Ghislaine Maxwell’s bid for new trial denied,
judge rules
Maxwell repeatedly requested a new trial after a juror
on her case failed to disclose childhood sexual abuse during jury selection
Victoria
Bekiempis in New York
Sat 2 Apr
2022 01.50 BST
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/01/ghislaine-maxwell-retrial-bid-denied-judge
Ghislaine
Maxwell’s bid for a new trial has been denied, the judge in her Manhattan federal
court sex-trafficking case said on Friday.
The
daughter of the late British media baron Robert Maxwell repeatedly requested a
new trial after a juror in the case failed to disclose childhood sexual abuse
during jury selection.
Juror No
50, Scotty David, was questioned in court on 8 March about his omission. He
told the judge, Alison Nathan, he had been distracted when quickly completing a
screening questionnaire.
In her
ruling on Friday, Nathan said she thought David’s explanation was truthful and
he gave no indication of bias against Maxwell.
“The court
finds Juror 50 testified credibly at the hearing,” Nathan wrote in a 40-page
decision. “There are many reasons for that finding. He appeared to testify
frankly and honestly, even when the answers he gave were the cause of personal
embarrassment and regret. His incentive at the hearing was to testify
truthfully or face criminal perjury charges.”
Nathan
added: “His tone, demeanor and responsiveness gave no indication of false
testimony. The court thus credits his testimony that he was distracted as he
filled out the questionnaire and ‘skimmed way too fast’, leading him to
misunderstand some of the questions.
“The court
further finds that Juror 50 was not biased and would not have been stricken for
cause even if he had answered each question on the questionnaire accurately.”
David told
Nathan his failure to mention childhood sexual abuse was an “honest mistake”
and he was deeply remorseful. He was given immunity to testify, having
indicated he would invoke his fifth-amendment right against self-incrimination.
Maxwell was
found guilty on 29 December of sex-trafficking and related charges for bringing
girls, some aged just 14, to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein, for him to
sexually abuse. Maxwell insists she is innocent.
Epstein, a
convicted sex offender whose high-profile associates once included Prince
Andrew, was arrested in July 2019, on sex-trafficking charges. He killed
himself in federal jail in New York.
Following
Maxwell’s trial, David gave interviews in which he discussed experiencing
sexual abuse as a child. He claimed he had told the jury about this so they
could understand things from a victim’s perspective.
David’s
comments prompted questions because would-be jurors were asked about any history
of abuse during selection proceedings. The questionnaire asked, for example:
“Have you or a friend ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse
or sexual assault?”
When
David’s comments were revealed, prosecutors requested Nathan investigate.
Maxwell’s lawyers made a similar request and then asked Nathan for a new trial.
Following
the proceeding where David gave testimony, prosecutors argued against a new
trial, noting David’s adamance that he did not fail to reveal his abuse
intentionally.
“After the
thoughtful and thorough hearing held by this court, it is crystal clear that
the defendant received a fair trial,” prosecutors said in court papers. “Juror
50’s sworn testimony at the hearing made evident that he did not deliberately
lie in completing the questionnaire, but that he instead made an honest
mistake.”
In her
decision on Friday, Nathan also addressed the contention of Maxwell’s attorneys
that they would have tried to keep David off the jury had they known his
history. The judge said that was not pertinent to weighing Maxwell’s push for a
new trial.
“What is
not at issue in resolving this motion is whether the defendant would have
exercised a peremptory strike against this juror had he accurately disclosed
his prior sexual abuse,” Nathan wrote.
“Although
the defendant argues in her pre-hearing briefing that she is also entitled to a
new trial because Juror 50’s failure to disclose his history denied her the
opportunity to exercise her peremptory challenges, that is not the law in federal
court.”
Nathan also
addressed in detail the Maxwell team’s argument that David’s experience made
him inherently biased against her.
“To imply
or infer that Juror 50 was biased – simply because he was himself a victim of
sexual abuse in a trial related to sexual abuse and sex trafficking, and
despite his own credible testimony under the penalty of perjury, establishing
that he could be an even-handed and impartial juror – would be tantamount to
concluding that an individual with a history of sexual abuse can never serve as
a fair and impartial juror in such a trial,” Nathan wrote. “That is not the
law, nor should it be.”
“In sum,
the court concludes that the evidence in the record does not support the
finding that Juror 50 was biased. Juror 50’s sworn testimony did not reveal
actual partiality. And Juror 50 was not impliedly or inferably biased,” Nathan
said in her ruling. “He was neither a victim nor otherwise involved in the
actual crimes. Nor does he have any sort of relationship with any of the parties
or case participants.”
“His
failure to disclose his prior sexual abuse during the jury selection process
was highly unfortunate, but not deliberate,” Nathan continued. “The court
further concludes that Juror 50 harbored no bias toward the defendant and could
serve as a fair and impartial juror.”
Asked for
comment, David’s lawyer, Todd Spodek, said in an email: “Juror 50 does not
consider himself a victim and does not let his past define him. He listened to
the evidence and was fair and impartial. This is what justice requires, not
more.”
Prosecutors
declined to comment on Nathan’s ruling. Maxwell’s attorneys did not immediately
respond to a request for comment.
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário