Juror 50
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
the defendant
|
Legal representative |
17
Very Strong
|
24 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
14
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Juror defendant |
12
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
22 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
17 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Juror defendant |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Juror judge |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
location
court
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Juror defendant |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Annie Farmer
|
Social media interaction |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Defendant juror |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Juror 50’s counsel
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Juror 50's mother
|
Family |
7
|
3 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Judicial |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
TODD A. SPODEK
|
Client |
7
|
2 | |
|
location
court
|
Judicial |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Counsel
|
Client |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
second juror
|
Co jurors |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Juror 50's stepbrother
|
Family |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
TODD A. SPODEK
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Mr. Spodek
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Jury selection for Maxwell's trial, including a jury questionnaire where Juror 50 failed to accur... | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Juror 50 gave press interviews after the verdict, stating he was a survivor of child sexual abuse. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Juror 50 interview with Daily Mail. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Selection (Voir Dire) | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Hearing on potential juror misconduct involving Juror 50. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Deliberations in US v. Maxwell | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Deliberations and Verdict | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Juror 50 filling out the juror questionnaire. | Courthouse | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sexual abuse of Juror 50. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Juror 50 voir dire/questionnaire completion | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Limited Hearing | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deliberations | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial completion | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Hearing regarding false testimony by Juror 50 | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Hearing where Juror 50 may be a witness | The Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Hearing on potential juror misconduct regarding Juror 50. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Rule 33 Motion Ruling | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Voir dire process where Juror 50 allegedly omitted information. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Juror 50 gave interviews admitting identification with witnesses. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Hearing regarding Juror 50. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Juror 50 Motion to Intervene | US District Court SDNY | View |
| N/A | N/A | Voir Dire process where Juror 50 allegedly concealed information. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Juror 50's experience of being sexually abused | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | The trial for which the juror is being screened, requiring attendance from 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. | Courthouse | View |
| N/A | N/A | Proposed Limited Hearing Regarding Juror 50 | Court | View |
DOJ-OGR-00009130.jpg
This legal document, part of case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE filed on February 24, 2022, analyzes post-trial interviews given by 'Juror 50' in the Maxwell case. The document recounts the juror's statements to media outlets like Reuters and The Independent, where he discussed his initial impartiality, his handling of the juror questionnaire regarding his own experience of sexual abuse, and the jury's reasoning for their verdict. The filing argues that a full review of the juror's interviews demonstrates his impartiality and the care taken during deliberations, countering the defendant's claims of bias.
DOJ-OGR-00009128.jpg
This legal document, filed on February 24, 2022, details the voir dire process for 'Juror 50'. It outlines his responses to a questionnaire, confirming he has no biases regarding sex crimes, has not been a victim of such crimes, and can assess witness credibility impartially. The document also recounts his statements from November 16, 2021, where he affirmed his ability to remain impartial despite hearing in the media that Jeffrey Epstein had a girlfriend, and his commitment to deciding the case based only on the evidence presented in court.
DOJ-OGR-00009127.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. It details the jury selection process (voir dire) occurring in November 2021, specifically focusing on 'Juror 50.' The text highlights Juror 50's questionnaire responses, where he disclosed reading on CNN that the defendant was Epstein's girlfriend but affirmed his ability to remain fair, impartial, and decide the case based solely on evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00009121.jpg
This document is the Table of Contents for a court filing (Document 615) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on February 24, 2022. The filing appears to be the Government's response arguing against the Defendant's motion for a new trial, specifically addressing issues surrounding 'Juror 50' regarding their questionnaire, voir dire, and post-verdict public statements. The outline proposes a limited hearing to question Juror 50 while arguing that the defense has not met the legal standards (McDonough test) to warrant a new trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009118.jpg
This document is the conclusion of a legal filing, dated February 24, 2022, arguing for a new trial based on juror bias. The attorneys contend that "Juror 50" exhibited both implied and inferred bias due to past experiences and media statements, rendering them unfit to serve despite claims of impartiality. The filing cites legal precedents, including phrases from Chief Justice Marshall, to argue that the juror should have been disqualified to protect the defendant's right to a fair trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009114.jpg
This document is page 7 of a legal filing (Document 614) from February 24, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). It argues that 'Juror 50' provided untrue answers during jury selection (voir dire) by denying past sexual abuse and claiming impartiality, facts which were later contradicted by the juror's own press statements. The text cites the 'McDonough test' to argue that these false answers prevented the defense from challenging the juror for cause.
