The jury
OrganizationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00021012.jpg
This document is a page from a legal ruling (likely denying a new trial) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It discusses a jury note asking for clarification on 'Count Four' regarding whether aiding a victim's ('Jane') return flight constitutes guilt if the defendant did not aid the initial flight to New Mexico for sexual activity. The Court rejects Maxwell's argument that the jury instruction was unclear or that it constructively amended the indictment, noting that Jane testified about numerous flights on both Epstein's private plane and commercial airlines.
DOJ-OGR-00020870.jpg
This document is a legal exhibit containing an excerpt from an article in The Independent featuring an interview with a juror named David following the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. David explains that the jury found the victims credible despite defense attempts to attack them and use memory expert Elizabeth Loftus to cast doubt on their recollections. He highlights a specific moment where a victim named 'Carolyn' became distressed on the stand, noting that such incidents increased his compassion rather than creating doubt.
DOJ-OGR-00016487.jpg
This legal document is a judicial ruling from a case dated August 10, 2022. The judge permits the defense to ask a witness, Mr. Glassman, a single, specific question about whether he told the government that he had informed another witness, Jane, that her testimony would benefit her civil case against Ms. Maxwell and Epstein's estate. The judge deems this question relevant for potential impeachment, as it could suggest a motive for Jane's testimony.
DOJ-OGR-00008935.jpg
This legal document from a court case, filed on February 11, 2022, details arguments over jury instructions concerning whether an offense must be a violation of New York law, even if events occurred in New Mexico. It highlights a specific note from the deliberating jury asking for clarification on Count Four, questioning if defendant Ms. Maxwell could be convicted for aiding a victim's (Jane's) return flight if the criminal intent was tied to the initial flight to New Mexico. The court declined to provide clarifying instructions, referring the jury back to the original charge.
DOJ-OGR-00013758.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer. The questioning attorney probes inconsistencies between Farmer's statements to a victims' compensation fund, the government, and the jury regarding massages involving Mr. Epstein. The focus is on Epstein's behavior during a foot massage (staring, groaning) and whether the witness's chest was also massaged, contrasting her detailed account to the fund with what she allegedly told the government previously.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity