Another, who testified under the name “Jane”, told the New York court she did not come forward about the sexual abuse she suffered for years starting in 1994 when she was 14 because she feared the repercussions for her acting career.

Legal experts say Maxwell’s team faces an uphill struggle. She would not be guaranteed a new trial even if the juror did not disclose his abuse on a questionnaire he filed out ahead of his selection. Cases of juror dishonesty that led to verdicts being overturned in the US generally involved jurors who deliberately lied in order to be selected.

One former prosecutor said speculated that the US government could put on an even stronger case if it was given a second shot, having learned lessons from the first.

That view was echoed by Brad Edwards, a lawyer who represents a number of Epstein victims.

“What has happened since the guilty verdict is more people have come forward, willing to share their stories about Ghislaine and testify, so I don’t think a new trial would go any better for her. In fact, I think it would go worse for her,” he told Insider.

“I’m not ultimately that worried about the end result.”

The government could draw upon the many dozens of victims of Epstein who allege they were groomed by Maxwell. Some 135 won payouts from the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Fund, though they first had to agree not to sue Maxwell through the civil courts.

Several victims, including Briton Sarah Ransome, watched the federal trial from the public gallery but was not one of the witnesses called to give evidence.

There is a possibility that Prince Andrew’s accuser, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, could be included in any second trial. However, it is thought prosecutors were concerned that details of Ms Giuffre’s account had changed over the years in the telling and re-telling of her story to the media over the years.

If her bid for a new trial is unsuccessful, Maxwell, who is facing up to 65 years in prison, is scheduled to be sentenced in June.