Juror 50
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Judicial inquiry |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Stepbrother of Juror 50
|
Family |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Judicial inquiry subject |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
United States Government
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Stepbrother of Juror 50
|
Victim abuser |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Judicial authority |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
district court
|
Judge juror inquiry |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
district court
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge Nathan
|
Judicial oversight |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Knowledge of |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Knowledge of |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Counsel for Juror 50
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Juror judicial authority |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Trial participant |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lucia Osborn-Crowley
|
Interviewee interviewer |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Elizabeth Loftus
|
Contradictory views |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Judicial authority witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
United States Attorney’s Office (SDNY)
|
No association |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
FBI
|
No association |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Knowledge subject |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
The Defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell)
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Defendant juror |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Trial participant |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Juror accused |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-02-21 | N/A | Voir dire process involving Juror 50 | Court | View |
| 2022-02-16 | N/A | Jury Selection | Court context | View |
| 2022-02-11 | Court ruling | The Court denied Juror 50's motion to intervene in the criminal case. | N/A | View |
| 2022-02-11 | Court ruling | The Court denied Juror 50's motion to intervene. | N/A | View |
| 2022-02-01 | N/A | Jury Deliberation | Jury Room | View |
| 2022-01-26 | Legal deadline | Deadline for Juror 50 to submit a brief if he determines he desires to be heard on the issue of a... | N/A | View |
| 2022-01-25 | Court filing | Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, on behalf of ABC News and NBCUniversal News Group, filed a letter to t... | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-01-12 | Court order | Judge Alison J. Nathan issued an order stating that if a further submission from Juror 50 is perm... | New York, New York | View |
| 2022-01-12 | N/A | Court issues order regarding redactions and Juror 50's motion to intervene. | SDNY | View |
| 2022-01-10 | N/A | Counsel for Juror 50 filed a motion to intervene and a supporting memorandum of law. | Court | View |
| 2022-01-05 | Legal action | Judge Nathan issued an order giving Juror 50 an opportunity to be heard. | N/A | View |
| 2022-01-05 | N/A | Reuters article published regarding an interview with Juror 50. | N/A | View |
| 2022-01-05 | N/A | Court sets schedule for post-verdict motions and addresses Juror 50 counsel. | SDNY | View |
| 2022-01-05 | Phone call | Juror 50 called the Jury Department of the Southern District of New York for guidance regarding s... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2022-01-05 | N/A | Judge Nathan issues an Order regarding Juror 50 | Court | View |
| 2022-01-05 | Interview | Reuters published an article reporting an interview with Juror 50 regarding his jury service. | N/A | View |
| 2022-01-05 | N/A | Juror 50 gave interviews to media outlets admitting to past sexual abuse. | Unknown | View |
| 2022-01-05 | Media interview | Juror 50 made public statements to media outlets, including The Independent and The Daily Mail, s... | N/A | View |
| 2022-01-05 | N/A | Juror 50 called the Jury Department seeking guidance and an attorney due to media reports. | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2022-01-04 | N/A | Publication of interview with Juror 50 in The Independent. | The Independent (Publication) | View |
| 2022-01-01 | N/A | Juror 50 posted on Instagram after trial completion. | Instagram (Social Media) | View |
| 2022-01-01 | N/A | Timeframe of Juror 50's post-trial media interviews. | International media outlets | View |
| 2022-01-01 | N/A | Juror 50 used Twitter account again after trial (approximate date based on 'January 2022') | Online | View |
| 2022-01-01 | N/A | Juror 50 commented on Annie Farmer's Twitter post | View | |
| 2022-01-01 | Social media activity | Juror 50 posted on his Instagram account after the completion of the trial. | 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 |
Jury Questionnaire
Documents containing answers regarding prior experience with sexual assault.
Production of communications
Compelling production of Juror 50's communications and other information.
Jury Service
Statements made by Juror 50 to the media about his jury service.
Juror Screening
Document Juror 50 is seeking a copy of.
Jury Deliberations
Discussed why the jury did not convict on count two (regarding Jane) but convicted on others.
Explanation of questionnaire answers
Testimony regarding why he answered 'No' to questions about family abuse.
Juror experience / Sexual abuse history
Juror 50 disclosed his sexual abuse history and realized he may have misanswered questionnaire Question 48.
Experience as a juror
Following the verdict, Juror 50 gave interviews to journalists where he discussed his experience as a juror and revealed he was a survivor of childhood sexual abuse, which he had not disclosed on the questionnaire.
Juror 50's statements regarding his jury questionnaire
Juror 50 was interviewed by a Daily Mail reporter about his jury questionnaire, specifically concerning questions about sexual abuse.
Juror 50's statements regarding his jury questionnaire
Juror 50 was interviewed by a Daily Mail reporter about his jury questionnaire, specifically concerning questions about sexual abuse.
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.
Post-trial inquiry
Oral questioning regarding Juror 50's answers on the questionnaire and prior experience with sexual abuse.
Jury Selection Questionnaire
Question regarding history of sexual abuse.
Ghislaine – Partner in Crime
Undisclosed interview containing a 'bombshell revelation'.
Jury Selection Questionnaire
Questions regarding background and potential bias.
Granting of Immunity
The Court explains to Juror 50 that they have been granted 'use immunity' regarding their testimony, meaning their truthful testimony cannot be used against them in a federal criminal case, though they can still be prosecuted for perjury.
Juror Impartiality Inquiry
Questioning regarding whether past sexual abuse experience would affect duty as a juror.
Testimony regarding abuse
Stated he was abused at age nine or ten by a family member and disclosed it in high school.
Jury Questionnaire Accuracy
Juror testified answers were inadvertent mistakes and did not affect impartiality.
Hearing on potential bias
At a hearing, Juror 50 repeatedly denied any bias, stated he had 'no doubt' in his ability to be fair, and explained his state of mind when filling out the questionnaire.
Hearing on potential bias
At a hearing, Juror 50 repeatedly denied any bias, stated he had 'no doubt' in his ability to be fair, and explained his state of mind when filling out the questionnaire.
Guidance regarding media statements
Juror 50 called the Jury Department asking for guidance due to statements he had given to media outlets, inquiring if he needed an attorney and if he could get a copy of his questionnaire.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity