Ghislaine Maxwell seeks new trial, alleges jury misconduct

[groundloop]

Source: ABC News

Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted accomplice of deceased sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein, formally asked a federal judge to grant her a new trial, contending in a sealed court filing late Wednesday that one of the jurors who decided her fate failed to disclose his own history of childhood sexual abuse, according to a person with knowledge of Maxwell's arguments seeking to have her guilty verdicts set aside.

The juror, who has been identified in court records as "Juror No. 50," answered "no" when asked on a pre-trial jury questionnaire if he, a friend or family member had even been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse or sexual assault, according to the source.

The juror, a 35-year-old Manhattan resident, granted several interviews in the days following Maxwell's convictions in late December. Identified in media reports using his first and middle names, Scotty David, he told Reuters, The Daily Mail and The Independent, that during a critical stage of deliberations, he shared his experiences of being sexually abused as a child. He claimed in interviews that his personal reflections helped convince some skeptical jurors that key prosecution witnesses -- the four women who testified about Maxwell's role in their sexual abuse -- could be believed.

[snip]

Maxwell's lawyers, who structured her defense case largely on challenges to the reliability of her accusers' memories, contend that if the juror had disclosed his history of child sexual abuse during jury screening, he almost certainly would have been removed from consideration.

Read more: https://abcnews.go.com/US/ghislaine-maxwell-seeks-trial-alleges-jury-misconduct/story?id=82375697

[onecaliberal]

1. Child rapist said what.

Throw away the key already

[AZLD4Candidate]

9. Child rapist says what? "I want a new trial" Straight Karen behavior.

[PJMcK]

2. Good luck with that

Bye, Ghislaine.

[Alexander Of Assyria]

3. Exactly...when u got something to clutch to, clutch it. The logic of felons argument escapes me.

[MontanaMama]

4. In this current environment of crazy...

I would bet she gets a new trial.

[WA-03 Democrat]

6. and a personal suite at Margo-Large-Ass

with a Presidential medal of honor for good measure

[PJMcK]

7. Nah, she's too old for Trump (n/t)

[SouthernDem4ever]

18. now I'm grossed out

[Goonch]

5. video captures the moment Ghislaine Maxwell juror Scotty David claimed he 'wasn't asked' about his

sexual abuse history in jury questionnaire
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10380247/Never-seen-video-shows-moment-Ghislaine-Maxwell-juror-sent-conviction-chaos.html

[mzmolly]

8. Sexual abuse victims,

are capable of being fair jurors.

[Skittles]

10. that gal complaining about "misconduct"

[calguy]

11. She has enough money to drag this out in court for years to come

The good news is, she'll be in jail the entire time.

[2naSalit]

16. +1

[mahatmakanejeeves]

12. The juror, who has been identified in court records as "Juror No. 50," answered "no" when asked ...

Last edited Thu Jan 20, 2022, 07:58 PM - Edit history (1)

The juror, who has been identified in court records as "Juror No. 50," answered "no" when asked on a pre-trial jury questionnaire if he, a friend or family member had even been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse or sexual assault, according to the source.

This assertion can be quickly verified or dismissed.

Maxwell's lawyers, who structured her defense case largely on challenges to the reliability of her accusers' memories, contend that if the juror had disclosed his history of child sexual abuse during jury screening, he almost certainly would have been removed from consideration.

If the prospective juror did lie on his questionnaire, and he would have been dismissed had he answered truthfully, then there's trouble with the verdict.

Would the prospective juror have been dismissed or not? As much money as the defendant's lawyers are billing, they should know the answer to every question on every juror's questionnaire.

I don't know the answer to any of these questions. Keep this in mind, though:

Sixth Amendment

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you. It has been most visibly tested in a series of cases involving terrorism, but much more often figures in cases that involve (for example) jury selection or the protection of witnesses, including victims of sex crimes as well as witnesses in need of protection from retaliation.

I am certain that if I were the appellant, I would want my rights upheld. I think you would too. Whether the petitioner is likable is of no bearing.

One looks at the replies to the OP and wonders which parts of the Constitution the persons posting those replies would pick and choose to uphold.

Just a reminder, I am not a lawyer.

[NH Ethylene]

14. Very good points.

Everybody has the same rights within the justice system, not just people we sympathize with.

If the assertions the defense maintains are true, she may very well have a right to a new trial. And it won't be anybody's fault except for the juror who lied.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

15. Thanks. The Constitution is not a popularity contest.

If there's one thing I've learned from my time at DU, it's that if I'm ever on trial for something, I don't want a trial by jury.

Happy New Year.

[monkeyman1]

19. as much as I hate to say it , if lie'd , fair game for a mistrial!! Ageed !

[Jarqui]

17. I agree with this if the facts behind the reasoning are accurate.

It sounds like he remembers the question of whether friend or family member was a victim of sexual abuse. He might have missed the first part of that question about himself being a victim.

Whether he lied or misheard the question, I think this poses real trouble for the verdict holding up.

I can't stand her or Epstein. She can rot in jail for all I care. But the law is the law.

I hope the prosecution can salvage it but I think the odds are against them if what has been reported is accurate.

[LiberalLovinLug]

13. Of course this totally overlooks the question of if a sexual abuse survivor will be against justice.

And if having the thoughts of a juror who has been sexually abused is maybe even a good thing? That they can give that perspective to other jurors, which they did.

I know , I know the logical answer.....they may harbour some unfair bias towards anyone even accused of sexual abuse.

But I think that's just as much an unfair assumption as the assumption that they can't make an unbiased judgment on a particular case. And in fact, overlooks their experiences would actually help to see or not see any tell tale signs of guilt on this charge.