DOJ-OGR-00008984.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 609 Filed 02/24/22 Page5of13 Intervention in this action by Juror 50 would not prejudice either party to this action. If granted, intervention would also not delay resolution of the issue subject to a possible inquiry, on the merits. For these reasons and those further set forth below, the technical requirements for intervention are satisfied here. Additionally, the principles of justice, fairness and common-sense weigh strongly in favor of allowing Juror 50 to intervene. As such, Juror 50’s motion to intervene and for the release of the sealed Jury Questionnaire and voir dire materials should be granted, as requested herein I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Juror 50 served on the jury in the case sub judice, which reached a verdict on December 29, 2021. After the verdict was reached Juror 50 gave interviews, which were reported in both print media and televised news reports. In the media reporting on the interviews given by Juror 50, he is alleged to have discussed his personal experience(s) with sexual abuse. See Prosecution Letter dated Jan. 5, 2022. ECF # 568. On this basis, and on the basis of information filed under seal, Defense Counsel sent a letter to Judge Nathan, which was also published in the media, claiming “incontrovertible grounds for a new trial under rule 33”. See Defense Letter dated Jan. 5, 2022. ECF #569. Thereafter, Judge Nathan issued an order giving Juror 50 the opportunity to determine if he “wishes to be heard on the issue of the appropriateness of an inquiry” and to submit a brief by January 26, 2022, if he determines that he does desire to be heard on such issue. Order at 1. Jan. 5, 2022. 20-CR-330. Juror 50 seeks a copy of his Jury Questionnaire, as he does not recall answering questions regarding his prior experience with sexual assault. Juror 50 indicated the same to the media, DOJ-OGR-00008984