US Government Prosecutors have advised ‘Scotty David’ to get a lawyer after he was found to have withheld key information during the jury selection process that would have inevitably led to him being rendered ineligible to be a juror.
It is being reported that Scotty quickly hired the services of Attorney Todd Spodek, who filed a notice in Maxwell’s federal case in Manhattan yesterday night asserting that he “will now appear in this case as Counsel for Jury Number 50.”
Spodek is best known for defending ‘fake heiress’ Anna Sorokin, who was convicted for fraud after weaving a web of lies for financial gain.
During jury selection in Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial, in a legal questionnaire, and under oath, each juror answered question 48: “Have you or a family member ever been a victim of sexual abuse?”
To this question, jury member Scotty David (who has asked to be referred to in the press by her first and middle name) answered ‘no’. As did another juror who wishes to remain anonymous.
Both told the press that they didn’t disclose their potential bias until the deliberations began, and only to fellow jury members – with both now coming forward to admit that they used their own personal experiences of being sex abuse victims to ‘guide them’ through the trial.
In an interview with The Independent Scotty David said he’d used his experience to influence the jury when they began to rightly question the contradictions in the four accuser’s testimonies, and waited to reveal his past until that moment, saying that the ‘jury room went dead silent’ as he shared his story.
Scotty also says he believes he persuaded fellow jurors to not question the accusers at all – to instantly believe them, thus creating significant bias and rendering the accused, i.e. Maxwell, automatically guilty regardless of any evidence or lack thereof; despite Maxwell’s legal right to the presumption of innocence.
“We are not here to judge these victims,” he told The Independent. “We are here to judge whether we believe their stories, but we are not here to judge the decisions they made or didn’t make.”
Further, Scotty told the Daily Mail that the accuser’s claims were ‘corroborated by a significant amount of evidence’, despite this being generally accepted not to have been the case, and specifically mentioned witness ‘Kate’ as an example – despite jurors being told they weren’t allowed to consider Kate’s testimony as evidence because she was over the age of consent at the time she alleges the events to have taken place.
In interviews given by the second juror, they also stated they believed sharing their own sex abuse stories to the other jurors helped lead uncertain jurors towards a conviction.
With the US Attorney General now involved and calling for an urgent probe, it is highly likely that a mistrial will be called.