Page 45 of a legal filing (Document 613) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed in February 2022. The text presents a legal argument regarding 'Inferred Bias' and 'Actual Bias' in jurors, citing the precedent *Torres*. The defense argues that, similar to *Torres*, a juror in the current case (implied to be the Maxwell trial) was subject to conduct closely approximating that of the defendant, creating a risk of unconscious bias.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Judge Preska | Judge (Cited Case) |
Mentioned in the cited precedent (Torres) regarding her conclusion about Juror No. 7.
|
| Devery | Appellant (Cited Case) |
Appellant in the cited case used as a legal precedent.
|
| Juror No. 7 | Juror (Cited Case) |
Juror in the cited case whose 'structuring activity' was similar to the defendant's conduct.
|
| Judge Calabresi | Judge (Cited Case) |
Quoted from the Torres opinion regarding the scope of judicial discretion to infer bias.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| District Court |
Referenced in the legal argument.
|
|
| DOJ |
Indicated by the footer stamp 'DOJ-OGR'.
|
"It is enough for the present to note that cases in which a juror has engaged in activities that closely approximate those of the defendant on trial are particularly apt."Source
"This is one such case."Source
"Actual bias is ‘bias in fact’—the existence of a state of mind that leads to an inference that the person will not act with entire impartiality."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,899 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document