Page 29 - The People of the State of New York v. M. Robert Neulander - Brief for Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Respondent

of

violations of

taken with a large grain of
the likely prejudicial effect of
separate, isolated acts, each of
salt.
convicted, and held that, because of

24
and insufficient to offset the presumption of
The People claim baldly that "[n]one of
mind is Juror 12's own unreliable testimony.
search, by citing Juror 12's self-serving testimony.

The People also attempt to dissect Juror 12's pattern of

lying must be deemed inconsistent with a juror who was impartial.
which they then argue was harmless.
presumed bias could not be rebutted, and a new trial was thus required.
The People cannot carry their burden of
the juror's deliberate misconduct, the
Juror 12's misconduct, it is akin to Colombo in that it involves ajUJ"or who
Juror 12's conduct in other
But, as
respects demonstrated that she was a liar, and her testimony must therefore be
misconduct into
the texts that Juror 12 received, and her internet
bias that arises from her deliberate
Indeed, as in
this case, the Second Circuit in Colombo was acting after the defendant had been
demonstrated a "willingness to lie" during trial, and whose "deliberateness" in so
original), but their only support for this assertion about Juror 12's subjective state
negating
on the court's instructions and the evidence must be disregarded as untrustworthy
the information [Juror 12] received
'affected [her] thinking,"' People's Br. at 9 (first bracket added, second bracket in
For the same reasons, Juror 12's protestations that she decided the case only
her oath as a juror. Although this case involves post-trial revelation of