Ghislaine Maxwell attends the Etm Children's Benefit Gala at Capitale on May 6, 2014, in New York City.
A jury last week found Jeffrey Epstein guilty of sex trafficking.
Two jurors admitted to sharing their own experiences of sexual abuse during deliberations.
The comments were called an absolute disaster and experts said it's very likely the case will be retried.
Two jurors in the case told media that they may have swayed the jury by sharing their own experiences of sexual abuse, which could jeopardize the entire trial.
After five days of deliberations, the jury found her guilty on five of the six counts against her.
A juror, identified only by his first and middle names, told The Independent that he used his own experience of abuse to convince other jurors that the accusers' testimonies were true. A second juror told The New York Times that they shared a personal experience of sexual abuse that helped shape the jury's discussions.
The prosecutors requested an inquiry into the remarks, according to Insider's Michelle Mark. Two letters were filed requesting a new trial.
Attorneys told Insider that the jurors' comments to the media could mean the case would need to be retried.
Neama Rahmani, the president of West Coast Trial Lawyers and a former federal prosecutor, told Insider that this is the last thing you want when you get a guilty verdict. You don't want the jurors talking to the media. You don't want them to say something that will cause a mistrial.
He said it was an absolute disaster. The entire conviction may be thrown out, and we may have to re-try the case.
Rahmani explained that the jurors' comments could be used to sway the jury.
The defense would have dismissed him if they knew about it.
During the selection process, jurors were asked if anyone in their family was a victim of sexual abuse. David told the news agency that he would have answered honestly if he had been asked about his personal experiences of sexual abuse.
It's doubtful that the defense would have allowed him as a juror if he had answered affirmatively.
Matthew Barhoma, a criminal-appeals lawyer in Los Angeles, told Insider that the defense would have dismissed him if they knew about it. He agreed that the case would likely be retried.
Attorneys go to great lengths to avoid selecting someone who will be biased, especially in cases such as the one with Maxwell's. He did not want to accuse the juror of lying, but he said there are two reasons a person may lie.
If the case is notorious and if the victims of the same allegations are on the jury, they will lie to get on the jury.
Rahmani said it appeared to him that David may have lied during jury selection, as well as how the prosecutors reacted to his comments to the media.
Rahmani said prosecutors have an ethical duty to flag possible prejudice to the court. They requested David be appointed an attorney.
He said that jurors don't get appointed an attorney because they say and do things that are inappropriate.
David may have committed perjury if prosecutors think he needs an attorney.
The jury in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, an associate of Jeffrey Epstein, received instructions before beginning deliberations.
The jurors said their experiences made other people convict.
The jury said that their comments helped convince them to deliver a guilty verdict.
Rahmani said that if he lied to the media and used his own experience to convince the jury to convict, you have perjury and prejudice.
David said that several jurors had doubts about some of the accusers' stories. He said that he showed that memories of sexual abuse can be clear in some aspects and hazy in others.
I know what happened when I was abused. I remember the color of the walls. David told The Independent that some of it can be watched again. I can't remember all the details. There are some things that run together.
Some jurors were able to come around to the memory aspect of the sexual abuse after sharing that.
According to Rahmani, jurors are free to discuss their past when drawing on personal experiences during deliberations. If David didn't disclose the sexual abuse on the selection questionnaire, it would be an issue.
Rahmani believes that if it wasn't the case, David's comments caused actual harm to Maxwell, which is needed to prove prejudice.
The jury would have voted to convict regardless of the comments, but that is contrary to David's claims.
David's comments about persuading others are particularly damning.
He said that if he were the defense team, he would take the quotes from the news agency.
He said that it was saved by the media. We may never have found it if he hadn't been talking to reporters.
Do you have a news tip? Contact the reporter at lamikvs@insider.com.
The original article is on Insider.
