On Day 1 of Ghislaine Maxwell Trial Her Lawyer Trashes 4 Victims as Gold Diggers, Visa Seeker
Bobbi Sternheim, on the SDNY CJA panel, went directly after all four planned accusers. Inner City Press will cover the cross examinations - still no call in line. #CourtCaseCast
SDNY COURTHOUSE, Nov 29 – Ghislaine Maxwell, charged with sex trafficking and other charges, faces a November 29, 2021 trial today, after the November 23 final-final pre trial conference, vlog here.
On October 29 and again on November 12 Maxell 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.
Midday vlog here.
At 2 pm, the government's opening statement. Inner City Press live tweeted here.
Maxwell's lawyer Bobbi Sternheim: Ever since Eve, women have been blamed for the evil deeds of men. Ghislaine Maxwell is not Jeffrey Epstein or any of the other men, moguls and media giants who abuse women.
Sternheim: Epstein will be mentioned throughout the trial. He is the elephant in the room. He is consuming this entire courtroom and the overflow courtrooms. You are not here to judge Epstein. You are here to determine if Ghislaine Maxwell committed these crimes
Sternheim: We are proud to represent Ghislaine Maxwell, me and Christian Everdell, Laura Minninger & Jeffrey Pagliuca [pronounced like "Lasagna," G silent]
Sternheim: These witnesses want a jackpot of money. There are 4 accusers. They'll say Ghislaine groomed them Sternheim: Memories fade and become contaminated. [Get ready for expert Elizabeth Loftus, who also testified for Harvey Weinstein and others] Sternheim: Jeffrey showed only what he wanted to show. [Get ready for Maxwell's "halo effect" expert(s)]
Sternheim: The Epstein Victims Fund did not test the claimants' stories. They got millions of dollars. Ghislaine Maxwell is on trial because of her association with Epstein. She is a scapegoat -- AUSA: Objection! Judge Nathan: As stated, overruled.
Sternheim: Ghislaine is a stand-in for a man who behaved badly-- AUSA: Objection! Judge Nathan: Let me hear from counsel at the sidebar. [Non-public whispering]
Sternheim returns from the sidebar and says: "Ghislaine Maxwell can pilot a helicopter. Her life of luxury is not a crime. You all said you would not be biased by affluence or opulence and your word is your bond. Sternheim: In the 1990s Ghislaine met Jeff Epstein
Sternheim: Epstein had made positive traits. Attractiveness. He radiated what's called a halo effect. Ghislaine became his employee, to administer his real estate like small boutique hotels. Like many New Yorkers, he wintered in Palm Beach.
Sternheim: Houses require upkeep. Epstein spent time with other women and traveled with them without Ghislaine. The jets were like a Hamptons Jitney in the air. Very interesting people on them: politicians, celebrities, even a former astronaut who became a Senator
Sternheim: There will be Jane, Annie, Kate and Carol. They will tell their stories only from memory. But memory, as you will here, changes.
Sternheim: Consider the incentive of personal monetary gain. These women were not initial interviewed by investigators with experience -- AUSA: Objection! Judge Nathan: Sustained. Jury will disregard. Sternheim: You decide if they are credible.
Sternheim: Epstein was a manipulator. He had no children. He had no boss. But he attracted these rich and famous people. Before his fall from grace. He was a 21st Century James Bond. His mystery has stirred interest and his accusers have shaken the money tree
Sternheim: Epstein traveled with an entourage but kept parts of his life locked up. Other manipulators? Lawyers, media & money have impacted the memories you'll hear. Civil lawyers targeted clients and primed them. [objection]
Judge Nathan: Just a moment. Grounds?
[Another whispered sidebar. Maxwell drinks from a water bottle, straighten her glasses: she does not go up to the bench with Sternheim]
[In the 2d row: new US Attorney Damian Williams, being whispered to by senior AUSA Tom McKay
Sternheim is back: "For people to receive money from the Epstein Fund, they receive more if they cooperate with the government. These witnesses have gotten money, lots of money.
Sternheim: The Epstein Fund has many of the same administrators as the 9/11 fund. But for 9/11, there was hard proof. Let's talk about Jane. Yes, she was and is a talented singer and Epstein, a patron of the arts and a supporter of young talent, sponsored her
Sternheim: After Epstein died, when money was on the line, Jane hired a lawyer and became a client, they got in touch with the government because it would help with her monetary claim,
Sternheim: Jane is now on a soap opera. She got $5 million from the Epstein fund. Consider that. And this, about Annie - her sister is an artist. She came to NY when she was 16 and met Epstein. Ghislaine was not in the country.
Long sidebar. US Attorney Damian Williams has left the courtroom. Sternheim: Annie will tell you she stopped writing in her diary before the events in NM. Annie is a 41 year old psycho-therapist who only met Ghislaine once, in NM. She promotes herself as a victim
Sternheim: She will say she's scarred. But why did she keep the boots Epstein gave her? They are well worn. She was awarded $1.5 million. Let's talk about Kate. She has admitted she is ambitious. She was involved with an older British gentleman.
Sternheim: She eagerly spent time with Epstein. Her emails to Epstein continued a relationship with him for over a decade. When he was in jail she sent him pictures of herself. Kate is a 44 year old former actress and socialite from the UK. Sternheim: She came on an entertainment visa but she is no longer in the entertainment field. She got $3.25 million. She is also seeking assistance from the government to help her get a visa, a special visa for US witnesses.
Steinheim: The last accuser -- she had a dangerous lifestyle, using drugs. This is 2002. Carolyn was introduced to Epstein by Virginia Roberts, who was paid to recruit for massages. This is for the trafficking charges 5 and 6. This had nothing to do with Ghislaine
Sternheim: She sued Epstein and his assistant, but not Ghislaine. Ghislaine had not come up in the interview in 2007. It was Carolyn who groomed and trafficked for Epstein. But when he died, her story changed to include Ghislaine. She got $3.5 million minus $40k
Sternheim: We are not here to smear anyone, just to test the government's proof. In NY the age of consent is 17. For trafficking, the age of consent is 18. But for Carolyn, the charges will not be proven.
Sternheim: The government is trying to stitch together four different story. But the only common denominator is they got big payouts. These are paper cut-outs. The charges are not supported.
Sternheim: Jeffrey Epstein is not here. Ghislaine is here. You have the power - find Ghislaine not guilty. Judge Nathan: Thanks. 10 minute break then 1st US witness.
Likewise, Inner City Press opposes censorship by the UN, which after it asked why UN Sec-Gen Antonio Guterres' head of Partnerships Amir Dossal was on the board of Maxwell's Terramar Foundation was roughed up and banned from the UN, summary here, Quinn Emanuel lawyers' letter Q&A here.
Now this: a petition, submitted Monday to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, filed by international criminal lawyers François Zimeray and Jessica Finelle on behalf of Maxwell’s three sisters and three brothers, arguing to Maxwell's partners at the UN that Maxwell’s “abnormally rigorous” lock-up conditions at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn are horrific, and thus unlawful and discriminatory. The petition asks the UN to call on the US government to release Maxwell pending trial and to urge an independent investigation into her “arbitrary detention.”
This while the UN active covers up its own peacekepers child rapes. This is ghoulish.
Late on November 16 it emerged that Judge Ali Nathan is being nominated for elevation to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals by Senator Chuck Schumer.
She said, "If I am nominated I...will continue to do my day job, which means presiding over this trial until completion and handling the hundreds of other civil and criminal matters on my docket."
So it appears she would complete the Maxwell trial. But any sentencing? Would she follow 2d Circuit Judge Richard J. Sullivan in keeping some SDNY cases? (As noted, Judge Sullivan is still rightly allowing call-in lines to in-person cases, here).
Podcast here. Watch this site.
Jury (pre) selection ended on the morning of November 18, Inner City Press live tweeted here
With so much of the case, and so many of the victims, far from Epstein's Manhattan townhouse, in Florida, the Caribbean, New Mexico, the UK and by private jet in Africa, the lack amid COVID of a listen-only call-in line during the trial proper would be all the more unfortunate.
On October 29, after the flurry of redacted motions, Inner City Press filed formal requests with SDNY District Judge Alison J. Nathan, on DocumentCloud here.
On November 12, while Maxwell and DOJ still redacting and a notice that after 50 people, no more would be admitted even on November 15, Inner City Press filed again. This time, both letters were docketed - appreciated - but denied, letter on CourtListener here.
"ENDORSED LETTER as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Matthew Russell Lee, dated 10/29/2021, re: timely opposition to blanket requests to seal portions of motions in limine, trial exhibits, public access. ENDORSEMENT: The Court received the attached letters via email. This District no longer permits public access by telephone for in-court criminal proceedings, including trials. The memorandum can be found here. The Courts public access orders for all proceedings in the case can be found here. The Court has implemented a procedure for docketing filings with proposed redactions and is ruling on the proposals as expeditiously as possible. See Dkt. No. 401. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 11/12/2021)."
Earlier on November 12, Inner City Press called in to, and reported on, a January 6 case in the District for the District of Columbia - and even other in-person criminal matters in the SDNY. For November 15, only 50 people will be allowed in. Meanwhile, for example, the Kyle Rittenhouse in Wisconsin state court is on YouTube. While engaged and appreciative on the Federal / SDNY beat, we'll have more on this.
Here was from the October 29 request: Re: US v. Maxwell, 20-cr-330 (AJN), timely opposition to blanket requests to seal portions of motions in limine, trial exhibits, public access
Dear Judge Nathan: On behalf of Inner City Press and in my personal capacity, I have been covering the above-captioned case. This concerns in the first instance the flurry of motions in limine filed earlier this evening, replete with redactions justified by a conclusory reference to Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006).
The Government's Justifications for redaction (Docket No. 399, docketed at 10:06 pm on Friday Oct 29) cites Lugosch then says "The Government also seeks sealing of trial exhibits, which are not public." Inner City Press immediately opposes this.
As one example within this motions of limine, the Government has redacted the entirety of its Argument X, even the title and the page number. And as to trial exhibits, see for example Judge Jed S. Rakoff's order in US v. Weigand, 20-cr-188 (JSR), here.
There, Judge Rakoff ordered the US Attorney's Office to make trial exhibit available to the public at large. While this was done, belatedly, in US v. Parnas, it was refused in the current US v. Cole. It cannot be refused in this case. Also, Inner City Press understands that the listen-only call-in telephone lines available so far in the case, there may be an attempt to discontinue them. The Court should take judicial notice of continuing COVID-19 issues, including people's understandable concerns about congregating even in so-called overflow rooms. Be aware that the District for the District of Columbia still allows public phone access to all criminal proceedings, even those held in-person. That should happen here. The loss of First Amendment freedoms, even for a short period of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury. Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347, 373 (1976).
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.
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.
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.