Jurors
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Unnamed Speaker (Judge)
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Court/Judge
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional judge jurors |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Government/Defense
|
Judicial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed Speaker (presumably the judge)
|
Official |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
spouse, domestic partner, family, colleagues, co-workers
|
Friend |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
witnesses
|
Evaluation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
witnesses
|
Judicial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
accusers
|
Judicial evaluation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge
|
Authority instruction |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge (PAE)
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
fellow jurors
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional protective |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Judicial authority |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Lawyers
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
The case agent
|
Restricted |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge
|
Authority instructor |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Ghislaine Maxwell trial proceedings, including peremptory challenges, preliminary instructions, a... | Main courtroom: 40 Foley, c... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial attendance required from 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. | The Courthouse | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Selection / Trial | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deliberations | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Juror disclosure of abuse history | Jury Room | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The Jury Selection Process | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination and cross-examination of witnesses | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Impanelment and Swearing In | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Selection Process | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Review of evidentiary exhibits (1J, 1K, 1M) during trial testimony. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Ghislaine Maxwell Trial (#GhislaineMaxwellTrial) | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Preliminary Jury Instructions | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Impaneling and swearing in of the jury | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of witness Rodgers regarding Government Exhibit 662 (a logbook). | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Impaneling of the Jury | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | O.J. Simpson Criminal Trial | Unknown (context implies USA) | View |
| N/A | Juryroom deliberation | The process of jurors deliberating, which the author argues would be inhibited by granting the de... | juryroom | View |
| N/A | Trial | A court trial where witness Brune was present every day and observed the jury. | courtroom | View |
| N/A | Voir dire | The jury selection process during which other jurors disclosed experiences with sexual abuse, sex... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | The trial for which jurors were being selected, where the central issue was the credibility of ac... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The document discusses the legal process of voir dire, specifically how the court can limit attor... | this district | View |
| N/A | Legal trial | The trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, where a juror reported that some jurors initially doubted the acc... | United States | View |
| N/A | Trial | A trial where the witness, Brune, was present every day and observed the jury, including Ms. Conrad. | courtroom | View |
| N/A | Trial | The legal proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) for which jurors are being selected. | courtroom | View |
| N/A | Jury service | A potential juror's prior experience serving on a jury for a civil or criminal case. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00009125.jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal filing from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on February 24, 2022. It describes the conclusion of the voir dire process on November 18, 2021, where the Court questioned prospective jurors about their impartiality and subsequently qualified 58 jurors. The majority of the page is redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00017343.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330), filed in August 2022 but recording events during the trial's jury deliberations (likely December 2021). The Judge discusses a note received from the jury requesting to end the day at 5:00 p.m. and resume the next morning. Citing the risk of the 'omicron variant,' the Judge rules that deliberations must continue every day, including weekends if necessary, until a verdict is reached.
DOJ-OGR-00017269.jpg
This document is page 3082 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It contains the judge's charge to the jury, instructing them to reach a verdict based solely on evidence and the law, without being swayed by sympathy or consequences. The text also outlines the protocol for deliberations, emphasizing that every juror should be heard, no one should dominate the room, and jurors should be open to changing their views while maintaining honest convictions.
DOJ-OGR-00017265.jpg
This document is page 244 of the jury charge in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains Instruction No. 55, advising jurors that witness preparation by lawyers is standard procedure and not improper, and begins Instruction No. 56 regarding redacted documents submitted as evidence. The page emphasizes that jurors should not speculate why other persons are not on trial.
DOJ-OGR-00017255.jpg
This document is page 234 of the jury charge filed on August 10, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The page contains specific legal instructions to the jury, warning them not to infer guilt solely based on Maxwell's association with wrongdoers. It also introduces Instruction No. 44, guiding the jury on how to evaluate the credibility, honesty, and demeanor of witnesses using their common sense.
DOJ-OGR-00013929.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022, showing the direct examination of a witness named Espinosa. The witness is questioned about an envelope (exhibit CE3) and a photograph (exhibit CE4). The witness identifies the person in the photograph as 'Jane' and is about to describe an inscription on it when an attorney, Mr. Everdell, interjects.
DOJ-OGR-00013604.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. It details a courtroom exchange where Prosecutor Ms. Moe asks jurors to review Government Exhibit 52G (sealed), specifically trying to point them to entries regarding 'massage, Florida.' Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca objects to this direction, and the objection is sustained by the Court, allowing jurors to review the document without specific direction.
