DOJ-OGR-00021711.pdf

--- Page 1 --- **Document Header** Case 22-1426, Document 79, 06/29/2023, 3536060, Page64 of 93 **Page Number** 51 **Main Text** sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault, and that this experience would not affect their ability to serve fairly and impartially as a juror in the case.12 (A.344-45; Voir Dire Tr.18, 52, 200, 207, 259, 293, 532, 538-39, 635). Each confirmed that he or she could be fair and impartial, and defense counsel did not move to strike any these jurors for cause based on their answer to Question 48. (A.345). For instance, one juror said that she was "sexually molested by an uncle when she was 12 or 13," but that would not affect her ability to be fair and impartial in the case. (A.345). Another juror indicated that she had recently reported that a friend was being coerced and sexually abused by a professor," but confirmed that experience would not "in any way interfere with her ability to be fair and impartial" in this case. (Id.). Neither the Government nor defense counsel challenged those jurors for cause. The parties then exercised their peremptory strikes, and a jury was seated. **Section 2. Juror 50** Juror 50 completed the questionnaire and was questioned by Judge Nathan during voir dire. In his questionnaire, Juror 50 repeatedly made clear that he could be fair and impartial. In response to Question 13, **Question 13** Twelve of the 58 qualified prospective jurors indicated that a friend or family member had been a victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault. **Footer** DOJ-OGR-00021711