A Manhattan judge on Friday denied Ghislaine Maxwell’s request for a new trial, dismissing her claim that a juror’s failure to disclose his personal history of child sexual abuse deprived her of a fair and impartial jury.
Judge Alison J. Nathan’s decision appears to clear the way for Ms. Maxwell’s sentencing on June 28. The verdict is also likely to form part of an appeal by Ms Maxwell against her conviction.
Ms Maxwell, 60, was found guilty on December 29 of sex trafficking and four other charges related to allegations she helped disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein procure, groom and sexually abuse underage girls.
Ms Maxwell had requested a new trial after the juror identified as Juror 50 revealed in interviews with the news media that he had told other jurors about his history of sexual abuse during deliberations. One article quoted him as saying he helped the jury see things from a victim’s perspective.
But the juror had checked “no” on a pre-trial screening questionnaire that specifically asked prospective jurors if they had experienced sexual abuse. “Had Jury No. 50 spoken the truth,” argued Ms. Maxwell’s attorneys, “he would have been challenged and disfellowshipped on good cause.”
Understand the Ghislaine-Maxwell process
But Judge Nathan disagreed in her 40-page verdict, noting that even if Jury 50 had disclosed his abuse during jury selection, she would not have allowed a hypothetical valid cause challenge.
The jury system, she wrote, “does not disqualify individuals with experience similar to that at trial if those individuals can serve fairly and impartially,” she wrote.
The key question, she said, is whether Juror 50 “had the ability to decide the case based solely on the evidence presented in court, not on irrelevant information, and without bias.”
She concluded that Juror 50 “held no bias” against Ms Maxwell and “could serve as a fair and impartial juror”.
Judge Nathan added that “Juror 50’s lack of attention and care in accurately answering each question on the questionnaire is regrettable, but the court is confident that the non-disclosure was not intentional.”
An attorney for Ms Maxwell did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Nicholas Biase, a spokesman for the US Attorney’s office in Manhattan, declined to comment.
Todd A. Spodek, juror’s attorney, said in a statement, “Jury 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. That is what justice demands, nothing more.”
When attempting to assess the impact of disclosures in a jury room, in most cases judges are prohibited from questioning a jury about what was said during deliberations. But judges can consider statements made by jurors during jury selection, such as their responses to a questionnaire.
In a recent statement, Judge Nathan noted that Juror 50 “made several direct, unambiguous statements to multiple media outlets about his own experience, unrelated to the jury’s deliberations, which cast doubt on the accuracy of his answers,” in the selection process of the jury.
She said his statements were “clear, strong, substantial and indisputable evidence” that a “false statement” was made during jury selection.
Federal prosecutors, in a recent brief against Ms Maxwell’s request for a new trial, pointed to Juror 50’s affidavit at a recent court hearing that he made an “honest mistake” in not disclosing his history of abuse on the questionnaire. He also said that if he had disclosed it properly, he would still have been able to be fair and impartial.
The Government also noted that during the selection process, eight other prospective jurors reported experiencing sexual abuse, assault or harassment and were nevertheless allowed to remain in the jury pool without objection from Ms Maxwell’s attorneys.
“It was entirely appropriate that juror 50 sit on that jury,” prosecutors wrote, “and nothing about his serving as a juror calls into question the integrity of the verdict in this case.”
Ms Maxwell’s months-long trial was widely seen as the courtroom reckoning Mr Epstein, 66, never had. He was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell in August 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. The coroner determined that he had hanged himself.