DOJ-OGR-00009894.jpg
656 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing / legal motion (page from defense brief)
File Size:
656 KB
Summary
This document is page 25 of a defense filing (Document 644) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated March 11, 2022. The text argues against a proposed hearing format regarding 'Juror No. 50's' alleged misconduct, citing legal precedent (*Dyer v. Calderon*) to claim that the Court cannot act as investigator, witness, and decision-maker simultaneously without violating due process. The defense questions how the Court intends to uncover Juror No. 50's motives and social media posts without independent investigation.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror No. 50 | Juror |
Subject of a bias inquiry regarding potential misconduct, misstatements, and undisclosed posts about the trial.
|
| Judge Kozinski | Judge |
Cited judge from the precedent case Dyer v. Calderon regarding juror bias inquiries.
|
| The Court | Judicial Body |
The presiding judge in the current case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), who the defense argues should not act as witness, inquis...
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| 9th Cir. |
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, cited as legal precedent.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (referenced in footer stamp DOJ-OGR).
|
|
| The Government |
Prosecution team, referenced as citing Dyer v. Calderon favorably.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Relationships (1)
Court previously questioned Juror No. 50 through questionnaire and in person.
Key Quotes (4)
"At any hearing it is the Court’s job to evaluate the evidence presented, not present the evidence."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009894.jpg
Quote #1
"Where juror misconduct or bias is credibly alleged, the trial judge cannot wait for defense counsel to spoon feed him every bit of information which would make out a case of juror bias"Source
DOJ-OGR-00009894.jpg
Quote #2
"under the government’s farcical hearing the Court would be a (1) witness, (2) inquisitor, (3) factfinder and (4) sole decision maker."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009894.jpg
Quote #3
"These multiple, conflicted, roles are no model of due process."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009894.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,925 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 644 Filed 03/11/22 Page 25 of 32
At any hearing it is the Court’s job to evaluate the evidence presented, not present the
evidence. The evidence elicited should be the product of all available investigation and research.
In Dyer v. Calderon, 151 F.3d 970, 976 (9th Cir. 1998), cited favorably by the government,
Judge Kozinski explained the perils of a court conducting a juror bias inquiry with incomplete
information or failing to ask critical questions. "[A] judge investigating juror bias must find
facts, not make assumptions . . . [I]t was the trial court’s obligation to develop the relevant facts
on the record, not merely presume them. The judge’s lack of verve in pursuing the matter casts
doubt on his findings." Id. at 976-77. The Ninth Circuit en banc opinion also was critical of the
trial judge’s refusal to allow the defense to subpoena a critical witness of the bias. "Where juror
misconduct or bias is credibly alleged, the trial judge cannot wait for defense counsel to spoon
feed him every bit of information which would make out a case of juror bias; rather, the judge
has an independent responsibility to satisfy himself that the allegation of bias is unfounded." Id.
at 978.
evidence. The evidence elicited should be the product of all available investigation and research.
In Dyer v. Calderon, 151 F.3d 970, 976 (9th Cir. 1998), cited favorably by the government,
Judge Kozinski explained the perils of a court conducting a juror bias inquiry with incomplete
information or failing to ask critical questions. "[A] judge investigating juror bias must find
facts, not make assumptions . . . [I]t was the trial court’s obligation to develop the relevant facts
on the record, not merely presume them. The judge’s lack of verve in pursuing the matter casts
doubt on his findings." Id. at 976-77. The Ninth Circuit en banc opinion also was critical of the
trial judge’s refusal to allow the defense to subpoena a critical witness of the bias. "Where juror
misconduct or bias is credibly alleged, the trial judge cannot wait for defense counsel to spoon
feed him every bit of information which would make out a case of juror bias; rather, the judge
has an independent responsibility to satisfy himself that the allegation of bias is unfounded." Id.
at 978.
If the Court is charged with the responsibility questioning Juror No. 50, what resources
will the Court use to uncover any statements and misstatements made by Juror No. 50? Will the
Court investigate Juror No. 50’s motives? Will the Court hire an investigator to find all of the
posts made by Juror No. 50 about the trial? Having witnessed Juror No. 50 during the trial and
having previously questioned Juror No. 50 -- both through a written questionnaire and in person -
- under the government’s farcical hearing the Court would be a (1) witness, (2) inquisitor, (3)
factfinder and (4) sole decision maker. These multiple, conflicted, roles are no model of due
process.
will the Court use to uncover any statements and misstatements made by Juror No. 50? Will the
Court investigate Juror No. 50’s motives? Will the Court hire an investigator to find all of the
posts made by Juror No. 50 about the trial? Having witnessed Juror No. 50 during the trial and
having previously questioned Juror No. 50 -- both through a written questionnaire and in person -
- under the government’s farcical hearing the Court would be a (1) witness, (2) inquisitor, (3)
factfinder and (4) sole decision maker. These multiple, conflicted, roles are no model of due
process.
20
DOJ-OGR-00009894
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document