DOJ-OGR-00013570.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It features the cross-examination of a witness named Chapell by attorney Mr. Everdell regarding FedEx invoices (Exhibits 801, 802, and 803) from late 2002 associated with Jeffrey Epstein's account. The discussion focuses on orienting the jury to specific pages of Government Exhibit 803.
DOJ-OGR-00013484.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a portion of a trial. A lawyer, Mr. Everdell, is cross-examining a witness, Mr. Rodgers, and requests that both the witness and the jury view evidence labeled LV3A and LV3B, which are photos. Mr. Everdell specifically instructs the witness that he knows the person's name in the photos but should not say it aloud in court.
DOJ-OGR-00014682.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a discussion between the Judge ('The Court'), prosecutor Ms. Comey, and defense attorney Ms. Sternheim regarding jury deliberations, specifically addressing a jury note declining an offer because they had plans, and confirming that a 'limiting instruction' was included with the transcript of witness 'Annie's' testimony provided to the jury. The court prepares to dismiss the jury for the day at 4:25 PM.
DOJ-OGR-00014649.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of the jury charge in the trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The judge instructs the jury on the requirement for a unanimous verdict, the protocol for filling out the verdict form via the foreperson, and general conduct regarding courtesy during deliberations. The transcript concludes with the judge calling for a sidebar with counsel and the court reporter before submitting the case to the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00014648.jpg
This document contains instructions to a jury, emphasizing that their verdict must be based solely on evidence and law, not sympathy. It outlines proper deliberation conduct, urging all jurors to be heard without any single individual dominating, and advises them to be open to changing their views if genuinely convinced they are wrong, but not to surrender honest convictions merely due to being outnumbered.
DOJ-OGR-00014644.jpg
This document is a transcript of a judge's charge to a jury, specifically Instructions No. 55 and 56, from a case filed on August 10, 2022. The judge instructs the jury not to speculate about individuals not on trial, clarifies that it is normal and proper for witnesses to prepare with lawyers before testifying, and gives the jury full discretion in weighing such testimony. The judge also notes that some evidentiary documents have been redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00011769.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a procedural discussion between the Judge ('The Court') and defense attorney Mr. Everdell regarding the logistics of providing physical evidence binders to jurors while maintaining witness anonymity. The Judge emphasizes that while jurors will know witness names, those names must not be published to the general courtroom.
DOJ-OGR-00011738.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It details procedural discussions between the Judge, Mr. Everdell, and Ms. Comey regarding jury instructions for handling binders, the display of nonsealed exhibits, and a recess. The text also outlines the court's plan for the trial schedule over the Christmas and New Year's holidays.
DOJ-OGR-00005360.jpg
This document is a page of jury instructions from a court case filed on October 22, 2021. It outlines the defendant's rights, including the presumption of innocence and the right not to testify, and clarifies that the government holds the burden of proof. The instructions strictly forbid jurors from consuming any media, conducting independent research (including on the internet), or discussing the case with anyone—including family, colleagues, and fellow jurors—until deliberations officially begin.
DOJ-OGR-00005320.jpg
This document is a page from a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on October 22, 2021, containing instructions to the jury pool. The text outlines strict prohibitions against jurors discussing the case on social media or conducting independent research via Google or news outlets. It also details privacy and safety measures due to the 'high-profile' nature of the case and COVID-19, including the use of juror numbers instead of names and the provision of daily transportation for jurors.
DOJ-OGR-00005315.jpg
This document is page 39 of 40 from a court filing (Document 365) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains a list of voir dire questions (numbered 21-33) for prospective jurors, focusing on crime victim history, basic demographics, employment history, and media consumption habits (social media, news, podcasts).
DOJ-OGR-00005314.jpg
This document is page 38 of 40 from a court filing (Document 365) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 22, 2021. It contains proposed voir dire questions (15-20) designed to screen potential jurors for bias regarding the government (DOJ, FBI, NYPD), the legal system, and wealthy individuals. The questions specifically ask if jurors have opinions on 'people who are wealthy or have luxurious lifestyles' that would affect their impartiality.
DOJ-OGR-00005313.jpg
This document is page 37 of a legal filing from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on October 22, 2021. It is a questionnaire for potential jurors designed to assess their knowledge of trial participants and relevant locations, and to gather information about their prior jury or grand jury service. The document contains placeholders for specific names and locations to be supplied during the jury selection process.
