DOJ-OGR-00020964.jpg
631 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court order / legal opinion (united states district court)
File Size:
631 KB
Summary
This document is page 21 of a court order (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) addressing post-trial arguments by the Defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell) regarding Juror 50. The Court analyzes whether Juror 50 was dishonest about his sexual abuse history, noting that while he claimed he rarely disclosed it, he later gave media interviews and contacted witness Annie Farmer. The Court recounts Juror 50's explanation that he did not believe his family or friends would discover his abuse despite the media attention.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Juror 50 | Juror |
Subject of a post-trial inquiry regarding potential misconduct and nondisclosure of sexual abuse history.
|
| Annie Farmer | Witness |
Witness in the case whom Juror 50 contacted on social media to thank her for sharing her story.
|
| The Defendant | Defendant |
Refers to Ghislaine Maxwell (based on 'Maxwell Post-Hearing Br.'), who is arguing that Juror 50's conduct was inconsi...
|
| AJN | Judge |
Initials in case number (Alison J. Nathan), presiding judge.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court |
Implied by case number format and S.D.N.Y. citation.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (stamped in footer).
|
|
| International media outlets |
Entities Juror 50 gave interviews to.
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Southern District of New York (cited in legal precedent).
|
Relationships (2)
Juror 50 posted a comment on social media thanking her for sharing her story.
Defendant argues Juror 50's statements contradict his conduct.
Key Quotes (5)
"Yet Juror 50 did not read closely Question 49 or consider carefully his answer to it on November 4."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020964.jpg
Quote #1
"The Court is cognizant that jurors may well assign their own emotional connotations to terms like 'family' rather than interpret it in the technical or legal manner"Source
DOJ-OGR-00020964.jpg
Quote #2
"Juror 50 testified that he '[doesn’t] tell very many people' about his abuse."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020964.jpg
Quote #3
"Juror 50 posted a comment on social media to Annie Farmer... in which he 'thanked her for sharing [her] story.'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00020964.jpg
Quote #4
"he 'did not think that anybody— certainly [his] family or friends would find this out,' despite the significant media attention that the case had received."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020964.jpg
Quote #5
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,177 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page138 of 221
A-338
A-338
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 653 Filed 04/01/22 Page 21 of 40
accurate response. Yet Juror 50 did not read closely Question 49 or consider carefully his
answer to it on November 4.
answer to it on November 4.
These evolving answers do not reflect Juror 50 changing his story so much as an
explanation of a complex and fraught set of events and relationships from decades before. The
Court is cognizant that jurors may well assign their own emotional connotations to terms like
“family” rather than interpret it in the technical or legal manner as would an attorney or judge.
Cf. United States v. Stewart, 317 F. Supp. 2d 432, 438 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (“Would a reasonable
juror necessarily consider an ex-girlfriend to be ‘someone close to him?’”).
explanation of a complex and fraught set of events and relationships from decades before. The
Court is cognizant that jurors may well assign their own emotional connotations to terms like
“family” rather than interpret it in the technical or legal manner as would an attorney or judge.
Cf. United States v. Stewart, 317 F. Supp. 2d 432, 438 (S.D.N.Y. 2004) (“Would a reasonable
juror necessarily consider an ex-girlfriend to be ‘someone close to him?’”).
Fourth, the Defendant argues that Juror 50’s proclaimed reluctance to disclose his sexual
abuse is inconsistent with his post-trial conduct. Maxwell Post-Hearing Br. at 5–6, 10–11. In
particular, Juror 50 testified that he “[doesn’t] tell very many people” about his abuse. Hearing
Tr. at 22. Yet he conducted several interviews with international media outlets in which he
revealed his sexual abuse history. Further, Juror 50 posted a comment on social media to Annie
Farmer, a witness in this case, in which he “thanked her for sharing [her] story.” Id. at 43.
These prominent disclosures of his sexual abuse, the Defendant argues, contradict Juror 50’s
statement that he rarely disclosed that abuse.
abuse is inconsistent with his post-trial conduct. Maxwell Post-Hearing Br. at 5–6, 10–11. In
particular, Juror 50 testified that he “[doesn’t] tell very many people” about his abuse. Hearing
Tr. at 22. Yet he conducted several interviews with international media outlets in which he
revealed his sexual abuse history. Further, Juror 50 posted a comment on social media to Annie
Farmer, a witness in this case, in which he “thanked her for sharing [her] story.” Id. at 43.
These prominent disclosures of his sexual abuse, the Defendant argues, contradict Juror 50’s
statement that he rarely disclosed that abuse.
The Court confronted Juror 50 at length about each of these purported contradictions. As
to his interviews, the Court asked Juror 50 how he “reconcile[d] what [he] just said” about
nondisclosure with his high-profile disclosure in media interviews. Id. at 22. Juror 50 primarily
provided two overlapping explanations. He first testified that he “didn’t think this would
happen.” Id. That is, he explained, he “did not think that anybody— certainly [his] family or
friends would find this out,” despite the significant media attention that the case had received.
Id. at 23. When the Court returned to this issue later in the hearing, Juror 50 added that in the
to his interviews, the Court asked Juror 50 how he “reconcile[d] what [he] just said” about
nondisclosure with his high-profile disclosure in media interviews. Id. at 22. Juror 50 primarily
provided two overlapping explanations. He first testified that he “didn’t think this would
happen.” Id. That is, he explained, he “did not think that anybody— certainly [his] family or
friends would find this out,” despite the significant media attention that the case had received.
Id. at 23. When the Court returned to this issue later in the hearing, Juror 50 added that in the
21
DOJ-OGR-00020964
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document