SDNY COURTHOUSE,
Jan 6 – Ghislaine
Maxwell,
charged with
six counts of
sex
trafficking
and other
charges, was on
December 29
found guilty
on five of the
six counts.
Inner City
Press, which asked
Judge Alison
J. Nathan
for a public
call-in line
and unsealing of
exhibits throughout,
live tweeted
it here.
With juror
"Scotty David"
giving interviews, the
US on January
5 wrote in: "Dear
Judge Nathan:
The Government
has become
aware that a
juror has
given several
interviews to
press outlets
regarding his
jury service
in this case." Full
US
letter on
Inner City
Press' DocumentCloud
here.
The US asked
that Juror 50
be appointed a
lawyer.
And redacted
part of its
letter.
Judge Alison
J. Nathan
appointed CJA
lawyer Todd Spodek.
But then on
January 6,
this: "ORDER
as to
Ghislaine
Maxwell. A
notice of
appearance has
been filed by
retained
counsel on
behalf of
Juror Number
50. See Dkt.
No. 572.
Retained
counsel has
communicated
to the Court
that the juror
does not wish
to have
counsel
appointed.
Accordingly,
the Court will
not appoint
CJA counsel as
indicated in
its prior
order. See
Dkt. No. 571.
Counsel for
Juror Number
50 is directed
to review Dkt.
No. 571. SO
ORDERED.
(Signed by
Judge Alison
J. Nathan on
1/5/2022)."
On
January 5
the defense,
by Christian
Everdell,
sent in
an even more
heavily
redacted letter,
that "presents
incontrovertible
grounds for a
new trial
under Rule 33." Then
lengthy
redactions.
Inner
City Press quickly opposed
these
redactions,
writing to
Judge Nathan:
"Re: US v.
Maxwell,
20-cr-330
(AJN), Press
request that
redactions to
US and defense
letters about
juror
controversy be
removed and
other relevant
documents
unsealed;
request should
be docketed
and ruled on
Dear Judge
Nathan:
On behalf of
Inner City
Press and in
my personal
capacity, I
have been
covering the
above-captioned
case,
including
repeatedly
asking that
sealing and
redactions be
reduced and
that a public
call-in line
be provided
(it
wasn't).
Now on January
5 the
government and
the defense
have submitted
significantly
redacted
letters about
juror "Scotty
David" and his
print and
video
interviews,
requesting an
inquiry or a
new
trial.
But the public
and press have
a right to
know what the
US and defense
are arguing to
the Court.
Accordingly,
the redactions
should be
removed
forthwith, and
all other
relevant
still-sealed
or redacted
documents be
placed in the
public
docket
While
appreciating
that the Court
docketed
before denying
Inner City
Press'
November 12
request for a
call-in line,
Dkt. 451, this
is a request
that this
opposition to
sealing be
docketed as
took place in
US v.
Avenatti,
19-cr-374
(JMF), Dkt 85,
here.
If deemed
necessary,
PLEASE TAKE
NOTICE that
Inner City
Press and its
undersigned
reporter, in
personal
capacity, will
move this
Court before
Honorable
Alison J.
Nathan, U.S.
District Judge
for the
Southern
District of
New York, at a
date and time
directed by
the Court, for
entry of an
order granting
permission to
the heard on
unsealing the
improperly
redacted
submissions of
January 5,
2022, and
unsealing of
documents
related to
juror(s) esp
Scotty David." Inner
City Press
letter here.
Judge
Nathan
issued an
order, not
addressing the
redactions, setting a
schedule:
"ORDER as to
Ghislaine
Maxwell. The
Court is in
receipt of the
parties'
letters. Dkt.
Nos. 568, 569,
570. The Court
hereby sets
the following
briefing
schedule for
the Defense to
move for a new
trial in light
of the issues
raised in the
parties'
letters:
Defense
motion:
January 19,
2022;
Government
response:
February 2,
2022; Defense
reply:
February 9,
2022. The
parties'
briefing
should address
whether an
inquiry of
some kind is
permitted
and/or
required, and,
if so, the
nature of such
an inquiry.
Although the
Court reserves
decision on
whether an
inquiry of any
kind is
warranted, the
Court grants
the
Government's
request, Dkt.
No. 568, to
offer
court-appointed
counsel to the
juror in
issue. Subject
to the juror's
right to
decline
court-appointed
counsel, the
Court will
appoint the
on-duty CJA
counsel to
represent the
juror. If
counsel for
the juror
wishes to be
heard on the
issue of the
appropriateness
of an inquiry,
briefing by
the juror's
counsel may be
filed by
January 26,
2022. The
Court will not
adjourn
post-trial
briefing on
other issues
as requested
by the
Defense, Dkt.
No. 569, but
sets the
following
schedule for
any other
post-verdict
motion by the
Defense:
Defense
motion:
February 4,
2022;
Government
opposition:
February 18,
2022; Defense
reply: March
4, 2022. SO
ORDERED.
(Signed by
Judge Alison
J. Nathan on
1/5/2022)."
Then CJA
lawyer
Todd Spodek
filed a notice
of appearance
for Juror 50,
whom Inner
City Press
had
already linked
to Scotty
David: 35
and in finance.
And knew of
Ghislaine
Maxwell before
the trial. We
will
have more on
this.
[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 -- and
Jan 2 -- 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.
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?
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?
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 2006-2022 Inner City
Press, Inc. To request reprint or other
permission, e-contact Editorial [at]
innercitypress.com for