DOJ-OGR-00021709.jpg
609 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / court filing (appellate)
File Size:
609 KB
Summary
This page from a 2023 appellate filing (likely by the government) argues that Ghislaine Maxwell's convictions on Counts Three and Four properly qualify as offenses involving sexual abuse of a child, citing testimony from a victim named 'Jane.' It also begins a section defending the District Court's decision regarding 'Juror 50,' who failed to disclose his own history of childhood sexual abuse during jury selection.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant/Appellant |
Referenced as 'Maxwell', arguing regarding jury fairness and conviction counts.
|
| Jane | Victim/Witness |
Testified that she was sexually abused when transported across state lines as a minor.
|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
Subject of legal argument regarding disclosure of past abuse and impartiality.
|
| Diehl | Legal Precedent |
Cited in case law comparison.
|
| Countentos | Legal Precedent |
Defendant in cited case United States v. Countentos.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States Court of Appeals |
Implied by Case 22-1426 (2nd Circuit ID) and citation of 8th Cir. precedent.
|
|
| District Court |
The lower court whose decision is being reviewed.
|
|
| Department of Justice |
Indicated by footer 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
|
| 8th Cir. |
Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals (cited in legal precedent).
|
Timeline (2 events)
Prior to 2023-06-29
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location where 'Jane' was transported to and abused.
|
Relationships (1)
Jane testified that she was in fact sexually abused when transported... Maxwell’s commission... involved completed sex acts abusing one or more minor victims
Key Quotes (3)
"Maxwell’s commission of Counts Three and Four involved completed sex acts abusing one or more minor victims"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021709.jpg
Quote #1
"Jane testified that she was in fact sexually abused when transported across state lines, including to New York, as a minor."Source
DOJ-OGR-00021709.jpg
Quote #2
"The District Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Concluding that Juror 50 Could Be Fair and Impartial Notwithstanding His Inadvertent Mistakes on His Juror Questionnaire"Source
DOJ-OGR-00021709.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,502 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page62 of 93
49
contact with a child. Counts Three and Four each have an “essential ingredient” that fits within that broad definition. See supra Point II.B.2.a.
Finally, neither Diehl nor United States v. Countentos, 651 F.3d 809 (8th Cir. 2011), supports the use of a categorical approach. (Br.51-52). In each decision, the court concluded that Section 3283 applied to the subject offenses without considering the specific facts of the crime, but in neither case did the court consider whether a categorical approach was required—let alone hold that it was.
As noted above, it is undisputed that the evidence at trial established that Maxwell’s commission of Counts Three and Four involved completed sex acts abusing one or more minor victims: Jane testified that she was in fact sexually abused when transported across state lines, including to New York, as a minor. Accordingly, Counts Three and Four qualify as offenses involving the sexual abuse of a child both by their statutory terms and based on the specific facts of this case.
POINT III
The District Court Did Not Abuse Its Discretion in Concluding that Juror 50 Could Be Fair and Impartial Notwithstanding His Inadvertent Mistakes on His Juror Questionnaire
Maxwell contends that she was denied her right to a fair and impartial jury because a juror failed to disclose during voir dire that he was sexually abused as a child, and therefore incorrectly answered three
DOJ-OGR-00021709
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document