In US v. Ghislaine Maxwell Trial Judge Mulls New Year's Deliberations As Inner City Press Re-Asks Call-In Line
For now the jurors were told, 9 am to 6 pm "the rest of the week." But Judge Nathan told the lawyers, including the weekend. Would this be appealable? And what of the 3 days in DC? #MaximumMaxwell
By Matthew Russell Lee Patreon Song Video Ruling
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Radio - Podcast
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Dec 28 – Ghislaine Maxwell, charged with sex trafficking and other charges, is nearing the end of trial that started on November 29, after the November 23 final-final pre trial conference, vlog here.
On December 28, the fourth day of jury deliberations, Judge Alison J. Nathan cited the spread of Omicron's impact on the trial going forward. Inner City Press minutes later renewed its request for a public call-in line to the proceeds, as it provided in DDC, EDNY and by other judges in SDNY, including in criminal proceedings, see below.
At December 28 end of day, Judge Nathan told the lawyers she is of a mind to have the jurors deliberate on New Year's Eve and New Year's Day if they haven't reached a verdict by then. Inner City Press live tweeted here:
Update of 9:47 am - Lawyers are assembling. Bobbi Sternheim, prosecutors, Leah Saffian in front row. But still no Maxwell, nor Judge Nathan. Both should be coming. Might Judge Nathan set US a deadline to reply on instruction-Gate? Or have they already, UNdocketed?
It begins. Judge Nathan: I got the defense's letter this morning. I haven't heard from the government. Maxwell is at the defense table: black sweater, black mask. Assistant US Attorney asks that courtroom door be closed, says "Just being cautious."
AUSA: There is no reason to be speculating about what the jury is thinking. Sending back the [proposed] additional instruction would just compound the problem. Judge Nathan: The defense's proposal speaks about Count 2 which wasn't asked about.
Judge Nathan: I want to make more of a record of extending the deliberations by an hour. I want to make clear: I am doing this because of the expansion of Omicron. [Inner City Press: Then why still no public call-in line? And what of the 3 day DC trip?
Judge Nathan says she will speak later today about deliberations going forward. Speed up or pause, due to Omicron? Defense speaks, not (yet) on that, but to make a further record (for appeal) about their proposed additional instruction to the jury.
Judge Nathan: I'm not going to give them an incorrect instruction. Judge goes on to refer again to Omicron.
OK - now at 4:45 pm in US v. #GhislaineMaxwell, the lawyer are assembling, it's said there is a note from the jury. There's also this renewed request for a public call-in line, citing Omicron, here
Judge Nathan: The jury says, We are making progress and would like to end today at 5 pm and resume tomorrow at 9 am. Does anyone want to say anything? I have a view. Defense: Let them go. AUSA: We defer to the court. Judge Nathan: I'll tell, deliberate the weekend
[Note: Judge Nathan canceled the trial for three days to go to DC, told jurors they'd have this Thursday and Friday off. Now she's saying deliberated Dec 31 and Jan 1, if no verdict. Appealable?] Defense: Why tell them the weekend? Just the week.
Judge Nathan: I will say "everyday this week." [Apparently she'll only mention the weekend when it gets closer.] Defense: Thank you. Judge Nathan: I'll ask Ms. Williams to bring them out.
Inner City Press filed a letter for docketing and ruling on: "Dear Judge Nathan: On behalf of Inner City Press and in my personal capacity, I have been covering the above-captioned case, and have repeatedly asked that a public call-in line be provided, in light of COVID-19 restrictions and spread. Now this morning the Court has taken note of the rapid spread of Omicron. This is the time to belatedly provide the public call-in line, for jury notes, counsel's argument, and the reading of the verdict, if and when it happens.
Yesterday Inner City Press was informed that a person who has been attending the trial in the overflow courtroom(s) and reporting to a wider audience was not allowed into the courthouse, with COVID / Omicron and social distancing being cited as the reason (according to the individual). While Inner City Press continues to inquire into this seeking to confirm or disprove it, it highlights the need for a public call-in line, to ensure a public trial.
Also on transparency, while again requesting the unsealing / unredaction in the flight logs of all but victims' / survivors' names (there is a flight in the Rodgers log from Wilmington, Delaware to New Jersey, involving non-victims, in which Inner City Press is particularly interested), this is also a request that all court exhibits, including jury notes, by docketed on PACER on the same-day basis the US Attorney's Office was supposed to operated on USAfx (but at times did not). While appreciating that the Court docketed before denying Inner City Press' November 12 request for a call-in line, Dkt. 451, since then travel restrictions to New York have been imposed on entire countries, including some visited by Jeffrey Epstein's plane, with defendant Maxwell aboard, in their tour of Africa with former President Clinton and others. Restrictions and cases are growing in New York, but still no call-in line. By contrast, on December 17 Judge Richard J. Sullivan provided a call-in line for an in-person criminal proceeding. And yesterday EDNY had a criminal proceeding with a call-in line" -- see here.
Full Inner City Press Dec. 28 filing here.
On Sunday December 19, Assistant US Attorney Maurene Comey wrote in jointly with Maxwell and her legal team stating that with regard to the closing arguments, "the public interest in viewing the parties’ presentations is marginal." Inner City Press immediately filed opposition to Judge Nathan, calling this inaccurate and insulting, and asking for unsealing (and a public call-in line). Inner City Press letter here and here.
On the morning of December 20 AUSA Alison Moe gave the government's closing argument. Inner City Press live tweeted here, podcast here, 8:30 am live stream here
Then, the defense rebuttal, live tweeted here, podcast here
On December 21, a full day of jury deliberations with requests for information, and for scheduling. Inner City Press live tweeted here, 9 am live stream here, podcast here
On December 22, a full day of deliberation with nothing from the jury until nearly 4 pm, when they asked for the testimony for Kate and Juan Alessi, and said they could not deliberate again until December 27. Inner City Press live tweeted it here, 9 am live stream here, podcast here
On December 27 mid-morning the jury returned and sent out a note, asking for office supplies, "Matt's" testimony and a definition of enticement. Inner City Press live tweeted it here, 9 am live stream here, podcast here.
On December 27 near 3 pm, the jury sent out a note asking for the testimony of Epstein pilot David Rogers. Judge Nathan told the parties she is considering telling or encouraging the jurors to deliberate longer hours and "complete the task." Inner City Press live tweeted here, 2d podcast here.
On December 27 nearing 5 pm, there was a question from the jury, and an instruction by Judge Nathan. Inner City Press live tweeted it here.
Dated December 27 but docketed on December 28, Maxwell's lawyers have contested the response Judge Nathan gave to the jury. Full letter with proposed additional instruction here.
Inner City Press view: The jury question that Judge Nathan called incomprehensible was, If we find that the defendant aided in the transportation of Jane's return flight from NM, but not her flight TO NM... can we find her guilty of the 2d element of Count 4?
Since the juror had, earlier on Monday, asked to get all of pilot Dave Rodgers' testimony, it might seem they're drilling into specific flights, to and from NM, and how the law applies to each of them. But why did the SDNY prosecutors leave the case so narrow?
Also in the arsenal: Allen Charge (defined)]
How large is Maxwell's legal and other team? Watch this site - and #MaximumMaxwell
On October 29 and again on November 12 Maxwell and the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York filed a flurry of motions in limine, heavily redacted; the Government argued that trial exhibits are not public and will be withheld. Inner City Press opposed and opposes the continued secrecy. And see DC op-ed here.
On December 16, after a three day hiatus as Judge Nathan went to DC seeking 2d Circuit seat, Maxwell's defense began, with her executive assistant Cimerly Espinosa. Inner City Press live tweeted here, 8:45 am live stream here, podcast here
On the afternoon of December 17, the defense rested, and Ghislaine Maxwell said there was no reason for her to testify because, she said, the government had not proved its case beyond a reasonable doubt, after Eva Dubin. Inner City Press live tweeted here, podcast here, midday live stream here
On Saturday December 18 Judge Nathan held the charging conference, at which references to "the defendant" were changed to a more Lady-like "Ms. Maxwell" and foreign travel and the word "minor" were dropped and replaced. Inner City Press live tweeted here, and below, pre-conference live stream here, podcast here
On December 10, leading up to the US resting of its case, Annie Farmer was cross examined, then her ex-boyfriend and mother testified. Inner City Press live tweeted it here, podcast here, stand-up, GMax sister - and circus
Again, where is the Press opposition to all this sealing, and the decision-maker?
Inner City Press is covering the trial, and all the comes before and after it; #CourtCaseCast and song I, Song 2, Song 3, fifth song, Nov 27 song Dec 4 song and Dec 11 song (YouTube demonetized it) and Dec 18 song (no ads) and Dec 24 song (also no ads - demonetized by YouTube)
On October 18 the US Attorney's Office opposed the request, saying the the voir dire questions should be asked by Judge Nathan, and that there should only be sidebars on "sensitive questions such as those that relate to sexual abuse and media exposure." Full letter on Patreon here.
In a conference on October 21 on that as scheduling issues, Judge Nathan denied the request to seal. Inner City Press live tweeted it here (podcast here)
On October 22 the draft jury questionnaire was unsealed and Inner City Press has immediately published it on its DocumentCloud here, including "Have you or a family member ever supported, lobbied, petitioned, protested, or worked in any other manner for or against any laws, regulations, or organizations relating to sex trafficking, sex crimes against minors, sex abuse or sexual harassment?" Photo here.
After the death of Jeffrey Epstein in the MCC prison, on July 2 Acting US Attorney for the SDNY Audrey Strauss announced and unsealed in indictment of Maxwell on charges including sex trafficking and perjury.
Inner City Press went to her press conference at the US Attorney's Office and asked, Doesn't charging Maxwell with perjury undercut any ability to use testimony from her against other, bigger wrong-doers? Periscope here at 23:07.
Strauss replied that it is not impossible to use a perjurer's testimony. But how often does it work?
At 3:30 pm on July 2 Maxwell appeared in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampsire, before Magistriate Judge Andrea K. Johnstone. Inner City Press live tweeted it here.
(Also live tweeted bail denial of July 14, here.)
In the July 3 media coverage of Maxwell, media all of the world used a video and stills from it of Maxwell speaking in front of a blue curtain, like here.
What they did not mention is something Inner City Press has been asking the UN about, as under UNSG Antonio Guterres with his own sexual exploitation issues (exclusive video and audio) it got roughed up and banned from the UN: Ghislaine Maxwell had a ghoulish United Nations press conference, under the banner of the "Terramar Project," here.
On July 5, after some crowd-sourcing, Inner City Press reported on another Ghislaine Maxwell use of the United Nations, facilitated by Italy's Permanent Representative to the UN, UN official Nikhil Seth and Amir Dossal, who also let into the UN and in one case took money from convicted UN briber Ng Lap Seng, and Patrick Ho of CEFC China Energy, also linked to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres.
At the Ghislaine Maxwell UN event, the UN Deputy Secretary General was directly involved.
List of (some of) the participants on Patreon here.
Inner City Press has published a phone of Maxwell in the UN with Dossal, here. But the connection runs deeper: Dossal with "25 years of UN involvement" was on Terrarmar's board of directors, one of only five directors, only three not related to Maxwell by blood and name.
The directors: Ghislaine Maxwell, Christine Malina-Maxwell, Steven Haft, Christine Dennison and... Amir Dossal. Inner City Press is publishing this full 990 on Patreon here.
Dossal has operated through the UN Office of Partnership, with Antonio Guterres and his deputy Amina J. Mohammed, here.
And the links to the world of UN bribery, including Antonio Guterres through the Gulbenkian Foundation, runs deeper. More to follow.
Antonio Guterres claims he has zero tolerance for sexual exploitation, but covers it up and even participate in it. He should be forced to resign - and/or have immunity waived.
Terramar has been dissolved, even though Maxwell's former fundraiser / director of development Brian Yurasits still lists the URL on his (protected) Twitter profile, also here.
But now Inner City Press has begun to inquire into Ghislaine Maxwell's other United Nations connections, starting with this photograph of another day's (or at least another outfit's) presentation in the UN, here. While co-conspirator Antonio Guterres has had Inner City Press banned from any entry into the UN for two years and a day, this appears to be in the UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) chamber. We'll have more on this, and on Epstein and the UN. Watch this site.
The case is US v. Maxwell, 20-cr-330 (Nathan).
***
Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.