In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee Patreon Song Video Ruling
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Honduras - Source

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.

  In the run up to peremptory challenges of prospective jurors on November 29 (Inner City Press thread here, including about the juror who forgot to come), on November 29 Judge Nathan belatedly docketed this:

"OPINION & ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court therefore denies in part and grants in part the Government's motion to preclude Dr. Dietz's testimony and denies in part and grants in part the Government's motion to preclude Dr. Loftus's testimony. This resolves docket number 424. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan).

 On November 23 there was a final final pre-trial conference and Inner City Press live tweeted it here (podcast here)

The day after the final pre-trial conference, the US and Maxwell agreed this on the protective order, applying it to information from the Epstein victims' fund: "ALISON J. NATHAN, United States District Judge: WHEREAS the Court has ordered production of materials from the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Fund to the Court pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 17(c) (the “Rule 17 Materials”) (see Dkt. No. 496); WHEREAS those materials are likely to contain information that would (i) affect the privacy and confidentiality of individuals, (ii) would risk prejudicial pretrial publicity if publicly disseminated, and (iii) are not authorized to be disclosed to the public or disclosed beyond that which is necessary for the trial in this action; WHEREAS the Court has directed the parties to negotiate and submit a proposed protective order; IT HEREBY IS ORDERED: 1. Any and all Rule 17 Materials disclosed to the Government, the defendant (“Defendant”), and/or to the defendant’s criminal defense attorneys (“Defense Counsel,” and Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 500-1 Filed 11/24/21 Page 1 of 2 2 collectively with the Government, “the Parties”) shall be treated as “Confidential Information” within the meaning of the Protective Order (Dkt. No. 36 ¶ 7) and shall be subject to the provisions thereof. 2. At the discretion of the Court, the Court may designate certain materials as “Highly Confidential” within the meaning of the Protective Order (Dkt. No. 36 ¶ 10) and subject to the provisions thereof. " Nov 24 podcast here.

   Preliminary instructions now on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud here

  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.

  On November 15, Judge Nathan held a conference about jury selection, Inner City Press live tweeted here (and podcast here)

On the morning of November 16, Judge Nathan questioned prospective jurors; Inner City Press live tweeted here (podcast here); Nov 16 afternoon here.

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.

On November 17, jury selection continued with questions of seized phones, jail conditions, and the death of Epstein, Inner City Press live tweeted here (podcast here)

On the afternoon of November 17, it continued, Inner City Press live tweeted here (podcast here)

 Jury (pre) selection ended on the morning of November 18, Inner City Press live tweeted here

Near 5 pm on November 18 this: "ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell: IT HEREBY IS ORDERED: 1. That courtroom sketch artists whether in the courtroom or overflow rooms may not draw exact likenesses of the Protected Witnesses; and 2. For avoidance of doubt, courtroom sketch artists may confer with the Court or counsel for either party to determine whether a witness is a Protected Witness. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 11/18/2021)." We'll have more on this.

  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).     

Inner City Press will cover the trial, and all the comes before and after it; #CourtCaseCast and song I, Song 2, Song 3, fifth song and now Nov 27 song

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.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2020 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for