Event Details
October 13, 2021
Description
Filing of Document 342 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
Participants (2)
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Defense counsel | person | 578 | View Entity |
| court | location | 177 | View Entity |
Source Documents (4)
DOJ-OGR-00005213.jpg
This document is page 8 of a legal defense filing (Document 342) from October 13, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The text argues that a robust jury questionnaire and individual voir dire are necessary because the jury pool has been tainted by 'pervasive, vitriolic, and extreme' negative media coverage. The defense compares Maxwell's situation to other high-profile New York sex scandals (citing politicians and media figures) to illustrate the hostile environment and potential for juror bias.
DOJ-OGR-00005217.jpg
This document is page 12 of a legal filing (Document 342) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 13, 2021. The text presents a legal argument advocating for attorney-conducted voir dire (jury selection questioning), citing that attorneys possess more in-depth knowledge of the case nuances than the presiding judge. It references legal precedents from the Fifth Circuit and scholarly articles to support the claim that counsel must be allowed to probe jurors for hidden prejudices.
DOJ-OGR-00005218.jpg
This document is page 13 of a legal filing (Document 342) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 13, 2021. It presents legal arguments regarding jury selection (voir dire), specifically arguing that defense attorneys should be allowed to question jurors directly due to the case's complexity and the high risk of prejudice from extensive pretrial publicity. The text cites legal precedents (United States v. Ible, United States v. Davis, Silverthorne v. United States) to support the necessity of thorough examination to ensure impartial jurors.
DOJ-OGR-00005209.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 13, 2021. It presents legal arguments justifying the use of jury questionnaires to screen for bias (actual, implied, and inferred) during voir dire. The text cites precedents from the Second Circuit and references other high-profile cases involving extensive pretrial publicity, such as those of Jeffrey Skilling (Enron), R. Kelly, Elizabeth Holmes (Theranos), and Keith Rainier (Nexium), to support the argument.
Related Events
Events with shared participants
The defense at trial focused on the credibility of victims who testified against the defendant.
Date unknown
Filing of Document 172-1 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN
2021-03-23 • US District Court
A status conference originally scheduled for January 14, 2021, was adjourned to March 17, 2021, at 1:00 p.m. The conference is to be conducted remotely via videoconferencing software.
2021-03-17 • Remote (videoconference)
The Court is evaluating the Defendant's flight risk and proposed conditions for release, such as renouncing citizenship and financial oversight.
Date unknown
A court document (Document 36) was filed in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, outlining the rules for handling discovery materials.
2020-07-30
An endorsement was filed granting a request for a video monitor for defense counsel, signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan.
2021-11-22 • 40 Foley Square
Date the second sharing order was signed according to email recollection.
2020-02-04 • New York
Deadline/Scheduled date to docket redacted versions of briefings on birth certificates, GX-52, and the Government's motion to quash.
2021-11-22 • Southern District of New York (Court Docket)
Evaluation of Maxwell's appeal of a Protective Order.
Date unknown
In advance of a conference, the government and defense counsel proposed a joint schedule for discovery, motion practice, and a trial.
Date unknown
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event