Ghislane Maxwell

You would imagine that if claims of sexual abuse were not on the questionnaire nor asked directly in voir dire it's a failure of representation. That could also lead to a new trial.
 
You would imagine that if claims of sexual abuse were not on the questionnaire nor asked directly in voir dire it's a failure of representation. That could also lead to a new trial.
Prospective jurors for the Maxwell trial had to answer more than 50 questions, including whether “you or a friend or family member have ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse or sexual assault”.
 
Prospective jurors for the Maxwell trial had to answer more than 50 questions, including whether “you or a friend or family member have ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse or sexual assault”.
If a juror lied on the questionnaire then she will get another trial I would assume.
 
If a juror lied on the questionnaire then she will get another trial I would assume.
The juror has said that, "he flew through the questionnaire and didn't recall being asked if he'd been a victim of sex abuse."

It doesn't necessarily mean she'll get a new trial though. There was an almost identical revelation after the Derek Chauvin trial where a juror, who had said on the questionnaire that he had not attended protests or demonstrations against police brutality, was shown to have attended a BLM protest.

Despite a request from Chauvin's lawyers, there was no new trial.
 
The juror has said that, "he flew through the questionnaire and didn't recall being asked if he'd been a victim of sex abuse."

It doesn't necessarily mean she'll get a new trial though. There was an almost identical revelation after the Derek Chauvin trial where a juror, who had said on the questionnaire that he had not attended protests or demonstrations against police brutality, was shown to have attended a BLM protest.

Despite a request from Chauvin's lawyers, there was no new trial.
There was a slight difference in that the juror had an argument that he answered the question truthfully in the chauvins case. It was a grey area in that instance.

I don't know the rules in the us around voir dire but a lie should really invalidate the entire process, given voir dire translates as speak truth I believe.

She wouldn't be found not guilty in a retrial anyway but that's the purview of the jury not the judge.
 
It goes further than the questionnaire though. The juror has said he used his experience to explain why the abused had not come forward earlier.
 
We don't have the same process for jury selection as they do in the US so it is unlikely that this would be the case.
I know from US tv programmes and John Grisham books (I know, I know 🤣) but don't they have 'juror consultants' in the US who dig deep into the backgrounds of potential jurors and advise the defence/prosecution who to select or reject?
 
I know from US tv programmes and John Grisham books (I know, I know 🤣) but don't they have 'juror consultants' in the US who dig deep into the backgrounds of potential jurors and advise the defence/prosecution who to select or reject?
They do indeed. John Grisham is a reasonable resource for the basics of legal process in the US and writes a good book.

But check this out;

 
They do indeed. John Grisham is a reasonable resource for the basics of legal process in the US and writes a good book.

But check this out;

That's staggering Millbrook. I wonder if there's anyone doing similar in the UK or don't the defence and prosecution get the chance?
 
Back
Top