Ghislaine Maxwell trial

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

[Sam the Centipede]

I was expecting to read more foglawyerly analysis or comment on this DENINED! decision — so I guess there's not much to say? The judge considered the juror's (non)disclosure issue didn't put the original trial into question, so that's it?

[LM K]

Thank dog!!

[LM K]

Juror’s Error Did Not Affect Ghislaine Maxwell Verdict, Judge Rules

A Manhattan judge on Friday denied Ghislaine Maxwell’s request for a new trial, rejecting her claim that a juror’s failure to disclose his personal history of being sexually abused as a child had deprived her of a fair and impartial jury.

The decision by Judge Alison J. Nathan appears to clear the way for Ms. Maxwell to be sentenced on June 28. The ruling is also likely to be part of any appeal by Ms. Maxwell of her conviction.


But the juror had checked “no” on a pretrial screening questionnaire that specifically asked potential jurors whether they had experienced sexual abuse. “Had Juror No. 50 told the truth,” Ms. Maxwell’s lawyers argued, “he would have been challenged, and excluded, for cause.”

Judge Nathan, in her 40-page ruling, disagreed, finding that had Juror 50 disclosed his abuse during jury selection, she would not have granted a hypothetical challenge for cause.

The jury system, she wrote, “does not exclude individuals with experiences similar to the issues at trial when those individuals can serve fairly and impartially,” she wrote.

The critical question, she said, as for any juror, was whether the juror “has the ability to decide the case based only on the evidence presented in court, not extraneous information, and without bias.”

She concluded that Juror 50 “harbored no bias” toward Ms. Maxwell and “could serve as a fair and impartial juror.”

Judge Nathan added that Juror 50’s “lack of attention and care in responding accurately to every question on the questionnaire is regrettable, but the court is confident that the failure to disclose was not deliberate.”

Bobbi C. Sternheim, a lawyer for Ms. Maxwell, said Friday night, “We strongly object to the court’s denial of Ms. Maxwell’s motion for a new trial.”

“The defense was denied the opportunity to question Juror 50 during the recent hearing,” Ms. Sternheim added. “This strong issue, among many other issues, will be presented to the Court of Appeals and we are optimistic about Ms. Maxwell’s success on appeal.”

Nicholas Biase, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan, declined to comment.

Todd A. Spodek, the juror’s lawyer, said in a statement: “Juror 50 does not consider himself a victim and does not let his past define him. He listened to the evidence and was fair and impartial. This is what justice requires, not more.”


Hours before Judge Nathan’s ruling, Ms. Maxwell’s lawyers wrote to the judge, asking that she delay her decision in light of what they called new information — yet another media interview with Juror 50, which was to be released on a streaming service. Prosecutors objected to the request, and the judge denied it.


Judges, in trying to assess the impact of disclosures made inside a jury room, are prohibited in most cases from questioning jurors about what was said during deliberations. But judges may examine statements made by jurors during jury selection, like their responses on a questionnaire.

In an earlier ruling, in February, Judge Nathan found that Juror 50 “made several direct, unambiguous statements to multiple media outlets about his own experience that do not pertain to jury deliberations and that cast doubt on the accuracy of his responses” in the jury selection process.

She said his statements were “clear, strong, substantial and incontrovertible evidence” that a “false statement” was made during jury selection.

Federal prosecutors, in a recent brief opposing Ms. Maxwell’s motion for a new trial, had pointed to Juror 50’s sworn testimony at a recent court hearing that he made an “honest mistake” in not revealing his abuse history on the questionnaire. He also said that had he properly disclosed it, he still would have been able to be fair and impartial.

The government also noted that during the selection process, eight other potential jurors reported having experienced sexual abuse, assault or harassment and were nonetheless allowed to remain in the jury pool without objection from Ms. Maxwell’s lawyers.

“It was entirely appropriate for Juror 50 to sit on this jury,” the prosecutors wrote, “and nothing about his service as a juror calls into question the integrity of the verdict in this case.”

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

From LM K above: The government also noted that during the selection process, eight other potential jurors reported having experienced sexual abuse, assault or harassment and were nonetheless allowed to remain in the jury pool without objection from Ms. Maxwell’s lawyers.

That alone is a slam dunk for me!

[Sam the Centipede]

I missed that eight-other-jurors nugget in LM Ks extract: yes, that does rather put the lid on any "oh wow we would certainly have objected if only we had known!" argument.

Does Maxwell have any further viable avenues of appeal or is this very definely "it"?

Will the authorities allocate her to an elegant five star boutique prison or will this rich white woman find herself bulleted with the general population of impoverished and inadequate ne'er-do-wells?

[jcolvin2]

Will the authorities allocate her to an elegant five star boutique prison or will this rich white woman find herself bulleted with the general population of impoverished and inadequate ne'er-do-wells?

