DOJ-OGR-00009749.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 642 Filed 03/11/22 Page 57 of 66

Ms. Maxwell requests that any hearing begin with the questioning of Juror No. 50.

Ms. Maxwell requests that the Court first advise Juror No. 50 about the nature of the hearing and then allow defense counsel to question Juror No. 50 followed by questioning from the government, re-cross examination by defense counsel, followed by any questions from the Court and any additional questions from counsel based on the Court’s questions.

If, after this examination further inquiry is required, Ms. Maxwell suggests that the second juror be summoned to Court for an identical process. If necessary, this process should be repeated as to all remaining jurors.

After the examination of the jurors the parties should be afforded a period of time to conduct any further investigation warranted by the information presented at the hearing followed by post-hearing arguments, either oral or written.

Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) does not prohibit this inquiry, because Ms. Maxwell does not seek to impeach the verdict based on the content of deliberations. Cf. Fed. R. Evid. 606(b) (providing that, with certain exceptions, “a juror may not testify about any statement made or incident that occurred during the jury’s deliberations” during “an inquiry into the validity of a verdict”). Instead, she intends to show that her jury was not fair and impartial as required by the Sixth Amendment because at least two jurors gave false answers during voir dire to material questions that, if answered truthfully, would have subject them to a challenge for cause.

To the extent Rule 606 might apply to certain questions asked at the hearing, Ms. Maxwell need not inquire into the content of deliberations to establish her jury bias

50

DOJ-OGR-00009749