mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00009111.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "4",
    "document_number": "614",
    "date": "02/24/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 614 Filed 02/24/22 Page 4 of 12\n\nSince the beginning of our Republic, sensational high-profile trials have complicated efforts to eliminate bias from the jury through voir dire,1 but never before have jurors been as incentivized to lie. In the past, coupling voir dire with prospective jurors swearing an oath to tell the truth was a powerful way to eliminate bias, but the oath no longer carries the force that it once did. As a former Chief Judge of this Court remarked:\n\nWhen our judicial system was established and the requirement of an oath or affirmation on the part of a witness was borrowed from the British common law, the swearing of an oath meant something—namely, that the court could be fairly sure that a witness would tell the truth. In the time of our Founding Fathers, witnesses believed that they would be subject to severe and perhaps immediate Divine retribution if they lied under oath on the witness stand, based on the Ninth Commandment’s proscription, handed down by God to Moses that “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor” (Exodus, Ch. 20, Verse 16 (King James Version)). Unfortunately, the sanctity of the oath taken by witnesses at trial has been significantly eroded and laced with skepticism in recent years.\n\nUnited States v. Ianniello, 740 F. Supp. 171, 179 (S.D.N.Y. 1990) (Bricant, C.J.), rev’d in part, United States v. Salerno, 974 F.2d 231 (2d Cir.1992); see, e.g., Donald Blackwell, Has The Time Come To Dispense With The Testimonial Oath?, 36 No. 4 Trial Advocate Quarterly 28, 29-30 (2017) (noting that prospective jurors now frequently lie during voir dire).\n\nProspective jurors now have more reason to lie than they did in the past because they know that sitting as jurors in a high-profile trial may bring them fame, prestige, and even profit. We live in an age of reality television in which the “true crime” genre is dominant. Jurors often find themselves instant celebrities. They are interviewed by the press and talk shows,2 and often seek\n\n1 See, e.g., United States v. Burr, 25 F. Cas. 49, 52 (C.C. Va. 1807) (Marshall, C.J.) (concluding that an impartial trial for Burr’s alleged treason could be chosen through voir dire).\n2 See, e.g., Derek Chauvin Jurors Speak Out For The First Time, CNN (Oct. 28, 2021) (interview with seven jurors who convicted a police officer of killing George Floyd); Weinstein Juror Reflects On Witness Testimonies, CBS Morning (Feb. 28, 2020); Juror On Weinstein Case Explains How Verdict Was Reached, Inside Edition (Feb. 25, 2020).\n\n3\n\nDOJ-OGR-00009111",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 614 Filed 02/24/22 Page 4 of 12",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Since the beginning of our Republic, sensational high-profile trials have complicated efforts to eliminate bias from the jury through voir dire,1 but never before have jurors been as incentivized to lie. In the past, coupling voir dire with prospective jurors swearing an oath to tell the truth was a powerful way to eliminate bias, but the oath no longer carries the force that it once did. As a former Chief Judge of this Court remarked:",
      "position": "top"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "When our judicial system was established and the requirement of an oath or affirmation on the part of a witness was borrowed from the British common law, the swearing of an oath meant something—namely, that the court could be fairly sure that a witness would tell the truth. In the time of our Founding Fathers, witnesses believed that they would be subject to severe and perhaps immediate Divine retribution if they lied under oath on the witness stand, based on the Ninth Commandment’s proscription, handed down by God to Moses that “Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor” (Exodus, Ch. 20, Verse 16 (King James Version)). Unfortunately, the sanctity of the oath taken by witnesses at trial has been significantly eroded and laced with skepticism in recent years.",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "United States v. Ianniello, 740 F. Supp. 171, 179 (S.D.N.Y. 1990) (Bricant, C.J.), rev’d in part, United States v. Salerno, 974 F.2d 231 (2d Cir.1992); see, e.g., Donald Blackwell, Has The Time Come To Dispense With The Testimonial Oath?, 36 No. 4 Trial Advocate Quarterly 28, 29-30 (2017) (noting that prospective jurors now frequently lie during voir dire).",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Prospective jurors now have more reason to lie than they did in the past because they know that sitting as jurors in a high-profile trial may bring them fame, prestige, and even profit. We live in an age of reality television in which the “true crime” genre is dominant. Jurors often find themselves instant celebrities. They are interviewed by the press and talk shows,2 and often seek",
      "position": "middle"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "1 See, e.g., United States v. Burr, 25 F. Cas. 49, 52 (C.C. Va. 1807) (Marshall, C.J.) (concluding that an impartial trial for Burr’s alleged treason could be chosen through voir dire).\n2 See, e.g., Derek Chauvin Jurors Speak Out For The First Time, CNN (Oct. 28, 2021) (interview with seven jurors who convicted a police officer of killing George Floyd); Weinstein Juror Reflects On Witness Testimonies, CBS Morning (Feb. 28, 2020); Juror On Weinstein Case Explains How Verdict Was Reached, Inside Edition (Feb. 25, 2020).",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "3",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00009111",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Marshall",
      "Bricant",
      "Donald Blackwell",
      "Derek Chauvin",
      "George Floyd"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "CNN",
      "CBS",
      "Inside Edition"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "Republic",
      "Britain",
      "New York",
      "Virginia"
    ],
    "dates": [
      "02/24/22",
      "1990",
      "1992",
      "2017",
      "1807",
      "Oct. 28, 2021",
      "Feb. 28, 2020",
      "Feb. 25, 2020"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 614",
      "740 F. Supp. 171",
      "974 F.2d 231",
      "25 F. Cas. 49",
      "DOJ-OGR-00009111"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a high-profile trial. The text discusses the history of voir dire and the oath taken by witnesses, as well as the potential for jurors to lie during the voir dire process. The document includes citations to various court cases and legal articles."
}