DOJ-OGR-00009550.jpg

720 KB

Extraction Summary

4
People
5
Organizations
0
Locations
4
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court filing / legal order
File Size: 720 KB
Summary

This document is page 9 of a court filing (Document 620) from the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell case, dated February 25, 2022. The text discusses a post-trial motion regarding 'Juror 50,' specifically addressing whether the juror lied during voir dire about social media usage. The Court ruled that a hearing is warranted regarding specific questionnaire answers but denied the Defendant's request to probe the juror's social media history, citing that the juror's minimal Twitter usage and explanation for deleting apps were consistent with their testimony.

People (4)

Name Role Context
Juror 50 Juror
Subject of a hearing regarding potential impropriety and truthfulness during jury selection regarding social media us...
The Defendant Defendant
Ghislaine Maxwell (implied by Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE and 'Maxwell Br.'); seeking an inquiry into Juror 50.
McDonough Legal Precedent
Referenced in the context of the 'McDonough' test regarding juror dishonesty.
Baker Legal Precedent
Referenced case law (Baker, 899 F.3d at 130).

Organizations (5)

Name Type Context
Facebook
Social media platform mentioned by Juror 50.
Instagram
Social media platform mentioned by Juror 50.
Twitter
Social media platform mentioned during questioning and analysis of Juror 50's account.
DOJ
Department of Justice (referenced in footer DOJ-OGR-00009550).
The Court
The judicial body presiding over the case.

Timeline (4 events)

2021-04-01
Juror 50's Twitter account opened (approximate date based on 'April 2021')
Online
2021-11-16
Voir Dire (Jury Selection) testimony
Court
2022-01-01
Juror 50 used Twitter account again after trial (approximate date based on 'January 2022')
Online
2022-02-25
Filing of Document 620
Court

Relationships (1)

Juror 50 Legal Adversary The Defendant
Defendant is challenging Juror 50's impartiality and truthfulness.

Key Quotes (4)

"The potential impropriety that warrants a hearing is not that someone with a history of sexual abuse may have served on the jury."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009550.jpg
Quote #1
"Accordingly, the Court will hold a hearing limited in scope to Juror 50’s answers to Questions 25 and 48 of the questionnaire."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009550.jpg
Quote #2
"Juror 50 stated, 'I do, but I actually just deleted them because I just got out of a relationship and I didn’t want to see anything regarding them. So I am fully off of it right now.'"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009550.jpg
Quote #3
"Juror 50’s account had only 1 follower and followed only 39 people, which corroborates that his Twitter use was, at most, relatively minimal."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00009550.jpg
Quote #4

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (2,146 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 620 Filed 02/25/22 Page 9 of 21
The potential impropriety that warrants a hearing is not that someone with a history of sexual abuse may have served on the jury. Rather, it is Juror 50’s potential failure to respond truthfully to questions during the jury selection process that asked for such material information so that any potential bias could be explored. Accordingly, the Court will hold a hearing limited in scope to Juror 50’s answers to Questions 25 and 48 of the questionnaire.
C. The Defendant has not justified an inquiry into Juror 50’s social media
The parties devote significant portions of the briefs to the question of whether Juror 50 answered falsely the Court’s questions about social media usage during voir dire. To the extent that the Defendant seeks a hearing to probe Juror 50’s answers to voir dire about his social media usage, her arguments are based on speculation, and she has failed to make the high showing required. See Baker, 899 F.3d at 130. At voir dire, when asked if he “use[s] social media,” Juror 50 stated, “I do, but I actually just deleted them because I just got out of a relationship and I didn’t want to see anything regarding them. So I am fully off of it right now.” Nov. 16, 2021 Tr. at 133. The Court then asked, “What did you use, Facebook, Twitter?” to which Juror 50 replied “Facebook and Instagram,” clarifying that the accounts contained “[p]ersonal stuff, like selfies.” Id.
The screenshots proffered by the Defendant do not demonstrate that any of these answers implicate McDonough. First, Juror 50 did not deny having a Twitter account. Second, Juror 50’s account had only 1 follower and followed only 39 people, which corroborates that his Twitter use was, at most, relatively minimal. See Maxwell Br. at 17. Third, the fact that Juror 50’s Twitter account was opened in April 2021 and that he used it again in January 2022, after the completion of the trial, is consistent with Juror 50’s answer that he deleted his social media accounts, or just the social media applications, shortly before voir dire. The same is true of Juror
9
DOJ-OGR-00009550

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document