DOJ-OGR-00020944.jpg
Extracted Text (OCR)
Case 22-1426, Document 58_02/28/2023, 3475901, Page118 of 221
A-318
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 653 Filed 04/01/22 Page 1 of 40
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ELECTRONICALLY FILED
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK DOC #:
DATE FILED:4/1/22
United States of America,
20-CR-330 (AJN)
—-Vvy—
OPINION & ORDER
Ghislaine Maxwell,
Defendant.
ALISON J. NATHAN, Circuit Judge, sitting by designation:
Central to our system of justice is a defendant’s right to have guilt adjudged by a lay jury
of one’s peers. Citizens give their time and attention to this critical role in the administration of
justice, a role which is enshrined in our Constitution. Judicial officers are charged with the
implementation of this constitutional right. In all cases, whether of high profile or low, trial
courts must ensure that only jurors who can fairly and impartially assess the evidence are seated
on the jury. And once seated, the jury must be permitted to deliberate fully and frankly in an
effort to reach a unanimous verdict. Trials entail significant investments of public and private
resources. McDonough Power Equip., Inc. v. Greenwood, 464 U.S. 548, 555 (1984). For all of
these reasons, a verdict may be set aside only in the most extraordinary of circumstances.
Before the Court is the Defendant’s motion for a new trial pursuant to Federal Rule of
Criminal Procedure 33 on the basis that a juror provided inaccurate information during jury
selection. Maxwell contends the juror’s presence on the jury violated her Sixth Amendment
right to an impartial jury. Bearing these principles in mind, the Court conducted an uncommon
post-trial hearing. Although uncommon, the hearing was necessary because of incontrovertible
evidence that Juror 50 failed to respond accurately during the jury selection process to a question
on a written questionnaire about his history of sexual abuse. At the hearing, the Court
DOJ-OGR- 00020944