April 01, 2022
Post-trial Hearing regarding Juror 50
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Juror 50 | person | 685 | View Entity |
| The Court | organization | 2003 | View Entity |
| Counsel | person | 172 | View Entity |
| court | location | 177 | View Entity |
| GHISLAINE MAXWELL | person | 9575 | View Entity |
DOJ-OGR-00020946.jpg
This document is page 3 of a court order (Document 653) filed on April 1, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The text details the Court's finding that 'Juror 50' did not deliberately provide false testimony on his jury questionnaire but rather rushed through it carelessly. The Court concludes that Juror 50 was not biased, can serve impartially despite being a survivor of sexual abuse, and would not have been struck for cause even if he had disclosed his history accurately.
DOJ-OGR-00021538.jpg
This document is page 14 of a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on 02/25/22, addressing Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for a new trial based on alleged juror misconduct. The court rejects Maxwell's argument that Federal Rule of Evidence 606 violates her confrontation and due process rights, clarifying that Juror 50 is a factfinder, not a witness against her. The text cites various legal precedents to support the limitation on using juror affidavits to impeach a verdict.
DOJ-OGR-00010324.jpg
This document is the first page of an Opinion & Order filed on April 1, 2022, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order addresses the defendant's motion for a new trial based on the allegation that 'Juror 50' provided inaccurate information regarding a history of sexual abuse during jury selection. The text outlines the legal standards for impartial juries and notes that an uncommon post-trial hearing was conducted to investigate the juror's conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00010352.jpg
This document is page 29 of a court order filed on April 1, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text addresses the controversy surrounding 'Juror 50,' who failed to disclose his history of sexual abuse during jury selection. The Court argues that even if the abuse had been disclosed, it would not have been grounds for a 'for-cause' challenge, provided the juror could remain impartial. The document emphasizes that victims of crimes (like fraud or murder) are not automatically disqualified from serving on juries for similar cases. A footnote details statistics regarding prospective jurors who answered 'yes' to Question 48 about abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00010347.jpg
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.
Events with shared participants
Notice of Appearance as Substitute Counsel filed on behalf of Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell
2021-03-30 • 02nd Circuit Court of Appeals
A shipment discussed in court, sent from Ghislaine Maxwell to Casey Wasserman. The event is stated to have occurred in 'October'.
Date unknown
The Court announced a 15-minute morning break for the jury.
2022-08-10
LETTER REPLY TO RESPONSE to Motion filed by Ghislaine Maxwell.
2020-07-29
A discussion took place regarding the order of witnesses for the day's trial proceedings.
2022-08-10 • courthouse
The defense at trial focused on the credibility of victims who testified against the defendant.
Date unknown
Filing or processing of the Reply Memorandum in Support of Third Motion for Bail
2021-04-01 • Federal Court (Implied)
The jury selection process where Juror 50 gave answers that corroborated his hearing testimony.
Date unknown
The Government gave on-the-record assurances to the Court regarding investigative files.
2020-07-14
A discussion between attorneys and the court regarding how to respond to a jury note.
2022-08-10 • Courtroom
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event