Event Details
Date Unknown
Description
Voir dire process during which a prospective juror makes statements.
Participants (1)
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Juror No. 50 | person | 232 | View Entity |
Source Documents (1)
DOJ-OGR-00009890.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that a new trial is necessary due to the implied and inferable bias of Juror No. 50. The author contends that if the juror had answered voir dire questions truthfully, it would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause. The document refutes the government's legal arguments by citing precedents like United States v. Daugerdas and United States v. Torres, and suggests a hearing is needed to evaluate the juror's actual partiality.
Related Events
Events with shared participants
The process where potential jurors, including Juror No. 50, were questioned. The document discusses how Juror No. 50 answered Question 48 during this time.
Date unknown • Courtroom (implied)
Juror No. 50 publicly discussed his beliefs about the science of memory, stating that his own memory is like a video-tape.
Date unknown • Media
A jury returned its verdict in a case, less than one week before January 4, 2022.
2022-01-04
Lucia Osborne-Crowley interviewed Juror No. 50 for an article.
2022-01-04
The Independent published an article based on the interview with Juror No. 50.
2022-01-04
Juror No. 50 was a victim of sexual assault and abuse.
Date unknown
Juror No. 50 revealed his experience with abuse to the jury, which was fundamental to the verdict.
Date unknown • jury room
The jury selection process during which Juror No. 50 allegedly provided false answers.
Date unknown • Court
Juror No. 50 sat for an interview as part of an hour-long documentary called “Ghislaine, Prince Andrew and the Paedophile.”
Date unknown
Juror No. 50 engaged in a publicity tour, giving multiple interviews to news outlets.
2022-01-01
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event