DOJ-OGR-00009744.jpg
716 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
6
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing / court motion (united states v. ghislaine maxwell)
File Size:
716 KB
Summary
This document is page 52 of a legal filing (Document 642) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated March 11, 2022. It argues that 'Juror No. 50' provided false answers during voir dire regarding social media usage to hide biases and ensure selection, noting he later used Twitter to contact victim Annie Farmer and appeared in an ITV documentary. The text contrasts this behavior with Juror No. 55, whose falsehoods were exposed through follow-up questioning.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror No. 50 | Juror |
Accused of providing false answers during voir dire regarding social media use and self-promotion; subject of the mot...
|
| Annie Farmer | Victim/Witness |
Recipient of direct communication via Twitter from Juror No. 50.
|
| Juror No. 55 | Juror |
Cited as an example of a juror who did not truthfully answer questions about social media use but was caught via foll...
|
| Defense Counsel | Legal Counsel |
Proposed follow-up questioning that exposed Juror No. 55's falsehoods.
|
Organizations (6)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| ITV |
Produced a documentary featuring Juror No. 50.
|
|
|
Social media platform Juror No. 50 admitted to using.
|
||
|
Social media platform Juror No. 50 admitted to using and posting on.
|
||
|
Social media platform Juror No. 50 failed to mention but used to contact Annie Farmer.
|
||
| YouTube |
Platform hosting the ITV documentary.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (indicated by footer stamp DOJ-OGR).
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Southern District of New York (implied by case number 1:20-cr-00330-PAE).
|
Relationships (1)
he used Twitter... to communicate directly to Annie Farmer
Key Quotes (4)
"Juror No. 50’s false answers to both questions deprived the Court of any basis for any meaningful inquiry on a topic bearing directly on his ability to serve impartially"Source
DOJ-OGR-00009744.jpg
Quote #1
"he suggests the juror’s intention to shield disqualifying information to advance a desire to serve, which he has now exploited for self-promotion."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009744.jpg
Quote #2
"He falsely said he only used Facebook and Instagram, and he did not mention Twitter, despite being specifically asked about it."Source
DOJ-OGR-00009744.jpg
Quote #3
"he used Twitter to publicize his interviews with the press and to communicate directly to Annie Farmer"Source
DOJ-OGR-00009744.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,969 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 642 Filed 03/11/22 Page 52 of 66
basis for a cause challenge or a peremptory challenge. Juror No. 50’s false answers to
both questions deprived the Court of any basis for any meaningful inquiry on a topic
bearing directly on his ability to serve impartially and the basis for a cause challenge. In
addition, the failure to be truthful on both questions cannot be purely accidental; rather, it
suggests the juror’s intention to shield disqualifying information to advance a desire to
serve, which he has now exploited for self-promotion.16
both questions deprived the Court of any basis for any meaningful inquiry on a topic
bearing directly on his ability to serve impartially and the basis for a cause challenge. In
addition, the failure to be truthful on both questions cannot be purely accidental; rather, it
suggests the juror’s intention to shield disqualifying information to advance a desire to
serve, which he has now exploited for self-promotion.16
We know, moreover, that Juror No. 50 gave at least one other false answer during
voir dire. He falsely said he only used Facebook and Instagram, and he did not mention
Twitter, despite being specifically asked about it. He also said that he deleted his social
media accounts. That was not true since, as we now know, he used Twitter to publicize
his interviews with the press and to communicate directly to Annie Farmer and then
posted on Instagram about his service as a juror.
voir dire. He falsely said he only used Facebook and Instagram, and he did not mention
Twitter, despite being specifically asked about it. He also said that he deleted his social
media accounts. That was not true since, as we now know, he used Twitter to publicize
his interviews with the press and to communicate directly to Annie Farmer and then
posted on Instagram about his service as a juror.
Truthful answers from Juror No. 50 would have led the Court and the parties to
probe much more deeply into his biases and prejudices, both known and unknown.17 Had
that happened, the record shows that he would have been removed as a potential juror.
probe much more deeply into his biases and prejudices, both known and unknown.17 Had
that happened, the record shows that he would have been removed as a potential juror.
__________________________________________________________________
16 Juror No. 50 continues his media exploits despite being the subject of this
Motion and represented by counsel. On January 18, 2022, he appeared in a documentary
produced by ITV. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvnwRuDfrdM at timestamps
01:53, 02:32, 04:10, 05:10, 34:36, 38:41, 39:15.
16 Juror No. 50 continues his media exploits despite being the subject of this
Motion and represented by counsel. On January 18, 2022, he appeared in a documentary
produced by ITV. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SvnwRuDfrdM at timestamps
01:53, 02:32, 04:10, 05:10, 34:36, 38:41, 39:15.
17 This follow-up questioning would not have been a mere formality. We know,
for example, that that Juror No. 55 did not truthfully answer the Court’s questions about
social media use, and it took follow-up questioning proposed by defense counsel to
“smoke out” his falsehoods.
for example, that that Juror No. 55 did not truthfully answer the Court’s questions about
social media use, and it took follow-up questioning proposed by defense counsel to
“smoke out” his falsehoods.
45
DOJ-OGR-00009744
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document