DOJ-OGR-00005252.jpg
This legal document is page 3 of a court filing from October 18, 2021, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It details the court's reasoning for denying a defendant's request for attorney-conducted voir dire. The defendant argued for it based on significant pretrial publicity and the case's sensitive nature, but the court concluded that court-conducted voir dire is sufficient to ensure fairness and prevent potential prejudice, citing legal precedents.
DOJ-OGR-00005215.jpg
This legal document, filed on October 13, 2021, argues for the necessity of individual, sequestered voir dire (jury questioning) for a high-publicity case involving a well-known defendant. The filing contends that the sensitive and inflammatory nature of the charges, specifically sexual abuse of minors, makes it unlikely for jurors to be candid in a group setting, thus hindering the ability of both the defense and prosecution to identify biases and ensure a fair trial.
DOJ-OGR-00008780.jpg
This document is Page 74 of 83 from a court filing (Document 565) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, dated December 19, 2021. It contains Jury Instruction No. 54, titled 'Persons Not on Trial,' which explicitly instructs jurors not to speculate or draw inferences regarding why other individuals are not currently on trial alongside the defendant.
DOJ-OGR-00008714.jpg
This document is a legal instruction (Instruction No. 3) for a jury in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 19, 2021. It strictly prohibits jurors from communicating about the case with anyone or conducting outside research using any electronic devices, the internet, or social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. The instruction emphasizes that jurors must base their verdict solely on evidence presented in the courtroom and may only discuss the case with fellow jurors in the jury room during deliberations.
DOJ-OGR-00008699.jpg
This document is page 161 of a court filing (Document 563) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330), filed on December 18, 2021. It contains Jury Instruction No. 59, which outlines the procedures for the start of deliberations, including the election of a foreperson, the method for communicating with the judge via written notes passed to Marshals, and strict rules regarding the privacy and weight of juror notes.
Basis for conviction on Count Four
A note (Court Exhibit #15) sent by the jury during deliberations indicated they were considering convicting Ms. Maxwell on Count Four based solely on conduct that occurred in New Mexico.
Reporting juror misconduct
Jurors are instructed to immediately inform the judge, through Ms. Williams, if they become aware of another juror violating the court's instructions.
Jury matters
Request 1(b) calls for communications between jurors.
Jury matters
Request 1(b) calls for communications between jurors.
Scheduling
"No, thank you." Asterisk, "Jurors have made plans for tomorrow."
Question 48 and 48a
Questions regarding details of victim's sexual abuse.
Schedule
We would like to end today at 5 p.m., deliberate from
Clarification on Count Four conviction requirements
The jury sent a note indicating a mistaken impression that they could convict Ms. Maxwell based on her intent for Jane to engage in sexual activity in New Mexico, even if that activity did not violate New York Penal Law, which was a requirement of the charge.
Basis for a guilty verdict
The jurors sent a note asking if a defendant could be found guilty solely for aiding and abetting the flight from New Mexico, separate from the flight to New Mexico.
Reporting juror misconduct
Jurors are instructed to immediately inform the judge, through Ms. Williams, if they become aware of another juror violating the court's instructions.
Clarification on charges regarding flights
Jurors asking if the defendant can be found guilty solely based on aiding and abetting a flight back from New Mexico.
Clarification on Count Four
Asked about the 'second element' of 'count four' and whether sexual activity needed to occur in New York.
Jury selection screening questions
The speaker plans to address the assembled jurors via video feed to ask two screening questions regarding their exposure to case information and their ability to be impartial.
Jury Polling
The Court asks individual jurors if the read verdict is their verdict; jurors respond affirmatively.
Verdict Polling
The Court asks individual jurors if the read verdict is their verdict; jurors respond 'Yes'.
Rules and principles for juror conduct
The court instructs the jury not to talk to each other or anyone else about the case, and not to use any form of electronic communication (cell phones, social media, email, etc.) regarding the case until the trial has concluded and they have been discharged.
Rules and principles for juror conduct
The court instructs the jury not to talk to each other or anyone else about the case, and not to use any form of electronic communication (cell phones, social media, email, etc.) regarding the case until the trial has concluded and they have been discharged.
Voir Dire / Jury Selection
Questioning regarding exposure to media about Epstein/Defendant and ability to be impartial.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity