When a judge meets a jury in an ex parte meeting, can the judge mitigate prejudicial effects of the meeting?

The judge also failed to take action to mitigate the prejudicial effects of the ex parte meeting. See, e.g., Sher v. Stoughton , 666 F.2d 791, 79395 (2d Cir. 1981) (finding no prejudice where the judge had conducted prompt voir dire and offered curative instructions after a potentially prejudicial call to jurors). For example, the content of the meeting was never discussed with the full jury, leaving the other jurors to speculate as to what had happened in the private meeting. This omission created the very real risk that some

[919 F.3d 182]