There are no "elegant five star boutique prisons" in the federal system. (As a rule, federal prisons tend to be nicer than state prisons.) There are some prison camps (only a couple for women - Bryan, TX and Alderson, WV)), which are considerably less restrictive than full-fledged prisons. The BOP generally allocates individuals to these facilities based on the the relative dangerousness of the offender, as well as the amount of time left on the sentence. With the lengthy sentence that Ms. Maxwell will likely receive, I anticipate that she will be placed in a medium or low security prison facility, rather than a camp.

[LM K]

I missed that eight-other-jurors nugget in LM Ks extract: yes, that does rather put the lid on any "oh wow we would certainly have objected if only we had known!" argument.

Does Maxwell have any further viable avenues of appeal or is this very definely "it"?

Will the authorities allocate her to an elegant five star boutique prison or will this rich white woman find herself bulleted with the general population of impoverished and inadequate ne'er-do-wells?

She can appeal for lots of reasons. She can further appeal this ruling. But nothing will move quickly enough to keep Maxwell from being sentenced in late June.

Maxwell has been in a very, very horrific jail as she awaited trial and currently awaits sentencing. She's at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, New York. She's been there since her arrest on July 2, 2020. She's scheduled to be sentenced on June 28. By the time she's actually transfered to her new prison, she'll have served 2 years at MDC.

MDC is a hell hole. It's one of the lead examples showing why we badly need jail/prison reform.

If I was Maxwell, I'd be thanking dog that I wasn't granted a new trial yet (nor will she ever be granted a new trial). After sentencing, she'll transfer to a federal prison, where conditions are significantly better. Maxwell cannot transfer to a federal prison until she is sentenced. She'd stay at MDC for at least another 12 months if she was granted a new trial.

Off Topic

I don't want to start a thread jack. So here's a few links about conditions at MDC.

Inspector General's report on MDC (downloads as pdf):

Review and Inspection of Metropolitan Detention Center Brooklyn Facilities Issues and Related Impacts on Inmates

Records Shed Light On Troubling Conditions at Brooklyn Metropolitan Detention Center During 2019 Power Outage

After latest reports of dangerous conditions at MDC, advocate calls for outside regulatory authority

Secret Internal Report Slammed Warden for Freezing Jail Conditions - then her was promoted anyway

Inside the Brooklyn jail holding Ghislaine Maxwell and R. Kelly, where the toilets don't work and a judge said it's 'run by morons'

[Sam the Centipede]

Thanks for the insights! It is disgraceful how prisons treat inmates – the bars force forfeiture of some human rights but they do not justify the absence of human decency from those who control prison policy.

So it's an interesting point that Maxwell is better served by fluffing her punt for a mistrial than if her lawyers hear won.

[Volkonski]

[Kendra]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/gh ... c727957bf5

Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyers say her cellmate has claimed multiple times that she had been offered money to kill the Jeffrey Epstein accomplice.

Maxwell's lawyers made the allegation in a Wednesday court filing, which sought to secure a lighter sentence in their case. Maxwell was convicted on five of six counts against her in December, with the most severe charge being sex trafficking of minors.

"One of the female inmates in Ms Maxwell’s housing unit told at least three other inmates that she had been offered money to murder Ms Maxwell and that she planned to strangle her in her sleep," the filing read, adding that the inmate claimed the payment had been worth "an additional 20 years’ incarceration."

GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S LAWYERS SEEK NEW TRIAL AFTER JUROR DISCLOSES HE WAS SEX ABUSE VICTIM

"This incident reflects the brutal reality that there are numerous prison inmates who would not hesitate to kill Ms Maxwell — whether for money, fame, or simple ‘street cred,'" Maxwell's lawyers argued.

[sad-cafe]

stick her in solitaire then!

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

[raison de arizona]

Prosecutors Ask That Ghislaine Maxwell Spend at Least 30 Years in Prison
Ms. Maxwell, who was convicted of helping Jeffrey Epstein recruit and abuse girls for years, blamed her behavior on him and her deceased father.

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan, writing that Ghislaine Maxwell had made the choice to conspire with Jeffrey Epstein for years, “working as partners in crime and causing devastating harm to vulnerable victims,” asked a judge on Wednesday night to sentence her to at least 30 years in prison.

Ms. Maxwell, 60, is to be sentenced on Tuesday in Federal District Court in Manhattan. If the judge follows the government’s recommendation, she could spend much of the rest of her life in prison.

Ms. Maxwell was convicted on Dec. 29 on five of the six counts she faced, including sex trafficking, after a monthlong trial in which witnesses testified that she helped Mr. Epstein recruit, groom and abuse underage girls.

Ms. Maxwell’s lawyers, in a brief last week, asked the judge, Alison J. Nathan, to impose a sentence shorter than the 20 years that the court’s probation department had recommended. The lawyers suggested that the government had decided to prosecute Ms. Maxwell after Mr. Epstein’s jailhouse suicide in 2019 to appease his victims and “repair the tarnished reputations” of the Justice Department and the Bureau of Prisons, in whose custody the disgraced financier died.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/23/nyre ... tence.html

[raison de arizona]

[Kendra]

I believe Maxwell is going to be sentenced today. Klasfeld says he tested positive and won't be in the courtroom. If anyone finds a link to another reporter live tweeting please post the link here.

[Slim Cognito]

I believe they'll be a thread here.

@CourtTV

[Kendra]

Thanks Slim

I think https://twitter.com/innercitypress is also going to live tweet.

[Volkonski]

[AndyinPA]

[raison de arizona]

As a reminder, the prosecution asked for a minimum of 30 years, the defense asked for a maximum of 5 years.

Fox is reporting that the 20 years will put her at 15-18 with good time served, out in her late seventies.

[Kendra]

https://apnews.com/article/ghislaine-ma ... ce=Twitter

DENVER (AP) — A law firm that helped defend Ghislaine Maxwell, the socialite convicted of helping the financier Jeffrey Epstein sexually abuse underage girls, is suing her, her brother and husband, saying it was never paid for more than $878,000 for its work.

Denver-based Haddon, Morgan and Foreman alleged in a lawsuit filed Monday that Maxwell put her brother Kevin Maxwell in charge of paying her legal fees after she was arrested in 2020 but that he only paid a fraction of what they had charged leading up to and during her trial. Kevin Maxwell urged the firm to keep working on appeal issues after she was convicted despite the unpaid bills and had blamed Maxwell’s husband, Scott Borgerson, for getting in the way of making payments, according to the lawsuit filed in Denver.

The lawsuit alleges that Borgerson formed an LLC to buy real estate to shield his wife’s assets from creditors.

[Volkonski]

Juror 50, Scotty David, has retained legal counsel.

A juror who served in Ghislaine Maxwell's New York sex abuse trial has retained a lawyer after revealing to reporters that he had been sexually abused as a child, the trial judge announced on Thursday.


In interviews published by the Independent and the Daily Mail, the juror said that he told his fellow jurors during the long trial deliberations that he was sexually abused as a child. He said that he used his story to demonstrate how a victim might not remember sexual abuse perfectly, but that doesn't mean that it never happened.

The idea of memories and their connection to the experiences of sexual abuse victims, which was key in a case centering on decades-old sexual abuse allegations, was a topic of debate between prosecution and defense lawyers. Both sides brought memory experts in to testify during the trial.

The juror's revelations that he used his experience to help give jurors insight on the issue of memory and sexual abuse is now threatening to upend Maxwell's guilty verdicts.

He told the Daily Mail that he could not remember a question on the 50-page questionnaire that asked potential jurors whether they experienced sexual abuse or knew a friend or relative who had. But he asserted that he had answered all of the questions truthfully.

He also told the site that he went into the trial with the "innocent until proven guilty" mindset, but eventually determined that she was guilty based on the evidence and accounts presented in court.

"I don't want to call her a monster, but a predator is the right word," he told the Daily Mail.

The juror has retained attorney Todd Spodek, who represented Anna Sorokin and Genevieve Sabourin, the woman convicted of stalking actor Alec Baldwin, the New York Post reported.

[Kendra]

https:// www.foxnews.com/world/jeffrey-epstein-d ... gde-orders

Broke the link since Fox has a bad habit of automatically playing videos. Haven't seen this reported elsewhere, so how newsworthy this is

Jeffrey Epstein documents to be unsealed, potentially revealing acquaintances, judge orders

A federal judge has ordered documents related to deceased convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his associates to be unsealed.

In a decision on Friday, Judge Loretta Preska ruled several documents filed in a defamation case against ex-Epstein handler and lover Ghislaine Maxwell to be released amid objections they would harm the reputations of the people named in the documents.

Preska determined public interest outweighed the privacy rights of the eight "John Does" named in the documents, referred to as Does 12, 28, 97, 107, 144, 147, 171 and 183.

[John Thomas8]

https:// www.foxnews.com/world/jeffrey-epstein-d ... gde-orders

Broke the link since Fox has a bad habit of automatically playing videos. Haven't seen this reported elsewhere, so how newsworthy this is

Jeffrey Epstein documents to be unsealed, potentially revealing acquaintances, judge orders

A federal judge has ordered documents related to deceased convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and his associates to be unsealed.

In a decision on Friday, Judge Loretta Preska ruled several documents filed in a defamation case against ex-Epstein handler and lover Ghislaine Maxwell to be released amid objections they would harm the reputations of the people named in the documents.

Preska determined public interest outweighed the privacy rights of the eight "John Does" named in the documents, referred to as Does 12, 28, 97, 107, 144, 147, 171 and 183.

Simon isn't to everyone's taste, but if even 50% of what's in this video is true, there's a passel of government officials that need to be hammered into oblivion.