EFTA00026484.pdf
156 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
4
Organizations
2
Locations
8
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court order
File Size:
156 KB
Summary
Court Order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on October 22, 2021, outlining the procedures for jury selection in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order establishes dates for screening questionnaires (Nov 4, 5, 12) and voir dire (Nov 16-19), mandates the use of juror numbers for anonymity, and denies a request to seal proposed questionnaires. The Judge cites significant case publicity and COVID-19 protocols as factors in these procedural decisions.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the criminal case and upcoming trial
|
| Alison J. Nathan | District Judge |
Judge issuing the order regarding jury selection procedures
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court Southern District of New York |
Court where the case is being heard
|
|
| United States of America |
Prosecuting party
|
|
| U.S. Attorney's Office |
Prosecuting body responsible for distributing questionnaires
|
|
| Clerk's Office |
Responsible for creating juror lists
|
Timeline (8 events)
2021-10-21
Conference held on the record (referenced as 'yesterday's conference')
Court
Court
Counsel
2021-11-07
Deadline for submitting juror lists for Nov 4-5 questionnaires
Via Email
Counsel
Court
2021-11-13
Deadline for submitting juror lists for Nov 12 questionnaires
Via Email
Counsel
Court
2021-11-15
Potential in-person conference to resolve disputes (if necessary)
Court
Court
Counsel
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location of the court and order issuance
|
|
|
Jurisdiction of the court
|
Relationships (1)
Judge Nathan is issuing orders in the case against defendant Maxwell.
Key Quotes (3)
"The Court implements these procedures taking into account the significant publicity this case has garnered, the nature of the charges, and the District’s COVID-19 protocols."Source
EFTA00026484.pdf
Quote #1
"the request to seal the parties’ proposed questionnaire and voir dire and the Court’s draft questionnaire and voir dire until after jury selection is completed is denied."Source
EFTA00026484.pdf
Quote #2
"Jurors will be identified on the questionnaire and in court throughout the process by their assigned number only."Source
EFTA00026484.pdf
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (4,040 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 364 Filed 10/22/21 Page 1 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
United States of America,
—v—
Ghislaine Maxwell,
Defendant.
Defendant.
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 10/22/21
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 10/22/21
20-CR-330 (AJN)
ORDER
ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge:
For the reasons stated on the record at yesterday’s conference, the Court will implement
the following procedures for jury selection:
the following procedures for jury selection:
• A screening questionnaire will be administered on November 4, 5, and 12.
• The Clerk’s Office will create a corresponding list of names and randomly assigned juror
numbers. The list will be provided to counsel and the Court for use throughout jury
selection. Jurors will be identified on the questionnaire and in court throughout the
process by their assigned number only.
numbers. The list will be provided to counsel and the Court for use throughout jury
selection. Jurors will be identified on the questionnaire and in court throughout the
process by their assigned number only.
• Completed questionnaires will be copied and distributed to defense counsel by the U.S.
Attorney’s Office.
Attorney’s Office.
• After reviewing the completed questionnaires, counsel must confer in good faith and
jointly submit four lists: (1) prospective jurors that both sides agree should proceed to
voir dire; (2) prospective jurors that both sides agree should be excused; (3) prospective
jurors that the defense, but not the Government believes should be excused; and (4)
prospective jurors that the Government, but not the defense believes should be excused.
jointly submit four lists: (1) prospective jurors that both sides agree should proceed to
voir dire; (2) prospective jurors that both sides agree should be excused; (3) prospective
jurors that the defense, but not the Government believes should be excused; and (4)
prospective jurors that the Government, but not the defense believes should be excused.
1
EFTA00026484
EFTA00026484
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 364 Filed 10/22/21 Page 2 of 3
o Lists for questionnaires completed on November 4 and 5 will be due to the Court
via email by November 7.
via email by November 7.
o Lists for questionnaires completed on November 12 will be due to the Court via
email by November 13.
email by November 13.
o If necessary, there will be an in-person conference on November 15 at 9:30 a.m.
to resolve any disputes.
to resolve any disputes.
• Voir dire will proceed on November 16-19. The Court will conduct one-on-one voir dire
with each prospective juror in the presence of the parties and with public access to the
proceeding. At the conference, both sides indicated the potential need for additional
procedures during voir dire under certain circumstances. See Transcript at 10–11. As
the Court indicated, it will consider proposed narrowly tailored measures that may be
necessary during voir dire on a case-by-case basis. See id. at 12.
with each prospective juror in the presence of the parties and with public access to the
proceeding. At the conference, both sides indicated the potential need for additional
procedures during voir dire under certain circumstances. See Transcript at 10–11. As
the Court indicated, it will consider proposed narrowly tailored measures that may be
necessary during voir dire on a case-by-case basis. See id. at 12.
• The Court will decide in due course whether the exercise of peremptory strikes will
proceed on November 19 or November 29.
proceed on November 19 or November 29.
The Court implements these procedures taking into account the significant publicity this case has
garnered, the nature of the charges, and the District’s COVID-19 protocols. These procedures are
carefully balanced and tailored to ensure the safety of the parties and prospective jurors in light
of the continuing pandemic; to ensure juror candor, impartiality, and privacy; and to ensure the
First Amendment right to public access of criminal proceedings.
garnered, the nature of the charges, and the District’s COVID-19 protocols. These procedures are
carefully balanced and tailored to ensure the safety of the parties and prospective jurors in light
of the continuing pandemic; to ensure juror candor, impartiality, and privacy; and to ensure the
First Amendment right to public access of criminal proceedings.
Also for the reasons stated on the record at yesterday’s conference, the request to seal the
parties’ proposed questionnaire and voir dire and the Court’s draft questionnaire and voir dire
until after jury selection is completed is denied. Although the Court has and will continue to
implement tailored measures to ensure a fair trial despite significant media interest, see Dkt. Nos.
parties’ proposed questionnaire and voir dire and the Court’s draft questionnaire and voir dire
until after jury selection is completed is denied. Although the Court has and will continue to
implement tailored measures to ensure a fair trial despite significant media interest, see Dkt. Nos.
2
EFTA00026485
EFTA00026485
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 364 Filed 10/22/21 Page 3 of 3
28, 81, 95, 99, 101, 232, 241, 284, 301, 315, the defense did not justify sealing the entirety of the
proposed and draft questionnaires and voir dire. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435
F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). The Court’s planned individual voir dire process is designed to
carefully probe the prior exposure to and the potential influence of any pre-trial media. As noted
at the conference, the parties may continue to propose for the Court’s consideration, any
appropriate and tailored procedures in light of the specific factors related to this case and
upcoming trial.
proposed and draft questionnaires and voir dire. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435
F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). The Court’s planned individual voir dire process is designed to
carefully probe the prior exposure to and the potential influence of any pre-trial media. As noted
at the conference, the parties may continue to propose for the Court’s consideration, any
appropriate and tailored procedures in light of the specific factors related to this case and
upcoming trial.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 22, 2021
New York, New York
New York, New York
ALISON J. NATHAN
United States District Judge
United States District Judge
3
EFTA00026486
EFTA00026486
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document