Relationship Details

This legal document analyzes the conduct of Juror 50 during and after the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. It highlights Juror 50's public revelation of his jury service on social media and his multiple false statements to the Court regarding his impartiality and willingness to follow instructions. The document argues that these actions demonstrate Juror 50's bias and inability to serve as an unbiased juror, providing grounds for a cause challenge.

Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim writes to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell case on April 1, 2022. The letter informs the court of a new Paramount Plus interview with 'Juror 50' that promises a 'bombshell revelation,' which may impact Maxwell's pending motion for a new trial. Sternheim requests a stay of any ruling until the defense and court can review the content of this interview.

This document is page 9 (filed as page 11 of 49) of a government filing in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It analyzes post-trial media interviews given by 'Juror 50' to Reuters and The Independent regarding his failure to disclose his own sexual abuse history on the jury questionnaire. The text argues that despite this omission, Juror 50 remained impartial, citing his skeptical approach to evidence and specific reasons for convicting on some counts while acquitting on others (specifically regarding victim 'Jane').

This document is page 18 of a court ruling filed on April 1, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court is addressing the Defendant's claim for a new trial based on 'Juror 50' providing false answers regarding his history of sexual abuse on a jury questionnaire. The Judge concludes that Juror 50's inaccurate answers were inadvertent rather than intentional perjury, citing a Daily Mail interview with Laura Collins where the juror appeared genuinely surprised to learn about the specific question he missed.

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.

This document is a table of contents page (Page ii) from a court filing appendix related to the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 22-1426), dated February 28, 2023. It lists legal orders, memoranda, and exhibits related to the post-trial controversy surrounding 'Juror 50,' including media articles published in January 2022 and a hearing transcript from March 2022. The document tracks the judicial process overseen by Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the motion for a new trial based on juror disclosures.

This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Document 614) submitted on February 24, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The text, likely from the NACDL, argues that high-profile trials create pressure on jurors to convict for fame or to avoid public scorn, citing the 'stealth juror' phenomenon. It specifically alleges that 'Juror 50' in the Maxwell trial used social media to express appreciation for gratitude received for convicting Maxwell, and compares the situation to historical cases like O.J. Simpson and Rodney King.

This document is page 6 of a legal filing submitted to Judge Alison J. Nathan on March 1, 2022, by the defense in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. It lists specific proposed questions for 'Juror 50' regarding his prior knowledge of the case, his exposure to media reports about Epstein and Maxwell, and how his own history as a victim of childhood sexual abuse may have influenced his state of mind and sympathy for the victims during jury selection.