DOJ-OGR-00009113.jpg
This legal document argues that Juror 50 should have been struck for cause due to bias revealed in press statements. It cites legal precedent, primarily the Supreme Court's decision in McDonough and the Second Circuit's test in United States v. Stewart, to assert that a new trial can be granted based on a juror's inaccurate voir dire response, even if the response was not deliberately dishonest. The document contends that the key is whether the juror was actually biased and whether a correct answer would have provided grounds for a challenge.
DOJ-OGR-00009112.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Document 614) submitted on February 24, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The text, likely from the NACDL, argues that high-profile trials create pressure on jurors to convict for fame or to avoid public scorn, citing the 'stealth juror' phenomenon. It specifically alleges that 'Juror 50' in the Maxwell trial used social media to express appreciation for gratitude received for convicting Maxwell, and compares the situation to historical cases like O.J. Simpson and Rodney King.
DOJ-OGR-00009110.jpg
This legal document, filed on February 24, 2022, argues that the court must protect a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to an impartial jury, especially in high-profile trials. It alleges that "Juror 50" provided false answers during the voir dire process, which constitutes a structural error and undermines the fairness of the trial. The document cites multiple legal precedents to emphasize that the integrity of the jury selection process depends on the truthfulness of prospective jurors.
DOJ-OGR-00009097.jpg
This document is page 30 of a court filing, Document 613-1, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. The page is a form that identifies "Juror ID: 50" and is otherwise blank, suggesting it may be part of a juror questionnaire or list. A Department of Justice (DOJ) document control number is present in the footer.
DOJ-OGR-00009094.jpg
This document is page 27 of a court filing from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. It is a blank supplemental answer sheet for Juror ID 50, likely part of a juror questionnaire, instructing the juror on how to provide answers that did not fit in the provided spaces. The page is also marked with a Department of Justice identifier.
DOJ-OGR-00009091.jpg
This document is a juror questionnaire for Juror ID 50, filed on February 24, 2022, as part of case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The potential juror indicates that neither they nor any friend or family member has ever been accused of sexual harassment, abuse, or assault. They also state they have no other experiences that would affect their ability to serve fairly and impartially as a juror in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00009090.jpg
This document is page 23 of a juror questionnaire for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. Juror ID 50 indicates they would not have difficulty assessing the credibility of a witness claiming sexual assault and that neither they nor a friend or family member has been a victim of sexual harassment, abuse, or assault.
DOJ-OGR-00009088.jpg
This document is page 21 of a juror questionnaire (Document 613-1) from federal case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. Juror ID 50 answers questions regarding the nature of the charges, which involve sex crimes against underage girls. The juror affirms that the nature of the case, their views on consent laws, and their opinions on federal sex trafficking laws would not prevent them from being a fair and impartial juror.
DOJ-OGR-00009087.jpg
This document is page 21 (filed as page 20 of 30) of a juror questionnaire for Juror ID 50 in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The juror indicates that they have not formed opinions about Jeffrey Epstein that would prevent them from being impartial, nor would Maxwell's association with Epstein prevent a fair verdict. The juror affirms their ability to decide the case solely based on the evidence presented at trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009086.jpg
This document is a portion of a juror questionnaire for Juror 50, filed on February 24, 2022, for a case involving Ms. Maxwell. The juror states they have not formed any opinions about Ms. Maxwell that would prevent them from being impartial. The juror confirms they have previously heard about Jeffrey Epstein from CNN, specifically recalling news of his death and that he was in jail awaiting trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009085.jpg
This document is a page from a juror questionnaire (Juror ID 50) filed on February 24, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The juror acknowledges having heard about the case through CNN.com, specifically noting that Maxwell was Jeffrey Epstein's girlfriend, but indicates they have not formed an opinion regarding her guilt or innocence.
DOJ-OGR-00009082.jpg
This document is a page from a juror questionnaire for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. Juror ID 50 indicates they have no association with the New York City Police Department (NYPD) and no pre-existing opinions about the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, U.S. Attorney Damian Williams, or former Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss that would impede their ability to be a fair and impartial juror.
DOJ-OGR-00009081.jpg
This document is page 14 of a juror questionnaire for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. Juror ID 50 indicates they have no professional, business, or social associations with either the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York or the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).
DOJ-OGR-00009080.jpg
This document is page 13 of a juror questionnaire from a legal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. The respondent, Juror ID 50, denies having any financial disputes with the government and also denies that they, their family, or close friends work in law, law enforcement, the justice system, or the courts.
DOJ-OGR-00009079.jpg
This document is page 12 (questionnaire page 13) of a jury questionnaire filed on February 24, 2022, for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The respondent is identified as Juror ID 50. The juror answers 'No' to questions 24, 25, and 26, indicating they have not been subject to grand jury investigations, have not been a victim of a crime, and have not had legal disputes with US government agencies like the FBI or NYPD.
DOJ-OGR-00009077.jpg
This document is page 10 of 30 (internal page 11) from a juror questionnaire filed on February 24, 2022, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Juror ID 50 answers 'No' to all questions regarding prior jury service, grand jury service, participation in court cases as a witness/defendant, or involvement in government investigations.
DOJ-OGR-00009076.jpg
This document is page 9 of a juror questionnaire for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. Juror ID 50 indicates they have no feelings or opinions about evidence from law enforcement searches or the use of expert witnesses that would affect their impartiality. The juror also affirms their willingness and ability to follow the court's instruction to avoid all media and any discussion of the case outside the courtroom until their jury service is complete.
DOJ-OGR-00009075.jpg
This document is page 8 of a juror questionnaire filed on February 24, 2022, for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It displays responses from Juror ID 50, who answers 'Yes' to three standard voir dire questions (12, 13, and 14) regarding the defendant's right not to testify, the obligation to decide based solely on evidence, and the separation of the verdict from punishment considerations. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00009073.jpg
This document is a portion of a juror questionnaire for Juror ID 50, related to case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE and filed on February 24, 2022. The prospective juror indicates they have no personal commitments, difficulty with English, medical conditions, or medications that would prevent them from serving on the jury and giving full attention to the trial.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Unknown Entities | Juror 50 | $0.00 | Hypothetical 'receipt of financial payment for ... | View |
| N/A | Received | Media outlets (im... | Juror 50 | $0.00 | Hypothetical compensation for post-trial interv... | View |
Recall of questionnaire questions
Juror 50 told the press he did not recall a question about his own sexual abuse but did recall one about the abuse of friends and family members.
Juror questionnaire
Juror 50 provided inaccurate answers to Questions 25, 48, and 49 of the questionnaire.
Jury deliberations and personal experiences
The document discusses testimony from Juror 50 about statements he made to journalists, where he broadcast his experiences and the role he played in jury deliberations.
Jury deliberations in the Maxwell trial
Juror 50 explained to The Independent the jury's reasoning for their verdict, including why they did not convict on count two and why they convicted on other counts, citing the corroboration of victims' testimonies.
Juror background screening
Juror 50 answered 'no' to three questions on the questionnaire regarding whether he or a friend/family member had been a victim of a crime, sexual abuse/assault, or accused of sexual harassment/abuse.
Juror's history of sexual abuse
Shortly after the trial, Juror 50 participated in several media interviews where he readily disclosed his history of sexual abuse, using his real name and pictures.
Juror 50's personal story and experience of sexual abuse
After the trial, Juror 50 decided to speak to the international press to 'tell his story', which is presented as evidence of his bias and identification with the victims.
Support for sharing her story
Juror 50 posted a comment on social media to Annie Farmer, a witness in the case, in which he “thanked her for sharing [her] story.”
The trial
The Defendant contends that Juror 50's decision to give interviews post-trial, using his picture and first name, is evidence of bias.
Jury deliberations
Juror 50 described the jury's deliberation process, stating they performed their "due diligence," felt sympathy for the defendant but took their job seriously, methodically reviewed evidence, and were not pressured into a verdict, ultimately concluding the prosecution proved its case.
Motion to intervene
A motion filed by Juror 50 to intervene in the criminal case, which the Court denied.
Juror qualification and background
Maxwell contends that had Juror 50 answered the questionnaire accurately, it would have provided a basis for a for-cause challenge.
Juror qualification and background
Juror 50 made false statements and failed to give truthful answers on the juror questionnaire.
Question 48
Juror 50 provided an answer to Question 48 on the juror questionnaire that is allegedly inconsistent with his public statements.
Unsworn statements
Juror 50 made unsworn statements to media outlets regarding the trial.
Another juror's experiences
Statements about another juror who discussed sexual abuse during deliberations.
Jury Selection
Question 48 regarding personal history of sexual abuse.
Post-trial hearing
Sworn testimony regarding lack of bias and reasons for inaccurate questionnaire response.
Immunity and Instructions
The Court explains the immunity order, the requirement to testify truthfully, and instructs the juror not to discuss jury deliberations.
Question 25
Juror 50 gave a negative response to the question whether he or relatives or close friends have been the victim of a crime.
Question 48
Answer regarding history of sexual abuse.
Sexual Abuse
Statements about being a victim of sexual abuse.
Jury Selection Questionnaire
Juror 50's responses during jury selection, specifically regarding prior experience with sexual assault.
Jury Selection Questionnaire
Juror 50 rushed through the questionnaire and provided inaccurate answers regarding prior experiences.
Assessment of Bias
The Court asked Juror 50 questions regarding prior sexual abuse and ability to be impartial.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity