{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "3",
    "document_number": "642",
    "date": "03/11/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 642 Filed 03/11/22 Page 3 of 66\nB. An intentionally false answer during voir dire is not a prerequisite to obtaining a new trial. .......................23\nArgument .......................................................28\nI. Ms. Maxwell is entitled to a new trial. ............................28\nA. Juror No. 50 did not truthfully answer material questions during voir dire, including Questions 25 and 48......................28\nB. Had Juror No. 50 answered Questions 25 and 48 truthfully, his answers would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause. ........29\n1. Implied bias...............................................30\n2. Inferable bias...............................................37\n3. Actual bias................................................38\nC. Juror No. 50's answers to Questions 25 and 48 were intentionally false.........39\nD. Had Juror No. 50 answered Questions 25 and 48 truthfully, the parties and the Court would have explored whether his other answers were false...........43\nE. The scope of any evidentiary hearing...............................48\n1. Pre-hearing discovery........................................48\n2. The hearing itself...........................................49\nII. Juror No. 50 has no right to intervene. ...............................51\nA. Juror No. 50 lacks standing.......................................51\nB. This Court should refuse Juror No. 50's discovery request because Juror No. 50 is under investigation and the release of the information requested would prejudice that investigation. .......................................................52\nC. Juror No. 50's filings should be stricken or, alternatively, remain under seal. ......53\nConclusion ............................................................56\nCertificate of Service ....................................................59\niii\nDOJ-OGR-00009695",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 642 Filed 03/11/22 Page 3 of 66",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "B. An intentionally false answer during voir dire is not a prerequisite to obtaining a new trial. .......................23\nArgument .......................................................28\nI. Ms. Maxwell is entitled to a new trial. ............................28\nA. Juror No. 50 did not truthfully answer material questions during voir dire, including Questions 25 and 48......................28\nB. Had Juror No. 50 answered Questions 25 and 48 truthfully, his answers would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause. ........29\n1. Implied bias...............................................30\n2. Inferable bias...............................................37\n3. Actual bias................................................38\nC. Juror No. 50's answers to Questions 25 and 48 were intentionally false.........39\nD. Had Juror No. 50 answered Questions 25 and 48 truthfully, the parties and the Court would have explored whether his other answers were false...........43\nE. The scope of any evidentiary hearing...............................48\n1. Pre-hearing discovery........................................48\n2. The hearing itself...........................................49\nII. Juror No. 50 has no right to intervene. ...............................51\nA. Juror No. 50 lacks standing.......................................51\nB. This Court should refuse Juror No. 50's discovery request because Juror No. 50 is under investigation and the release of the information requested would prejudice that investigation. .......................................................52\nC. Juror No. 50's filings should be stricken or, alternatively, remain under seal. ......53\nConclusion ............................................................56\nCertificate of Service ....................................................59",
      "position": "main content"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "iii",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009695",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Juror No. 50"
    ],
    "organizations": [],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "03/11/22"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "642",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009695"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to the case of Ms. Maxwell, with a focus on Juror No. 50 and their answers during voir dire. The document is well-structured and printed clearly."
}