mirror-epstein-docs/results/IMAGES004/DOJ-OGR-00010310.json

{
  "document_metadata": {
    "page_number": "4",
    "document_number": "649",
    "date": "03/15/22",
    "document_type": "court document",
    "has_handwriting": false,
    "has_stamps": false
  },
  "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 649 Filed 03/15/22 Page 4 of 12 LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIM him.\" United States v. Daugerdas, 867 F. Supp. 2d 445, 470 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (quoting McDonough, 464 U.S. at 554). Challenges for cause can be based on implied bias, inferable bias, or actual bias. See United States v. Torres, 128 F.3d 38, 43 (2d Cir. 1997). In determining whether Juror 50 was biased, the Court should consider several factors, including \"[1] the similarity between the juror's experiences and important facts presented at trial, [2] the scope and severity of the juror's dishonesty, and [3] the juror's motive for lying.\" See Sampson v. United States, 724 F.3d 150, 166 (1st Cir. 2013) (citations omitted). The record developed at the Hearing strengthened the already compelling evidence of Juror 50's bias and established that, had he answered the questionnaire honestly, he would have been struck for cause. A. The Similarity Between Juror 50's Sexual Abuse and the Witnesses' Sexual Abuse, As Well As His Post-Trial Conduct, Establish Bias. At the hearing, Juror 50 disclosed the facts of his sexual abuse, which significantly paralleled the abuse described by the government's four key victim witnesses at trial. Jury 50 had already disclosed some of these facts in his post-trial press interviews. But the opportunity to question Juror 50 further about the circumstances of his abuse at the Hearing—an opportunity that Ms. Maxwell was denied at voir dire because of his false answers to the questionnaire—revealed even more striking similarities to the abuse described by the four victim witnesses at trial. Like the four accusers, Juror 50 (i) was sexually abused as a minor, (ii) was abused on multiple occasions over the course of several years, and (iii) delayed reporting the abuse. (Tr. 8-9). Like the four accusers, Juror 50 was abused by two people who were friends and who each participated in the abuse. (Tr. 8-9). Furthermore, Juror 50 was not abused by a stranger or sexually assaulted by someone he did not know. He was abused by someone familiar to him, his stepbrother, who was part of his life (Tr. 8-9), just as the four accusers described the relationship between their families and Epstein and Ms. Maxwell. These similarities are significant and 4 DOJ-OGR-00010310",
  "text_blocks": [
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 649 Filed 03/15/22 Page 4 of 12",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIM",
      "position": "header"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "him.\" United States v. Daugerdas, 867 F. Supp. 2d 445, 470 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) (quoting McDonough, 464 U.S. at 554). Challenges for cause can be based on implied bias, inferable bias, or actual bias. See United States v. Torres, 128 F.3d 38, 43 (2d Cir. 1997). In determining whether Juror 50 was biased, the Court should consider several factors, including \"[1] the similarity between the juror's experiences and important facts presented at trial, [2] the scope and severity of the juror's dishonesty, and [3] the juror's motive for lying.\" See Sampson v. United States, 724 F.3d 150, 166 (1st Cir. 2013) (citations omitted). The record developed at the Hearing strengthened the already compelling evidence of Juror 50's bias and established that, had he answered the questionnaire honestly, he would have been struck for cause.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "A. The Similarity Between Juror 50's Sexual Abuse and the Witnesses' Sexual Abuse, As Well As His Post-Trial Conduct, Establish Bias.",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "At the hearing, Juror 50 disclosed the facts of his sexual abuse, which significantly paralleled the abuse described by the government's four key victim witnesses at trial. Jury 50 had already disclosed some of these facts in his post-trial press interviews. But the opportunity to question Juror 50 further about the circumstances of his abuse at the Hearing—an opportunity that Ms. Maxwell was denied at voir dire because of his false answers to the questionnaire—revealed even more striking similarities to the abuse described by the four victim witnesses at trial. Like the four accusers, Juror 50 (i) was sexually abused as a minor, (ii) was abused on multiple occasions over the course of several years, and (iii) delayed reporting the abuse. (Tr. 8-9). Like the four accusers, Juror 50 was abused by two people who were friends and who each participated in the abuse. (Tr. 8-9). Furthermore, Juror 50 was not abused by a stranger or sexually assaulted by someone he did not know. He was abused by someone familiar to him, his stepbrother, who was part of his life (Tr. 8-9), just as the four accusers described the relationship between their families and Epstein and Ms. Maxwell. These similarities are significant and",
      "position": "main"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "4",
      "position": "footer"
    },
    {
      "type": "printed",
      "content": "DOJ-OGR-00010310",
      "position": "footer"
    }
  ],
  "entities": {
    "people": [
      "Juror 50",
      "Ms. Maxwell",
      "Epstein",
      "Daugerdas",
      "McDonough",
      "Torres",
      "Sampson"
    ],
    "organizations": [
      "Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim"
    ],
    "locations": [
      "S.D.N.Y.",
      "2d Cir.",
      "1st Cir."
    ],
    "dates": [
      "03/15/22",
      "2012",
      "1997",
      "2013"
    ],
    "reference_numbers": [
      "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
      "Document 649",
      "Tr. 8-9",
      "DOJ-OGR-00010310"
    ]
  },
  "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court filing related to a criminal case, discussing juror bias and the similarity between a juror's experiences and those of witnesses in the case."
}