Event Details

This page from a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) details post-trial media interviews given by Juror No. 50 to Reuters and the Daily Mail. The text highlights that Juror No. 50 disclosed his own history of sexual abuse to the jury to help sway members who doubted the credibility of accusers Jane and Carolyn. Additionally, it notes that in a Daily Mail video (Exhibit 3), the juror explicitly denied being asked about his sexual abuse history in the jury questionnaire.

This is page 60 of a legal filing (Document 613) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues against providing 'Juror No. 50' with advance access to a questionnaire, suggesting it would allow him to manipulate his testimony regarding potential misconduct. The document mentions potential charges against the juror such as perjury or criminal contempt and cites case law regarding 'standing' and the striking of filings.

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.

This document is the table of contents for a legal filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. The filing argues that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, was deprived of a fair trial due to juror misconduct, focusing on "Juror No. 50," who allegedly was untruthful during jury selection and later gave interviews to media outlets like The Independent, Daily Mail, and Reuters. The document also notes that a second juror disclosed during deliberations that they had been a victim of sexual assault.

This document is page 42 of a legal filing (Document 613) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. It argues that 'Juror No. 50' demonstrated implied bias through post-trial conduct, specifically communicating with victim Annie Farmer (spelled 'Famer' in text) and making public statements that the verdict was 'for all the victims.' The text also alleges the juror lied during voir dire to secure a spot on the jury, citing case law (Daugerdas) regarding juror dishonesty.

This document is page 48 of a legal filing (Document 613) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), dated February 24, 2022. The text argues that 'Juror No. 50' intentionally provided false answers on a jury selection questionnaire. It claims this intent is evidenced by the juror's post-verdict media appearances where he promoted himself and his status as a victim.

This document is page 50 (PDF page 57) of a legal filing dated February 24, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense requests a hearing to question Juror No. 50 regarding potential bias, alleging that at least two jurors gave false answers during voir dire which violated Maxwell's Sixth Amendment rights. The filing argues that Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b) does not prohibit this inquiry as it pertains to juror qualifications rather than the content of deliberations.

This document is a page from a legal filing (Document 613) in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues that Ms. Maxwell was denied a fair trial because 'Juror 50' failed to disclose that they were a victim of sexual abuse during voir dire, preventing the defense from using a peremptory challenge to remove them. The document cites legal precedents regarding the Sixth Amendment and the importance of peremptory challenges.

This document is page 7 (marked 'vii') of a 66-page court filing, specifically Document 613 filed on February 24, 2022, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The page contains a Table of Authorities listing citations for the 6th Amendment and various Federal Rules of Civil and Criminal Procedure referenced elsewhere in the brief.

This document is page 32 of a legal filing (Document 613) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It discusses legal precedents regarding juror misconduct, specifically citing the Supreme Court's decision in McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. Greenwood (referenced via 'Id.' and the mention of 'Juror Payton'). The text outlines the legal standard required to obtain a new trial when a juror fails to answer voir dire questions honestly.

This is a page from a legal filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated February 24, 2022. The document argues that Juror No. 50 falsely answered questions during jury selection (voir dire) and requests subpoenas for the juror's emails with alleged victims, witnesses, or other jurors.

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.

This document is page 51 (internal page 44) of a legal filing (Document 613) dated February 24, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It argues that 'Juror No. 50' was dishonest during jury selection (voir dire) by failing to disclose that he was a victim of childhood sexual abuse and crime (referencing Questions 48 and 25). The text asserts that this nondisclosure prevented the defense from probing his ability to be impartial regarding Dr. Loftus's testimony and Maxwell's defense strategy concerning false memories.

This document is a page from a legal filing (Document 613) in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues against 'Juror No. 50's' request to intervene and obtain discovery, citing that the juror has no legal standing and is currently under criminal investigation. The prosecution argues that releasing information would allow the juror to tailor their testimony and prejudice the ongoing investigation into their conduct.