DOJ-OGR-00010347.jpg
709 KB
Extraction Summary
7
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing / judicial opinion
File Size:
709 KB
Summary
This document is page 24 of a court ruling (Document 653) filed on April 1, 2022, in the case United States v. Maxwell. The text addresses the legal standard for 'Actual Bias' and specifically rules that the record does not support a finding that 'Juror 50' was biased. The Court found Juror 50's testimony credible, noting that he affirmed his personal history of sexual abuse would not impact his impartiality or ability to assess witness credibility, rejecting the Defendant's (Maxwell) argument that his responses were merely self-serving.
People (7)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
Subject of a bias inquiry regarding undisclosed history of sexual abuse; found credible by the Court.
|
| Maxwell | Defendant |
Ghislaine Maxwell; argued that Juror 50's responses were 'self-serving' and implied bias.
|
| The Court | Judge/Judiciary |
Authored the opinion; evaluated Juror 50's credibility and found no actual bias.
|
| Torres | Legal Precedent |
Cited in case law defining actual bias.
|
| Haynes | Legal Precedent |
Cited in case law regarding juror partiality.
|
| Wainwright | Legal Precedent |
Cited in case law regarding demeanor and credibility.
|
| Witt | Legal Precedent |
Cited in case law regarding demeanor and credibility.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court |
Implied by case caption format (S.D.N.Y. typically for case 1:20-cr-00330).
|
|
| United States |
The Government/Prosecution in the case.
|
|
| 2d Cir. |
Second Circuit Court of Appeals (cited in legal precedent).
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (referenced in Bates stamp DOJ-OGR).
|
Key Quotes (6)
"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
DOJ-OGR-00010347.jpg
Quote #1
"The record does not support a finding that Juror 50 was actually biased."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010347.jpg
Quote #2
"He repeatedly and credibly affirmed that his personal history of sexual abuse would not affect his ability to serve as a fair and impartial juror 'in any way.'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00010347.jpg
Quote #3
"He testified that there was 'absolutely in no way' anything about his experience that would interfere with his 'ability to assess the credibility of witnesses alleging sexual abuse'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00010347.jpg
Quote #4
"Indeed, he did not want to put his 'thumb on the scale in any direction.'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00010347.jpg
Quote #5
"The Court disagrees; it finds each of these responses to be credible."Source
DOJ-OGR-00010347.jpg
Quote #6
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,139 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 653 Filed 04/01/22 Page 24 of 40
1. Actual Bias
“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.” Torres, 128 F.3d at 43. A court may find a
juror to be partial because the juror admits as much, or based on the juror’s other voir dire
answers. Id. (citing United States v. Haynes, 398 F.2d 980, 984 (2d Cir. 1968)). This finding is
“based upon determinations of demeanor and credibility.” Id. at 44 (quoting Wainwright v. Witt,
469 U.S. 412, 428 (1985)).
that the person will not act with entire impartiality.” Torres, 128 F.3d at 43. A court may find a
juror to be partial because the juror admits as much, or based on the juror’s other voir dire
answers. Id. (citing United States v. Haynes, 398 F.2d 980, 984 (2d Cir. 1968)). This finding is
“based upon determinations of demeanor and credibility.” Id. at 44 (quoting Wainwright v. Witt,
469 U.S. 412, 428 (1985)).
The record does not support a finding that Juror 50 was actually biased. As explained
above, the Court finds Juror 50’s sworn testimony to be credible overall. He was responsive and
forthright, and his demeanor evinced that he answered the Court’s questions truthfully. He
repeatedly and credibly affirmed that his personal history of sexual abuse would not affect his
ability to serve as a fair and impartial juror “in any way.” Hearing Tr. at 25; see also id. at 9, 10,
13. He testified that there was “absolutely in no way” anything about his experience that would
interfere with his “ability to assess the credibility of witnesses alleging sexual abuse,” and that he
would be able to conclude such a witness was not testifying truthfully if that was what the
evidence suggested. Id. at 26. He testified that he did not harbor any bias against the Defendant
nor any bias in favor of the Government. Indeed, he did not want to put his “thumb on the scale
in any direction.” Id. He declared that he had “no doubt” as to his ability to be fair to both sides.
Id. at 27. As noted above, the Defendant dismisses these responses as “self-serving.” Maxwell
Post-Hearing Br. at 7. The Court disagrees; it finds each of these responses to be credible.
above, the Court finds Juror 50’s sworn testimony to be credible overall. He was responsive and
forthright, and his demeanor evinced that he answered the Court’s questions truthfully. He
repeatedly and credibly affirmed that his personal history of sexual abuse would not affect his
ability to serve as a fair and impartial juror “in any way.” Hearing Tr. at 25; see also id. at 9, 10,
13. He testified that there was “absolutely in no way” anything about his experience that would
interfere with his “ability to assess the credibility of witnesses alleging sexual abuse,” and that he
would be able to conclude such a witness was not testifying truthfully if that was what the
evidence suggested. Id. at 26. He testified that he did not harbor any bias against the Defendant
nor any bias in favor of the Government. Indeed, he did not want to put his “thumb on the scale
in any direction.” Id. He declared that he had “no doubt” as to his ability to be fair to both sides.
Id. at 27. As noted above, the Defendant dismisses these responses as “self-serving.” Maxwell
Post-Hearing Br. at 7. The Court disagrees; it finds each of these responses to be credible.
Moreover, Juror 50’s hearing testimony is corroborated by his answers during voir dire.
Without hesitation, he declared that he would follow the Court’s instructions on the law, he
“absolutely” could decide the case based on the evidence or lack of evidence presented in court,
Without hesitation, he declared that he would follow the Court’s instructions on the law, he
“absolutely” could decide the case based on the evidence or lack of evidence presented in court,
24
DOJ-OGR-00010347
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document