Relationship Details

This document is a court docket sheet for Case 22-1426 involving Ghislaine Maxwell, covering dates from February 4 to February 16, 2022. It details legal maneuvers surrounding Maxwell's motion for a new trial, including disputes over sealing documents, the intervention of 'Juror 50,' and an amicus brief request by the NACDL. Judge Alison J. Nathan issued orders denying the blanket sealing of new trial documents and setting deadlines for amicus briefs.

This document is page 5 of a court order filed on February 25, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Court denies the Defendant's motion for an immediate new trial based on the current record but determines that an evidentiary hearing is necessary regarding 'Juror 50.' The document discusses the legal standards (McDonough standard, Rule 606) for post-verdict inquiries into juror misconduct, specifically addressing allegations that Juror 50 failed to disclose a history of sexual abuse during voir dire.

This is a letter dated March 15, 2022, from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The attorney argues for a new trial for Maxwell, claiming that a juror, identified as 'Juror 50', provided false answers on his juror questionnaire by failing to disclose his own history of sexual abuse. The letter asserts that the juror's testimony at a subsequent hearing was not credible and that his presence on the jury was improper, warranting a retrial.

This document is page 53 of a legal filing (Document 642) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on March 11, 2022. The text argues that Ms. Maxwell was denied a fair trial because 'Juror 50' made material misstatements by failing to disclose they were a victim of sexual abuse and misrepresenting their social media status. The defense contends that had this information been known, they would have exercised a peremptory challenge to remove Juror 50.

This document is page 17 (labeled page 40 of 56 in the header) of a legal brief, likely from the government (DOJ), arguing against Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal. It specifically addresses the District Court's denial of a new trial regarding 'Juror 50', who Maxwell alleges failed to disclose a history of sexual abuse during jury selection. The text cites legal precedents supporting the court's discretion to deny probing jurors post-verdict.

This document is page 8 of a legal filing from September 2024, recounting procedural history in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It details a March 2022 hearing where 'Juror 50' testified under immunity about inaccurate responses to jury questionnaire items regarding sexual abuse history; the court found the errors inadvertent and denied Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The text also notes Maxwell's sentencing to 240 months in prison.

This document is page 20 of a court order filed on April 1, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text details the Court's analysis of 'Juror 50,' specifically addressing whether the juror deliberately concealed a history of sexual abuse by a stepbrother when answering questionnaire questions 48 and 49. The Court concludes that the juror's inconsistent answers were due to skimming the questionnaire and a personal definition of 'family' that excluded the stepbrother, ultimately finding the juror's explanations reasonable and credible.

This document is page 4 of a court order (filed Feb 25, 2022) addressing Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for a new trial based on alleged juror misconduct. The text outlines the legal standards under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33 and the 'McDonough' test regarding juror nondisclosure during voir dire. Specifically, the court is analyzing whether 'Juror 50' failed to answer honestly about past sexual abuse, though the court notes in a footnote that it is not yet resolving whether a new trial is merited at this specific juncture.

This is a court order filed on February 11, 2022, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Judge denies the defendant's motion to seal all documents related to her motion for a new trial in their entirety, ruling that sealing must be narrowly tailored. The document also references a motion to intervene by 'Juror 50' and mentions that media organizations have requested the unsealing of documents.

This document is a court ruling from April 1, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Court rejects the Defendant's argument that 'Juror 50' was biased for failing to follow instructions during the jury questionnaire phase. The Court accepts Juror 50's testimony that while he was distracted (thinking about his ex) during the questionnaire, he was fully attentive and compliant during voir dire and the actual trial.

This document is a court docket summary from February 2022 for the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan. It details several procedural orders regarding motions for a new trial, redactions to protect juror privacy, and the filing of an amicus brief. The most significant entry is an order granting an evidentiary hearing to investigate whether Juror 50 failed to truthfully disclose a history of sexual abuse during jury selection, while denying a broader hearing involving other jurors.

This document is a letter dated January 13, 2022, from the U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case *United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell*. The Government argues that a motion filed by Counsel for Juror 50 to intervene and obtain jury selection materials should be filed publicly without redactions, countering the defendant's objection that it is not a judicial document. The document references a previous court order from January 12, 2022, and cites legal precedent regarding public access to judicial documents.

This legal document is a court docket summary from July 2022, detailing filings and orders from February 2022 in the case of Ghislaine Maxwell. The entries, primarily orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan, concern procedural matters like redactions and amicus briefs. The most significant action is the Court's order for an evidentiary hearing to investigate whether 'Juror 50' failed to truthfully disclose a history of sexual abuse during jury selection, a matter which could impact the validity of the trial's verdict.

This document is a page from a legal brief filed by the prosecution on February 25, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It argues against the Defendant's motion for a new trial based on alleged juror misconduct (specifically regarding 'Juror 50' and a 'second juror' lying during voir dire). The text cites Federal Rule of Evidence 606 and the Supreme Court case Warger v. Shauers to argue that juror testimony regarding internal deliberations or personal experiences is inadmissible and does not constitute 'extraneous prejudicial information.'