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document