Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-589House OversightDeposition

The document appears to be a transcript of a court hearing or argument where an attorney is discussi...

The document appears to be a transcript of a court hearing or argument where an attorney is discussing the strategic decisions made during juror selection, specifically regarding a juror with a 'checkered history'. The attorney argues that their decision was not a 'sandbagging' tactic, but rather a genuine change of heart after re-evaluating the juror's note.

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
d-589
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The document appears to be a transcript of a court hearing or argument where an attorney is discussing the strategic decisions made during juror selection, specifically regarding a juror with a 'checkered history'. The attorney argues that their decision was not a 'sandbagging' tactic, but rather a genuine change of heart after re-evaluating the juror's note.

Tags

juror selection and potential biasdefense strategy in a criminal trialattorney decision-making and ethics
0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.