mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES008/DOJ-OGR-00020967.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "24",
    "document_number": "653",
    "date": "04/01/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page141 of 221\nA-341\nCase 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 653 Filed 04/01/22 Page 24 of 40\n\n1. Actual Bias\n\"Actual bias is 'bias in fact'—the existence of a state of mind that leads to an inference that the person will not act with entire impartiality.\" Torres, 128 F.3d at 43. A court may find a juror to be partial because the juror admits as much, or based on the juror's other voir dire answers. Id. (citing United States v. Haynes, 398 F.2d 980, 984 (2d Cir. 1968)). This finding is \"based upon determinations of demeanor and credibility.\" Id. at 44 (quoting Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412, 428 (1985)).\n\nThe record does not support a finding that Juror 50 was actually biased. As explained above, the Court finds Juror 50's sworn testimony to be credible overall. He was responsive and forthright, and his demeanor evinced that he answered the Court's questions truthfully. He repeatedly and credibly affirmed that his personal history of sexual abuse would not affect his ability to serve as a fair and impartial juror \"in any way.\" Hearing Tr. at 25; see also id. at 9, 10, 13. He testified that there was \"absolutely in no way\" anything about his experience that would interfere with his \"ability to assess the credibility of witnesses alleging sexual abuse,\" and that he would be able to conclude such a witness was not testifying truthfully if that was what the evidence suggested. Id. at 26. He testified that he did not harbor any bias against the Defendant nor any bias in favor of the Government. Indeed, he did not want to put his \"thumb on the scale in any direction.\" Id. He declared that he had \"no doubt\" as to his ability to be fair to both sides. Id. at 27. As noted above, the Defendant dismisses these responses as \"self-serving.\" Maxwell Post-Hearing Br. at 7. The Court disagrees; it finds each of these responses to be credible.\n\nMoreover, Juror 50's hearing testimony is corroborated by his answers during voir dire.\nWithout hesitation, he declared that he would follow the Court's instructions on the law, he \"absolutely\" could decide the case based on the evidence or lack of evidence presented in court,\n\n24\nDOJ-OGR-00020967",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page141 of 221",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A-341",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 653 Filed 04/01/22 Page 24 of 40",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1. Actual Bias\n\"Actual bias is 'bias in fact'—the existence of a state of mind that leads to an inference that the person will not act with entire impartiality.\" Torres, 128 F.3d at 43. A court may find a juror to be partial because the juror admits as much, or based on the juror's other voir dire answers. Id. (citing United States v. Haynes, 398 F.2d 980, 984 (2d Cir. 1968)). This finding is \"based upon determinations of demeanor and credibility.\" Id. at 44 (quoting Wainwright v. Witt, 469 U.S. 412, 428 (1985)).\n\nThe record does not support a finding that Juror 50 was actually biased. As explained above, the Court finds Juror 50's sworn testimony to be credible overall. He was responsive and forthright, and his demeanor evinced that he answered the Court's questions truthfully. He repeatedly and credibly affirmed that his personal history of sexual abuse would not affect his ability to serve as a fair and impartial juror \"in any way.\" Hearing Tr. at 25; see also id. at 9, 10, 13. He testified that there was \"absolutely in no way\" anything about his experience that would interfere with his \"ability to assess the credibility of witnesses alleging sexual abuse,\" and that he would be able to conclude such a witness was not testifying truthfully if that was what the evidence suggested. Id. at 26. He testified that he did not harbor any bias against the Defendant nor any bias in favor of the Government. Indeed, he did not want to put his \"thumb on the scale in any direction.\" Id. He declared that he had \"no doubt\" as to his ability to be fair to both sides. Id. at 27. As noted above, the Defendant dismisses these responses as \"self-serving.\" Maxwell Post-Hearing Br. at 7. The Court disagrees; it finds each of these responses to be credible.\n\nMoreover, Juror 50's hearing testimony is corroborated by his answers during voir dire.\nWithout hesitation, he declared that he would follow the Court's instructions on the law, he \"absolutely\" could decide the case based on the evidence or lack of evidence presented in court,",
      "position": "body"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "24",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00020967",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Torres",
      "Juror 50",
      "Haynes",
      "Wainwright",
      "Witt",
      "Maxwell",
      "Defendant"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Government",
      "Court"
    ],
    "locations": [],
    "dates": [
      "02/28/2023",
      "04/01/22",
      "1985"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 22-1426",
      "Document 58",
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN",
      "Document 653",
      "3475901",
      "A-341",
      "DOJ-OGR-00020967"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript or legal document, discussing the credibility of Juror 50 and the issue of actual bias. The text is printed and there are no visible stamps or handwritten notes. The document is well-formatted and easy to read."
}