Ghislaine Maxill’s New York request to retrial for the sex trafficking charge has been denied by a judge. It was discovered that one juror had been sexually assaulted, but it wasn’t disclosed.
Maxwell, 60, was convicted in December of grooming and trafficking underage girls for her ex-boyfriend, Jeffrey Epstein.
Maxwell’s lawyers requested a new trial days after she was convicted. “Juror50,” also known simply as Scotty, claimed that Maxwell had been sexually abused in childhood, but didn’t disclose the details during jury selection as required.
Reporters also heard that he had used his experiences to convince other jurors not convinced by certain victim’s testimony.
Bobbi Sternheim Maxwell’s lawyer wrote Friday to Alison Nathan asking for a delay in her decision on whether Maxwell will face a second criminal trial due to a TV interview she had with Juror 50.
Paramount Plus’ documentary series “Ghislaine-Partner in Crime” was his topic of conversation. It is still not scheduled to air and has yet to be aired.
Nathan refused delay Maxwell’s decision and denies a retrial. Maxwell will be sentenced on June 28.
Jeffrey Epstein is seen with Ghislaine Maxwell, her ex-boyfriend. Maxwell, 60 years old, was denied a new trial Friday after being convicted of sex traficking in December.
Maxwell is shown here in a court sketch from her trial. Maxwell was convicted of recruiting and trading underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein. Maxwell will spend up to 65 Years in prison at her sentencing.
Scotty David, who was a juror for Maxwell in Maxwell’s case, did not disclose that he had been abused sexually as a child on the jury questionnaire. On March 8, Judge Alison Nathan ordered Scotty David to answer questions. He is shown arriving at court.
Nathan stated that the juror failed to reveal his past sexual abuses during jury selection, a decision certain to be appealed to a higher court.
Additionally, the judge ruled that the juror had shown no bias against the defendant and could act as an impartial and fair juror.
Nathan explained why she refused the retrial and stated that Maxwell’s juror claims of being impartial rang true.
He answered honestly and candidly when questioned, even though his answers caused him personal embarrassment.
Nathan stated that the court found Juror 50 had testified credibly during the hearing.
“There are many factors that led to this finding. He seemed honest, open and sincere even though he admitted to making mistakes and regrets.
“His motivation at the hearing was that he testify truthfully, or face criminal perjury penalties.”
Nathan said that Nathan’s tone, demeanor, and responsiveness did not indicate false testimony. According to the court, Nathan’s testimony was that he had been distracted while filling out the questionnaire. He also’skimmed too fast’ which led him to miss some questions.
“The court finds Juror 50 not biased. He would have not been struck for cause, even though he correctly answered every question of the questionnaire.”
Nathan stated that David’s background did not make him biased.
‘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’s not the law.
The court concluded that all evidence does not support Juror50’s biased verdict. The sworn testimony of Juror 50 did not disclose actual partiality. Nathan stated that Juror50 was not implicitly or inferably biased.
“He was not a victim of the crime or any other involvement in it.” He does not have any relationship whatsoever with the case participants or parties.
Nathan stated that Nathan failed to tell about his past sexual abuses during the jury selection process. However, this was not an intentional act.
The court concluded that Juror50 had no bias against the defendant, and was able to serve as an impartial and fair juror.
David, one the twelve men and women that convicted Ghislaine Maxiwell of five out of six charges of sex traficking in December revealed to fellow jurors that he told them he was the victim of sexual abuse during the deliberations
Prosecutors described the British heiress as a serial predator that preyed upon young girls, and then lured them to Epstein, an obscene pedophile, for sexual abuse.
Epstein was in Manhattan’s jail, in August 2019 while waiting for his trial.
Maxwell’s attorneys argued she was being charged with his crimes and that Maxwell had never told her.
However, the jury was not in agreement and Maxwell was sentenced to five of six murder charges. This came after an extended trial, where her four accusers gave evidence.
David claimed that telling jurors his abuse story was pivotal in the jury’s deliberations.
Paramount spoke to David and said, “Some jurors had serious credibility issues regarding some victims.
It doesn’t matter if some memories are blurry, it does not necessarily mean they’re telling the truth.
He adds that he was walking down the steps of the courthouse after leaving the courtroom. It was hard to contain my emotions.
After the trial ended, the 35-year old executive assistant explained that he was able to recall some details, but not all – which is a crucial point in the case.
David said, “I can recall what I saw when I was sexually abused.” I still remember the color of the carpets and walls. You can replay some of the footage as a video.
David shared his experiences with Maxwell in interviews. He described the 40-hour process of convicting Maxwell by serving as a member on a jury consisting six women and six men.
David stated that Maxwell and he had ‘locked eyes’ at one time from Maxwell’s third row seat in jury box.
He said: ‘There were times when it felt like she was staring right at me and we would lock eyes…it didn’t feel real’.
David stated that Maxwell was guilty after hearing every piece of evidence.
He stated that he had learned all the information and she was just as guilty of Epstein. She is not a monster but she is a predator.
