Trove
Sign In Sign Up

Juror 50

Person
Mentions
685
Relationships
152
Events
331
Documents
332
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.
152 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person the defendant
Legal representative
17 Very Strong
24
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Legal representative
14 Very Strong
14
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Juror defendant
12 Very Strong
8
View
person MAXWELL
Legal representative
12 Very Strong
22
View
person defendant
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
17
View
person the defendant
Juror defendant
11 Very Strong
7
View
organization The Court
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
12
View
organization The Court
Juror judge
10 Very Strong
7
View
location court
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
8
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Legal representative
9 Strong
5
View
person MAXWELL
Juror defendant
9 Strong
5
View
person Annie Farmer
Social media interaction
9 Strong
4
View
organization The government
Legal representative
9 Strong
5
View
person MAXWELL
Defendant juror
8 Strong
4
View
person Juror 50’s counsel
Professional
8 Strong
2
View
person Juror 50's mother
Family
7
3
View
organization The Court
Judicial
7
2
View
person TODD A. SPODEK
Client
7
2
View
location court
Judicial
7
3
View
person Counsel
Client
7
3
View
person second juror
Co jurors
7
3
View
person Juror 50's stepbrother
Family
7
3
View
person TODD A. SPODEK
Legal representative
7
2
View
person Mr. Spodek
Professional
6
2
View
person the defendant
Adversarial
6
2
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
N/A Legal proceeding Voir dire process where Juror 50 was selected. N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding The Government proposes a limited evidentiary hearing to determine if Juror 50 answered Question ... N/A View
N/A Jury selection Juror 50 filled out a questionnaire amidst distractions, which he later testified about. N/A View
N/A Hearing An 'upcoming hearing' is mentioned where Juror 50 intends to assert the Fifth Amendment privilege. USDC SDNY View
N/A Hearing The Court questioned Juror 50 under oath regarding his prior personal experience with sexual abus... N/A View
N/A Jury selection Prospective jurors, including Juror 50, were asked questions on a questionnaire and during voir d... N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding Juror 50's request to intervene in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE to protect his privacy rights and asser... N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding A Post-Verdict Hearing where the court limited the scope of questions for Juror 50. N/A View
N/A Jury deliberation Juror 50 disclosed to the jury that he was a victim of sexual assault, which influenced other jur... N/A View
N/A Questionnaire completion Juror 50 completed a juror questionnaire, where he allegedly answered Question 48 and Question 25... N/A View
N/A Legal testimony Juror 50 provided testimony to explain his answers on the juror questionnaire. Court View
N/A Legal argument A defendant argues that Juror 50 should be excused for implied bias based on alleged similarities... Second Circuit View
N/A Jury selection Juror 50 participated in oral voir dire, where he gave assurances of his impartiality. Court View
N/A Trial The criminal trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, referenced as 'United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell'. United States Courthouse View
N/A Legal proceeding The Defendant's trial, where Juror 50 served on the jury. N/A View
N/A Trial The Ghislaine Maxwell trial, which was widely covered by the press and subject to a massive media... N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding Voir dire process during which Juror 50 was questioned and allegedly gave a false answer. Court View
N/A Jury selection Juror 50 filled out a questionnaire, during which he admitted to being distracted and not diligent. N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding A hearing where Juror 50 testified about his conduct during the questionnaire and voir dire. N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding The voir dire process, during which Juror 50 answered the Court's questions in person and affirme... N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding The trial, during which Juror 50 was observed by the Court to be attentive. N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding Jury selection process where the impartiality of Juror 50 was considered. N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding Voir dire of Juror 50, during which an allegedly inaccurate answer was given. N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding The jury selection process, known as voir dire, where Juror 50 allegedly failed to give truthful ... N/A View
N/A Hearing A hearing was held where Juror 50 provided an explanation for his nondisclosure on the questionna... 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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Court filing / legal brief (case 1:20-cr-00330-pae - united states v. ghislaine maxwell)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Court filing (table of contents)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal filing / court document (case 1:20-cr-00330-pae)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal filing (court brief/motion)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Court document (juror questionnaire)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire / court filing
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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).

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Court filing (jury questionnaire)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire / court filing
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire / legal filing
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Juror questionnaire
2025-11-20
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
2 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
2 total transactions
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
As Sender
122
As Recipient
28
Total
150

Juror experience

From: Juror 50
To: media

Interviews about the part his own experience as a victim of sexual abuse played in his role as a juror.

Media interviews
N/A
Communication Source

Juror Questionnaire (Questions 48 and 49)

From: Court/Attorneys
To: Juror 50

Questions regarding sexual abuse history of self, friends, or family.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Disclosure of facts

From: Juror 50
To: Press

Juror 50 disclosed facts of his sexual abuse in press interviews.

Interview
N/A
Communication Source

Voir Dire Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: Court/Counsel (Primary...

Juror 50 provided false answers regarding his history of abuse.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Fairness and impartiality

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Replied by rote in the affirmative regarding fairness; provided explanations for incorrect questionnaire answers.

Testimony/inquiry
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Juror 50 completed a questionnaire regarding his background.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: Court

Juror 50 answered 'No' to questions 25, 48, and 49 incorrectly.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Explanation of questionnaire answers

From: Juror 50
To: Court

Juror admitted answers should have been 'Yes' but claimed he 'flew through' the form and was distracted.

Testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Prior sexual abuse / Trial

From: Juror 50
To: media

Statements reviewed in the appeal regarding his memory and prior abuse.

Statements
N/A
Communication Source

Explanation of conduct

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Testified he was distracted during questionnaire but attentive during trial.

Testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection Questionnaire

From: THE COURT
To: Juror 50

Questions 25, 48, and 49 regarding personal history.

Legal document
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: Court

Juror 50 repeatedly made clear that he could be fair and impartial.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection Questioning

From: Judge Nathan
To: Juror 50

Questioning during jury selection process.

Voir dire
N/A
Communication Source

Juror Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Referenced as 'Juror 50's Questionnaire'

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Post-verdict statements

From: Juror 50
To: Public/Media

Referenced as 'Juror 50's Public Statements Following the Verdict'

Public statements
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Questionnaire (Question 48 and 25)

From: THE COURT
To: Juror 50

Questions regarding history of sexual abuse or being a victim of crime.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Juror Bias / Sexual Abuse History

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Juror 50 testified that his history of sexual abuse would not affect his impartiality.

Hearing testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Gratitude for conviction

From: Juror 50
To: public

Social media posts expressing appreciation for statements of gratitude received for telling his personal story of abuse and convicting Ms. Maxwell.

Social media
N/A
Communication Source

Unknown

From: Juror 50
To: Annie Farmer

Thanked her for sharing her story.

Social media comment
N/A
Communication Source

Sexual Abuse History

From: Juror 50
To: international media ou...

Juror 50 revealed his sexual abuse history publicly.

Interviews
N/A
Communication Source

Juror Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Responses regarding impartiality, burden of proof, and media consumption (CNN).

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Unsworn statements

From: Juror 50
To: Chinese-language media...

Statements made by Juror 50 to media outlets post-trial.

Media statements
N/A
Communication Source

Juror misconduct inquiry

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Statements about a second juror.

Testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Experience as a juror

From: Juror 50
To: Media/Public

Described identifying with witnesses and convincing other jurors based on personal trauma.

Interviews
N/A
Communication Source

Unknown

From: Juror 50
To: Government witness

Juror felt compelled to contact a witness.

Contact
N/A
Communication Source

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search