DOJ-OGR-00008987.jpg

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document609_ Filed 02/24/22 Page 8of13 F3d 76, 79 (2d Cir 1998) (Citing United States v. King, No. 94 Cr. 455, 1998 WL 50221 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 5, 1998)). Moreover, conclusion of the trial on which the subject juror served does not remove a jurors’ interest in privacy and protection from harassment. See United States v. Gurney, 558 F.2d 1202, 1210-12 (Sth Cir.1977). 2. Jurors may face criminal exposure for answers given on jury uestionnaires To complete the jury questionnaire, jurors must swear to truthfully answer the same under penalty of perjury; jurors are also placed under oath prior to answering questions in voir dire. See e.g., United States v Parse, 789 F3d 83, 88 (2d Cir 2015). A juror who knowingly submits false answers on the jury questionnaire and/or during voir dire testimony may expose himself or herself to arrest and prosecution, while jurors also maintain a fifth amendment right against self-incrimination. /d., at 91. 3. Intervention in criminal trials may be granted to protect the rights of third parties It is indisputable that precedent supports interventions by interested third parties in criminal matters, as such have been repeatedly granted in “circumstances where ‘a third party’s constitutional or other federal rights are implicated by the resolution of a particular motion, request, or other issue during the course of a criminal case.’” United States v. Collyard, case no. 12cr0058, 2013 WL 1346202 at *2 (D. Minn. April 3, 2013) (quoting United States v. Carmichael, 342 F. Supp. 2d 1070, 1072 (M.D. Ala. 2004)). For example, courts have allowed the press to intervene in criminal cases to assert the First Amendment rights of the Press. See Jn re Associated Press, 162 F.3d 503, 506- 507 (7th Cir. 1998). Courts have also allowed 8 DOJ-OGR-00008987