In this photograph of the alleged abuse she received in prison, you can see a battered Ghislaine Maxiwell
“She was aware of what was going on. Epstein did what she knew and she let it happen. So that Epstein could get his way, she helped to make these girls feel comfortable.
David stated that he entered the trial believing Maxwell was innocent until proven guilty and looked at the victims skeptically.
However, he stated, “After all that I have learned, she is just as guilty” as Epstein. She is not a monster but she is a predator.
“She was aware of what was going on. It was clear to her that Epstein was doing it and she let it happen. He was able to have his way and she participated in making the girls feel at ease.
‘And, to my knowledge, they returning repeatedly for money has no relation to anything. These girls were minors. It doesn’t even matter what incentive was given to them. It doesn’t matter what happened.
Maxwell’s legal team filed immediately for a new trial after David had completed his interviews.
Maxwell’s attorneys have stated that Maxwell’s errors, which David said was an honest mistake after he had ‘flew through the’ question sheet, are grounds to retry him.
In March Judge Alison Nathan, who presided over the case, hauled David back to her court in New York to explain why he did not answers truthfully on three questions on his jury questionnaire.
David testified to the court that he was distracted while filling out the screening form.
He claimed he had’skimmed the questionnaire’ and wrongly answered three of its questions. It was ‘one the most costly mistakes that I’ve ever made’.
A chastened David said that he ‘never thought’ he would get chosen to be on the jury and that he had been distracted during the process because he was thinking about a recent breakup with his ex partner.
David agreed to testify only after Judge Nathan granted him immunity as a result of his initial threats to not answer any questions.
David described the process of filling out the questionnaire. It was weeks before.
David said that he didn’t intend to be on the jury, but that he still thought that it would be interesting if he was.
Following the hearing, Judge Nathan asked Maxwell’s lawyers to provide briefing papers to help him decide whether or not to ask for a new trial.
In court filings, the prosecution acknowledged that David did not disclose his history of being a victim to abuse. However, they argued that Maxwell was still entitled to a fair trial.
Judge Alison Nathan presided over Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial and questioned him about the answers he gave during jury selection. This was at an open court hearing held on March 8, (pictured).
David claimed that he had been distracted by the speed with which he filled out the screening form for potential jurors during the hearing on March 8.
David has been accused by the prosecution of making an honest mistake when filling in questionnaire.
Maxwell’s attorneys argued that Maxwell, through his testimony at the post-trial hearing, saw himself not as an impartial arbiter but rather as an advocate of victims.
Bobbi Sternheim, Attorney wrote in a scathing manner that David’s testimony had been ‘tortured’ and ‘completely unbelievable.
According to her, his replies were “alternative between inconsistent, plausible, and contradictory” and that they lacked credibility.
David claimed that no one would learn about his abuse, and cited the fact that he did not use his last name in the media to support his claim. This was “utterly absurd.”
Defense attorney also referred to the media interviews where David disclosed the abuse and the impact it had on his decision-making process.
The juror ‘reveled in the attention’ he received as a member of the jury and ‘was looking to soak up his 15 minutes of fame’ by talking to the media – including one interview with the DailyMail.com – Maxwell’s lawyers argued.
Sternheim stated, “If there was one thing that we learned about Juror 50 (David), it is that he shouldn’t have been a member this jury.”
She added that the abuse David suffered was ‘remarkably similar’ to that of Maxwell’s victims in the trial and would have formed the basis for a challenge during jury selection.
David was unable to set aside his past experiences and decide the case impartially solely on the evidence presented at trial. She said.
“Excusing Juror50’s falsified answers because he believes that his hidden history of sexual abuse didn’t affect his ability as a fair, impartial juror is not sufficient to satisfy the appearance justice,” the filing said. Only a new trial will.
According to the filings, David claimed that he ‘credibly explained’ how he had made unintentional mistakes during Judge Nathan’s one-hour interview.
The prosecutors stated that it was clear that the defendant had been given a fair trial.
“Juror 50″‘s swear testimony during the hearing showed that he didn’t lie about filling out the questionnaire but rather made an honest error.
They also gave praise to the juror’s candor, and stated that they could not hold them to the standards of lawyers.
The prosecution said that David did not answer yes to the question if he had been a victim of any crime.
It was written: “Lay persons sometimes may not see themselves as victims in a crime, even though lawyers and judges might.”
The juror gave evidence about the questions he answered after Nathan allowed him to be exonerated.
The judge repeatedly asked him questions and made it clear that he was sorry for failing to disclose repeated sexual abuses by two individuals at the age of nine and 10.
He told the judge, “This is the greatest mistake I have ever made in my entire life.”
“I flew through these questions,” he stated, noting that he was distracted by conversation nearby, and other potential jurors dropping off completed questionnaires only a few feet away.
In November, all potential jurors were asked to complete a screening questionnaire asking: “Have any of your friends or family members ever been victims of sexual harassment, abuse or assault?” This includes attempted or actual sexual assault, as well as any other unwelcome sexual advances, by anyone, whether they be a teacher, friend, stranger or supervisor.
Juror “No.
In interviews, the juror stated that he doesn’t recall ever being asked this question. 48.