Juror 50
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Laura Collins
|
Interviewee interviewer |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
other jurors
|
Influence |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-12-18 | N/A | Trial of Ghislaine Maxwell | Court | View |
| 0023-12-01 | N/A | Jury Deliberations | Jury Room | View |
| 0016-11-01 | N/A | Follow-up questions and an instruction video shown to jurors. | Court | View |
| 0008-03-01 | Legal proceeding | A court hearing where Juror 50 affirmed his impartiality regarding issues of reporting sexual abuse. | N/A | View |
| 0004-11-01 | N/A | Juror 50 filled out the juror questionnaire. | Unknown | View |
| 0004-11-01 | N/A | Juror 50 answered Question 49 on the questionnaire. | Court | View |
20250117133905126_22-1426.pdf
This document is a formal legal opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirming the conviction and 240-month prison sentence of Ghislaine Maxwell for sex trafficking and related offenses. The court rejected Maxwell's appeal on five grounds, including arguments regarding a non-prosecution agreement, statute of limitations, juror misconduct, jury instructions, and sentencing reasonableness. The document also includes a subsequent order from November 2024 denying Maxwell's petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc.
DOJ-OGR-00000080.tif
This document outlines legal arguments concerning Maxwell's trial, specifically addressing the District Court's handling of juror selection and a jury note related to Count Four of the Indictment. It discusses whether Maxwell could be found guilty for aiding in Jane's transportation if the intent for sexual activity was not tied to the New Mexico flight, and references a case (United States v. Ianniello) regarding juror questioning.
DOJ-OGR-00000078.tif
This document discusses legal arguments related to the application of statutes of limitations for sexual abuse charges under the PROTECT Act, specifically as it pertains to Maxwell's conduct. It also details Maxwell's appeal for a new trial, arguing that Juror 50's failure to disclose a history of sexual abuse during jury selection deprived her of a fair trial, a motion which the District Court denied. The document cites several legal precedents regarding the definition and application of 'abuse of discretion' in judicial review.
DOJ-OGR-00000069.tif
This document details the conclusion of a jury trial for Maxwell, who was found guilty on December 29, 2021, of multiple counts including sex trafficking and transportation of a minor for sexual activity, but acquitted on one count. It also highlights a critical issue with Juror 50, who, despite stating in post-verdict interviews that he was a survivor of child sexual abuse, had previously answered 'no' to relevant questions on the jury questionnaire.
DOJ-OGR-00014869.jpg
This legal document, page 19 of a court filing, discusses the District Court's response to a jury note during deliberations in a case against Maxwell. The jury questioned whether Maxwell could be found guilty on Count Four if she only aided in a victim's (Jane's) return flight from New Mexico, not the initial flight where the criminal intent was present. The court declined to answer directly, finding the question too complex, and instead referred the jury back to the original instructions.
DOJ-OGR-00014868.jpg
This legal document discusses the application of Rule 33 motions concerning juror responses during voir dire, referencing the McDonough standard. It details the District Court's finding that Juror 50's erroneous responses were not deliberately incorrect and that Maxwell did not challenge other jurors with similar disclosures. The document cites several legal precedents, including United States v. Gambino and McDonough Power Equipment, Inc. v. Greenwood, to support its legal arguments regarding the standard for overturning trial results based on juror honesty.
DOJ-OGR-00014867.jpg
This document is a page from a judicial opinion concerning an appeal by a defendant named Maxwell. The court is reviewing the District Court's decision to deny Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The basis for Maxwell's motion was that 'Juror 50' failed to accurately answer questions on a jury questionnaire about a personal history of sexual abuse, which Maxwell argues deprived her of a fair and impartial jury.
DOJ-OGR-00014858.jpg
This document is page 8 of a legal filing (filed Dec 2, 2024) summarizing the procedural history of Ghislaine Maxwell's post-trial motions. It details the controversy surrounding 'Juror 50,' who testified on March 8, 2022, that inaccuracies in his jury questionnaire regarding past sexual abuse were inadvertent mistakes. The court found the juror credible and denied Maxwell's motion for a new trial, subsequently sentencing her to 240 months in prison.
DOJ-OGR-00014857.jpg
This page from a legal document details the conclusion of a trial against a defendant named Maxwell, who was found guilty of multiple charges on December 29, 2021. The document's primary focus is on a post-verdict issue involving 'Juror 50', who revealed in press interviews that he was a survivor of child sexual abuse, directly contradicting his 'no' answers to related questions on his pre-trial jury questionnaire.
DOJ-OGR-00000020.jpg
This legal document, page 19 of a court filing dated September 17, 2024, discusses the District Court's response to a specific note from the jury during deliberations in the trial of Maxwell. The jury questioned whether Maxwell could be found guilty on Count Four if she only aided in a victim's (Jane's) return flight, not the initial flight to New Mexico where the criminal intent for sexual activity was present. The document states the court found the question too difficult to "parse factually and legally" and instead referred the jury back to the original instructions, an action which is being analyzed in this filing.
DOJ-OGR-00000019.jpg
This document is page 18 of a legal filing (Case 22-1426) dated September 17, 2024. It discusses a Rule 33 motion regarding Juror 50's erroneous responses during voir dire in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. The text argues that under the 'McDonough' standard, a new trial is not warranted because the District Court found the juror's errors were not deliberate and would not have resulted in a strike for cause.
DOJ-OGR-00000018.jpg
This document is a page from a legal opinion (Case 22-1426) dated September 17, 2024, concerning the appeal of a District Court's decision. The appellant, Maxwell, argues for a new trial on the grounds that Juror 50 was dishonest on a jury questionnaire regarding a history of sexual abuse. The text outlines the high legal standard of "abuse of discretion" required to overturn the lower court's ruling, emphasizing that new trials are granted only sparingly and in extraordinary circumstances.
DOJ-OGR-00000009.jpg
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.
DOJ-OGR-00021051.jpg
This document is a table of contents from a legal filing dated February 28, 2023, related to Case 22-1426. It outlines the arguments for an appeal on behalf of 'Maxwell', alleging multiple errors by the District Court, including the handling of 'Juror 50' in a post-trial hearing, constructively amending the indictment, and applying an incorrect sentencing guideline. The filing seeks to have the sentence vacated and the case remanded for resentencing.
DOJ-OGR-00020983.jpg
This document is a court order from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated April 1, 2022, signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan. The order denies the Defendant's motion for a new trial, concluding that 'Juror 50' harbored no bias, orders a presentence investigation report, and confirms sentencing is scheduled for June 28, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00020982.jpg
This document is page 39 of a court order filed on April 1, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court rejects the Defendant's motion for a new trial based on Juror 50's conduct, concluding that Juror 50 did not commit perjury, was not biased, and testified credibly at a post-trial hearing regarding his failure to disclose prior sexual abuse during the questionnaire phase. The judge rules that the 'McDonough inquiry' standard for a new trial was not met.
DOJ-OGR-00020981.jpg
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.
DOJ-OGR-00020978.jpg
This legal document is a court filing that addresses and rejects the Defendant's arguments for juror bias. The Defendant claims that Juror 50 was biased due to his personal history of sexual abuse, which she argues resonated with the victims' testimony and improperly shaped his views. The Court refutes these claims, stating that the juror's post-trial interviews do not prove pre-trial bias and that it is a foundational principle for jurors to rely on their life experiences to evaluate evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00020977.jpg
This legal document is a court's analysis of a defendant's (Maxwell's) claim that one of the jurors, Juror 50, was biased. The defendant cites other legal cases (Afshar, Burton) to support the claim, but the court distinguishes the facts and finds Juror 50 was not biased, noting his credible testimony about his past abuse. The court also dismisses the argument that Juror 50's post-trial interviews and social media activity are evidence of bias.
DOJ-OGR-00020974.jpg
This legal document is a court's analysis of a defendant's (Maxwell's) challenge to the impartiality of a juror, Juror 50. The court finds Juror 50's testimony credible and determines that his inadvertent nondisclosure about past sexual abuse does not constitute deliberate lying to be selected for the jury. The court rejects the defendant's argument that similarities between the juror's personal history and the case issues warrant a finding of implied bias, distinguishing this situation from other legal precedents.
DOJ-OGR-00020972.jpg
This legal document is a court's analysis regarding the impartiality of 'Juror 50'. The Court argues that even if the juror, a victim of sexual abuse, had disclosed this during jury selection, it would not have been grounds for a 'challenge for cause'. The Court found the juror's testimony credible and affirmed that individuals with traumatic experiences can serve as fair and impartial jurors, drawing parallels to jurors in murder and fraud trials.
DOJ-OGR-00020971.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 1, 2022, discusses the jury selection process in a criminal case. It details how the Defendant chose not to challenge for cause two prospective jurors, Juror A and Juror B, despite their disclosures of personal experiences related to sexual abuse. The document contrasts their situations with that of another juror, Juror 50, and notes that all affirmed their ability to remain fair and impartial.
DOJ-OGR-00020970.jpg
This legal document is a court's analysis concluding that Juror 50 is neither impliedly nor inferably biased against the Defendant. The court reasons that the juror's personal experience of sexual abuse is insufficient to infer partiality and that, based on the voir dire of other jurors, it is unlikely the Defendant would have successfully challenged the juror for cause.
DOJ-OGR-00020969.jpg
This legal document, page 26 of a court filing, provides a detailed legal analysis of the concepts of "implied bias" and "inferred bias" in the context of juror partiality. It distinguishes between the two, defining implied bias as a conclusive presumption for extreme cases and inferred bias as a discretionary finding by the trial court based on a juror's responses. The document relies heavily on precedents from cases like McCoy, Greer, and Torres to establish these legal standards.
DOJ-OGR-00020967.jpg
This legal document is a court's analysis regarding a claim of 'actual bias' against Juror 50. The Court finds Juror 50's sworn testimony to be credible, concluding that his personal history of sexual abuse would not impede his ability to be a fair and impartial juror. The Court rejects the Defendant's (Maxwell's) argument that the juror's assurances were 'self-serving', citing the juror's consistent and forthright demeanor during both a hearing and voir dire.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Unknown Entities | Juror 50 | $0.00 | Hypothetical 'receipt of financial payment for ... | View |
| N/A | Received | Media outlets (im... | Juror 50 | $0.00 | Hypothetical compensation for post-trial interv... | View |
Announcing participation in Ghislaine Maxwell trial
Juror 50 posted messages on social media, using his actual picture and real first name, announcing to the world that he was on the Maxwell jury.
Juror's memory and belief in victims' credibility
Juror 50 told the media that he believed his memory 'was like a video' and that he would advocate for the credibility of the alleged victims in the case.
Juror Qualification Questionnaire
Juror 50 completed a questionnaire, providing answers to questions (specifically 25 and 48) that are now being challenged as false and not credible.
Explanation of questionnaire answers
Juror 50 testified to explain his answers, stating he was rushed and that he no longer considers himself a victim of a crime as part of his healing process.
Experience as a juror
Juror 50 gave three press interviews, two to foreign press, about his experience. He did not use his last name and did not expect them to garner significant attention.
Jury deliberations
Juror 50 described the jury's deliberation process to The Daily Mail, stating they performed their due diligence, felt sympathy for the defendant but set aside the defendant's decision not to testify, and methodically reviewed evidence to reach a verdict without pressure.
Question 48
Juror 50's answer to Question 48 on the questionnaire is allegedly inconsistent with his later public statements about being a victim of sexual abuse.
Victim of sexual abuse
Juror 50 made unsworn public statements that he was a victim of sexual abuse, which appear inconsistent with his questionnaire answers.
Question 48
Juror 50's answer to Question 48 on the questionnaire is allegedly inconsistent with his later public statements about being a victim of sexual abuse.
Victim of sexual abuse
Juror 50 made unsworn public statements that he was a victim of sexual abuse, which appear inconsistent with his questionnaire answers.
Juror's own experience relevant to the trial
Following the trial, Juror 50 gave several direct, unambiguous statements to multiple media outlets about his own experience, which cast doubt on the accuracy of his responses to jury selection questions.
Recall of questionnaire questions
Juror 50 told the press he did not recall a question about his own sexual abuse but did recall one about the abuse of friends and family members.
Juror questionnaire
Juror 50 provided inaccurate answers to Questions 25, 48, and 49 of the questionnaire.
Jury deliberations and personal experiences
The document discusses testimony from Juror 50 about statements he made to journalists, where he broadcast his experiences and the role he played in jury deliberations.
Jury deliberations in the Maxwell trial
Juror 50 explained to The Independent the jury's reasoning for their verdict, including why they did not convict on count two and why they convicted on other counts, citing the corroboration of victims' testimonies.
Juror background screening
Juror 50 answered 'no' to three questions on the questionnaire regarding whether he or a friend/family member had been a victim of a crime, sexual abuse/assault, or accused of sexual harassment/abuse.
Juror's history of sexual abuse
Shortly after the trial, Juror 50 participated in several media interviews where he readily disclosed his history of sexual abuse, using his real name and pictures.
Juror 50's personal story and experience of sexual abuse
After the trial, Juror 50 decided to speak to the international press to 'tell his story', which is presented as evidence of his bias and identification with the victims.
Support for sharing her story
Juror 50 posted a comment on social media to Annie Farmer, a witness in the case, in which he “thanked her for sharing [her] story.”
The trial
The Defendant contends that Juror 50's decision to give interviews post-trial, using his picture and first name, is evidence of bias.
Jury deliberations
Juror 50 described the jury's deliberation process, stating they performed their "due diligence," felt sympathy for the defendant but took their job seriously, methodically reviewed evidence, and were not pressured into a verdict, ultimately concluding the prosecution proved its case.
Motion to intervene
A motion filed by Juror 50 to intervene in the criminal case, which the Court denied.
Juror qualification and background
Maxwell contends that had Juror 50 answered the questionnaire accurately, it would have provided a basis for a for-cause challenge.
Juror qualification and background
Juror 50 made false statements and failed to give truthful answers on the juror questionnaire.
His experience as a juror in the Maxwell trial.
Juror 50 stated he went into the trial believing Maxwell was innocent until proven guilty and that his own past experiences did not affect his impartiality.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity