Saturday, October 16, 2021

Cameroon Kills 3 Year Old Minex Kimora But UN Guterres Silent As Colludes and Bans Press

 

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon FB YouTube
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Honduras - Source

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Oct 16 – As more and more civilians have been killed by the Cameroon government of Paul Biya, absentee president for 41 years, UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has been silent, other than falsely claiming that he got a ceasefire in Cameroon (while he made a deal with Paul Biya, for UN Budget Committee favors).

  Now amid Guterres' false claims and continued banning of Inner City Press with no end in sight (Q&A on law firm letter here), on the morning of October 15, 2021 Inner City Press asked Guterres, spokespeople Stephane Dujarric and Melissa Fleming and DSG Amina J. Mohammed this: " On Cameroon what are the comments and actions if any of SG Guterres and separately USG Lacroix on that this week 3-year-old Minex Kimora was on her way to school with her mother in the city of Buea when a Cameroonian gendarme opened fire on their car, shattering her skull, killing the girl instantly."

  More than a day later, no answer. No one they let in asked; Dujarric said grandly he would make sure that announcements of meetings will be in French. And the UN "elected" Cameroon on a so-called clean (dirty) slate to its UN Human Rights Council. Today's UN is corrupt.

Back on December 9, Guterres' envoy Francois Lounceny Fall told the UN Security Council: "On 6 December, Cameroon successfully held its first ever regional elections aimed at finalizing the decentralization process in the country, including the implementation of a special status for the North-West and South-West Regions."

And Guterres and his spokesperson Stephane Dujarric and Melissa Fleming refused all of Inner City Press written questions on Cameroon.

  And on the other hand Human Rights Watch, whose Cameroon "expert" blocks Inner City Press, removed it from HRW's Louis Charbonneau's and UNCA's "human rights" presser, here.

When Inner City Press asked about it, Guterres used UN Security to rough up Inner City Press right after it interviewed Monthe, and to ban it from entering the UN, 1302 days and counting.

 Also: one of the witnesses who exposed the Biya government's mass killing at Ngarbuh, Mallam Danjuma has been killed and dumped in Bui by government forces in Kikaikelaki. And from the UN of Guterres? Nothing. This is Guterres' genocide. He has the only press that ask him about it, even from his propaganda speech at NYC's The New School.

This is Guterres' genocide. Watch this site.

***

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.

In CIA Leak Case Schulte Got Oct 25 Trial Canceled Files Appeals and Suppression Motion

 

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon Thread Song
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Honduras - Pod

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Oct 15 – In the conclusion of the month long trial of accused CIA leaker Joshua Schulte, on the morning of March 9 the jury returned guilty verdicts on Counts 8 and 10, with mistrial granted on all other counts. U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York Judge Paul A. Crotty set March 26 for the next date.  Then it was moved to April 22 (then May 18). March 9 thread here. Song here.

 On March 22 for his second trial, Schulte with the US Attorney's Office's consent proposed to Judge Crotty delaying the second trial from May 10 to the fourth quarter of 2021, with time under the Speedy Trial Act to be excluded to October 1.

On September 15, Judge Crotty held another proceeding with Schulte and his stand-by counsel. It emerged that the MCC will *not* be fully shut down. Inner City Press live tweeted it, below. [And see its Oct 15 MCC video here]

On September 24, the trial was postponed: "MEMO ENDORSEMENT as to Joshua Adam Schulte on [516] LETTER by USA as to Joshua Adam Schulte addressed to Judge Paul A. Crotty from United States dated 9/23/2021 re: Government's response to defendant's motion for an adjournment (Dkt. No. 495). ENDORSEMENT: The October 25 trial date will be adjourned sine die. The govt will submit its views on a appropriated date by November 1, 2021. So Ordered. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 9/24/2021)."

  Docketed on September 30 is a letter from Schulte that "my ability to hug my mother does not endanger national security" (noting that every otehr MCC inmate is along physical contact during social visits). Also, all of Schulte's discovery and legal CD/DVDs were taken as contraband, he was told, since he no longer has a DVD drive.

But on October 12 Judge Crotty denied increased access, to be reopened when a new trial date is selected: "MEMORANDUM & ORDER as to Joshua Adam Schulte: Thus, for the reasons stated, the Court denies Schulte's specific requests for relief, but partially grants his motion in the following limited respect: After a new trial date is set, the parties are to meet and confer as to Schulte's heightened trial preparation needs regarding unclassified discovery, SCIF access, legal research, access to a printer and other hardware, and other resources reasonably necessary for trial preparation-all accommodations Schulte currently has access to, but for which increased access may, per the Government and BOP, be possible as trial approaches. (Signed by Judge Paul A. Crotty on 10/12/2021) (lnl) ."

 On October 15, docketed were a number of handwritten notes about appeals by Josh Schulte, and a memo of law stating among other things, "This seizure and subsequent search are despicable acts of tyranny and oppression reprehensible to the US Constitution. The FBI acted as the Nazi's Gestapo, committing armed robbery in broad daylight. Accordingly, the seizure of the cell phone is void, aas are all fruits of the poisonous tree."

Watch this site.

From September 15: Schulte's shadow/stand-by counsel says some of the SDNY US Attorney team are not vaccinated, wants only vaccinated prosecutors to come into the SCIF.

AUSA Lockhard does not disagree.

Judge Crotty: The computers in the SCIF are related to child pornography? Schulte: No, it's the Snowden documents

 Schulte: With trial approaching, I wanted the court to know that this discovery has never been reviewed by me, in five years.  My stand-by counsel checked and none of these computers are in the SCIF.

Josh Schulte: I was just hoping to not be chained to the floor anymore.  Judge Crotty: What is the security issue, Mr. Lockhart?

AUSA: The Marshals requested the chain-up condition. Judge Crotty: I'll find out what the Marshals' concerns are. Schulte: What if I need resources from the court, like $10 for a CD / DVD drive? What if I have classified or ex parte filings for the Court? Judge Crotty: Use stand-by counsel.

 Schulte: The motions I'm filing, under Local Rule 49(b) they're supposed to answer in 2 weeks. My cell phone suppression motion, they haven't responded. Can you remind them? Judge Crotty: Mr. Lockhart? AUSA Lockhart: The defendant has filed a lot of motions.

Schulte: The Court ordered the MCC to allow me VTC calls with my family. But this month, I was scheduled for September 3. I was told that the MCC is going to allow family visits, so they don't have to abide by the Court's order any more.

Judge Crotty: Mr. Schulte where are you housed now? Schulte:  They've informed me that in the middle of October the prison is shutting down and they're supposed to be moving us. They'll take my laptop two weeks before they move us. In the middle of trial.

 AUSA Lockhart: We were informed this week that Mr. Schulte will not be moved. We are informed that a portion of the MCC will be left open, for in custody defendants and witnesses, and Mr. Schulte.

[Breaking: AUSA says MCC is *not* fully shutting down]

Judge Crotty: Anything else? Schulte: Not for me AUSA Lockhard: Not for the government.

On August 23 Schulte as filed two pro se motion, to review the classification of filings in the docket, for a complete copy of the docket - and to delay his second trial. In the first, he writes that "I require not only a complete electronic docket and all associated unclassified filings for my review in my torture cage at the MCC, but also a complete electronic docket for review at the SCIF." For the delay, Schulte cites the government's failure to re-establish SCIF appearances.

On August 30, more: in a letter "by hand," Schulte asked Judge Crotty to end the practice of chaining him to the floor in the SCIF, with a two foot leash which "greatly hinder [the] ability self-represent." He against asks for the docket, on CD / DVD.

On August 31, the US Attorney's Office complained of Schulte serving them papers by leaving them in the hall outside the SCIF. Schulte filed a new motion, stating among other things that

"on March 15, 2017, Special Agents Jeffrey David Donaldson and Richard John Evancheck initiated contact with Mr. Schulte in the lobby of Bloomberg LP at 120 Park Avenue... they relocated to the Pershing Square Diner at 90 East 42nd Street." And the rest is history. Watch this site.

On August 3, Schulte filed a motion, as "Slave #79471054," for "24/7 access to a legal library that enables the user to search court documents, filings, motions, opinions, annotations and other essentials" - Westlaw. Also, access to discovery and a printer, and to his mail. It begins.

 On July 27, 2021, Judge Crotty approved Schulte's ex parte July 26 request for a call with his parents, but said SDNY Civil Division must oversee it "to ensure full compliance with the protective measures that exist in this case."

Now on July 29, the US Attorney's Office has written, to say that the Civil Division AUSA will monitor with call and will not be "walled" from the FBI; it asks for notice and an opportunity to be heard before any future modifications of the Special Administrative Measures." A family call. They cc Schulte himself, in the MCC. Letter on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud here.

  On June 15, Judge Crotty noted that Schulte now wants to represent himself (pro se) at the October trial, then asked the US Attorney's office to brief that - transcript on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud, here.

On July 26, Judge Crotty approved Schulte's request: "OPINION & ORDER as to Joshua Adam Schulte. Defendant Joshua Adam Schulte ("Defendant" or "Schulte") is a former employee of the Central Intelligence Agency ("CIA") charged with stealing national defense information from the CIA and transmitting it to Wikileaks. Schulte, who is currently scheduled to stand trial in October 2021, moves to discharge legal counsel and represent himself in this criminal action. The Court held a Faretta Hearing on July 14 and 22, 2021, and reserved judgment on Schulte's motion. For the foregoing reasons, Schulte' s motion to discharge legal counsel and proceed pro se is GRANTED. The Government is directed to personally serve a copy of this Opinion & Order forthwith to Schulte." Full order on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud here.

  The first  Faretta hearing was held, but not concluded on July 14. Inner City Press live tweeted some of it then, in the courtroom, watched as Schulte whispered with his (stand-by?) counsel. Judge Crotty said it must be an unequivocal waiver of counsel but that Schulte was asking for access to a printer, and Westlaw or LEXIS-NEXIS, and his discovery.

AUSA Lockhard said there are constrained. No one asked about the hours' long access to discovery that Ghislaine Maxwell, for example, has. Judge Crotty said confer and reconvene July 21 at 2:30 pm. Inner City Press aims to be there. Here and below, the July 14 thread:  (and podcast here)

 On the morning of July 22, before a 1 pm Faretta hearing continuation, the US Attorney's Office has written to Judge Crotty that two charging wire hard drives will be replaced so they can be in Schulte's cell. Legal research database time will increase to 10 hours a week. The SCIF can be accessed, with stand-by counsel.

At 1 pm the second Faretta hearing was held and Inner City Press attended and live tweeted it, here (and podcast here)

Schulte in prison blues stands to be sworn in. 2 US Marshals stand too. Judge Crotty reads Faretta script, asks Do you still want to proceed pro se?

Schulte: Yes.  I want to go pro se regardless of the outcome.

Stand-by counsel Sabrina Shroff: He's competent. Judge Crotty: I will rule on July 26. [Why not today?]

Schulte: My mail takes 3 months.

 Judge Crotty: What else do you have? Schulte: I want an electronic copy of the docket. I've brought some letters...

Judge Crotty: Make a motion and serve the government. Schulte: How? Will they serve me in the SCIF? Judge Crotty: You're incarcerated. It's hard

 Schulte: I'm a pre-trial detainee, I should be able to represent myself.

Judge Crotty: I will rule Monday. And he did.

  Back on March 3, the jury deliberated and asked at least nine questions. Inner City Press live tweeted it, thread here. There were questions about locking and unlocking computers, and if Schulte was ever diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome, a matter raised in cross-examination. Perhaps of concern for the defense was the lack of questions about alternate suspect Michael.

  At day's end in Judge Crotty's courtroom gallery it was only Inner City Press and one of the Assistant US Attorneys, who waited to say he and Schulte's lawyers would try to answer some of the questions the next day, March 4. Inner City Press will be there - watch this site.

  On March 2 were the closing arguments, which Inner City Press tweeted, thread here

 More on Patreon here.

See Inner City Press filing into the docket on Big Cases Bot, here. Watch this site. The case is US v. Schulte, 17-cr-548 (Crotty).

***

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.

Theranos Trial Has Buddhist Juror Leaving But Carreyrou Coming Back Drop Out Cites Ozy

 

By Matthew Russell Lee, Patreon
BBC - Guardian UK - Honduras - ESPN

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Oct 16 –  The Elizabeth Holmes / Theranos trial has much to recommend it. Mad Dog Mattis spinning, and many podcasts covering it weekly.

 One of the main ones went small for two weeks but should be back on October 21, promising scoops.

 On September 30 journalist John Carreyrou of the WSJ filed a motion trying to get off Holmes' witness list, or for an exemption so he can nevertheless enter the courtroom. Alongside those legal issues, there's this from the motion returnable October 18: 

"The Supreme Court has long recognized that the press and public enjoy a First Amendment  “right of access to criminal trials.” Globe Newspaper Co., 457 U.S. at 604-05 (emphasis removed).  Steeped in Anglo-American jurisprudence is the principle that “throughout its evolution, the trial  has been open to all who cared to observe,” as criminal trials are “presumptively open.” Richmond  Newspapers, Inc. v. Virginia, 448 U.S. 555, 564, 575 (1980). Indeed, a trial courtroom is “a public  place where the people generally – and representatives of the media – have a right to be present.”  Id. at 578. 8 Carreyrou does not suggest that the Court has entirely shut down or closed the trial in this  action. Far from it; the Court has made efforts to ensure general access. But, unless he is  exempted, Carreyrou will be the only member of the news media especially barred from attending  the trial and reporting firsthand on its proceedings."   

For Inner City Press, the only media banned from the United Nations and for 1302 days now, it also stands in contrast to the recent R.Kelly trial in EDNY in Brooklyn, where ALL media and public were banned from the courtroom, with (as Judge Davila has for some reason done in US v. Holmes) no listen-only call in line.  

  Now coverage of the Holmes trial, for example by The Dropout, details Juror 4 pulling out for religious conviction by Alternate 2 staying on, as well as analogies to the Ozy Media flame out, and Facebook whistleblower.

  The trial coverage can also be compared, at SDNY, with the lower profile fraud trial of Neil Cole of Iconix for inflating earnings and selling $28 million of stock (Inner City Press song here), and now Lev Parnas (song here, and sidearm threat podcast, and Substack on racist video-gate).

Carreyrou will be back to a weekly podcast, after a two minute re-launch trailer this week. We'll have more on these issues.

***

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.

For Ghislaine Maxwell Nov 29 Trial She Wanted Same Day Mail Service But Now Denied

 

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

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Oct 15 – Ghislaine Maxwell, charged with sex trafficking and false statements in a second superseding indictment, has requested an in-person arraignment citing previous press coverage and debacles(s).

 Inner City Press on April 2 requested audio and video access for the arraignment on April 23. Inner City Press live tweeted it here and below.

On August 27, when the SDNY confirmed its fourth quarter schedule, the November 29 trial date was confirmed as firm: "ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. The Clerk's Office has now confirmed that a jury trial in this case has been scheduled to commence on November 29, 2021. This is a firm trial date."

Now on October 15 Maxwell through counsel has replied that she should get one-day mail service in the MDC, or her freedom. Letter on Patreon here. She cites "a BOP version of 'my dog ate my homework.'" She concludes, It is time for the Government and the Court to seriously reconsider Ms. Maxwell's detention."

  Then Judge Nather ruled, no: "ENDORSED LETTER as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Counsels of record for the Government dated 10/15/21 re: Government response to Order of The Court dated 10/15/21 (Dkt No. 348).ENDORSEMENT: Based on the information in this letter the Court will not enter the Defendant's requested order. See Dkt. 346. However, it is the Court's firm expectation that a defendant in a pre-trial posture like Ms. Maxwell will in most circumstances receive legal mail within approximately 1 business day. Going forward, if another delay occurs, the Defendant may renew the request for a specific order requiring delivery within the time frame. With this understanding and in light of the unusually early pre-trial disclosure schedule set by the Court, the Court remains confident that Ms. Maxwell and her attorneys are fully able to prepare for trial. This resolves Dkt. No. 346. SO Ordered.. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 10/15/21)." Watch this site.

  Maxwell wants to keep prospective juror questioning - voir dire - and selection even more sealed from the public and Press. On October 13 Judge Nathan gave the US until October 18 to respond: "ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court is in receipt of Defendant's motion for an order granting individual sequestered juror voir dire and limited counsel-conducted voir dire. Dkt. No. 341. The Government is hereby ORDERED to respond by Monday, October 18, 2021 (Government Responses due by 10/18/2021) (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 10/13/21)" and docketed October 14.

On October 12 the US Attorney's Office  asked that its joint jury questionnaire be sealed: "he defense respectfully requests that the joint proposed juror questionnaire and joint proposed voir dire be filed under seal to avoid media coverage that may prejudice the jury selection process. The Government consents to the defense’s request." Watch this site.

On October 5 Judge Nathan asked: "ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court is currently in the process of planning logistics for trial in this matter and requires the parties' best and current estimate of length of trial. The Court plans to have the jury sit 5 days a week from 9am until 5pm. Given that jury selection will be complete by November 19 and opening statements will occur on November 29, the Court requests that the parties provide their best estimate as to when the jury is likely to begin deliberations. This will allow the Court to assess the likelihood that trial may continue after the Christmas holiday and therefore whether the jury may be required to sit some days during the week between Christmas and New Year's Day. Accordingly, on or before October 12, 2021, the parties are ORDERED to confer and submit a joint letter with their best and current estimate as to when the jury is likely to begin deliberations. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 10/5/2021)."

On October 12, the estimate is a six week trial.

On August 30, Maxwell through counsel  argued that in order to file her "motions in limine" by October 18, she needs disclosure by the prosecution of "the specific co-conspirator statements it intends to admit at trial... The government says that, at least as of August 18, it intends to seek admission of co-conspirator statements by only two individuals: Jeffrey Epstein and the employee of Epstein's referenced in Paragraph 25(d) of the S2 indictment."

  Here's what Paragraph 25(d) says: "On multiple occasions between in or about 2001 and in or about 2004, Epstein, MAXWELL, or one of Epstein's other employees called Minor Victim-4 to schedule an appointment for Minor Victim-4 to massage Epstein. For example, in or about April of 2004 and May of 2004 another employee of Epstein's called Minor Victim-4 to schedule such appointments."

On September 3, Judge Nathan granted it nothing that the US has not alleged danger to co-conspirators: "ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell: The Court ORDERS that at the same time that the Government discloses Jencks Act material, the Government shall also disclose to the defense the identities of any unnamed co-conspirators who allegedly participated in the conspiracies charged in the S2 indictment to whom the Government will refer at trial. The Government is FURTHER ORDERED to disclose all co-conspirator statements it intends to offer at trial no later than October 11, as consistent with this Court's scheduling order. Dkt. No. 297 at 1. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 9/3/2021)." Full order here. Watch this site.

  On August 18 Maxwell's lawyers complained about the MDC switching her legal video calls from WebEx to Zoom and, they accuse, recording the calls. They named an MDC staffer by only one name, Leon, and quoted from MDC Legal's response.

On August 23, AUSA Maurene Comey replied, acknowledging that "due to an oversight by MDC IT staff, however, that same virtual room had also been assigned for a different group's use at the same time as the defendant's VTC appointment... MDC and BOP staff spent several days working to set up a unique VTC virtual room for the defendant's exclusive use on the BOP's system."

Now on August 25 Judge Nathan has ruled: "ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. Defendant submitted a letter on August 18 informing the Court about disruptions of attorney-client video teleconferences. Dkt. No. 319. After conferring with MDC Legal, the Government responded on August 23. Dkt. No. 326. According to the Government and MDC Legal, the Defendant's difficulties in communicating with her counsel via video teleconference have been resolved, and the Government's letter sufficiently addresses her other requests. The Court finds MDC Legal's assurance that Defendant's communications have not been interfered with, recorded, or listened to sufficient. No further application for relief was made in Defendant's August 24 reply. Dkt. No. 327. The Court remains confident that Ms. Maxwell is fully able to communicate with her defense counsel and to prepare for trial. If Defendant experiences further issues in communicating with her counsel, she should promptly notify the Court after conferring in good faith with the Government and MDC Legal. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 8/25/21)."

  When Judge Nathan denied Maxwell's motions for a bill of particulars, she put in a footnote that she "presumes the Government intends to disclose this information [a list of unnamed co-conspirators] at the same times that... it discloses Jencks Act material."  On August 18, the US said it has no such intent.
 
  Now Judge Nathan has ordered the parties to meet and confer about disclosure, and if not agreed by August 26, for Maxwell to file a response to DOJ position by August 30. Watch this site.

On August 18 Maxwell's lawyers complained about the MDC switching her legal video calls from WebEx to Zoom and, they accuse, recording the calls. They name an MDC staffer by only one name, Leon, and quote from MDC Legal's response. What will Judge Nathan do? Watch this site.

On July 30, acting on filings about an op-ed concerning the applicability of Bill Cosby's release to Maxwell, Judge Nathan issued a three page warning: "The Government has moved for an order requiring David Markus to comply with Local Criminal Rule 23.1 following an op-ed that he authored opining on the merits of this pending case. Dkt. No. 309. Mr. Markus is plainly a lawyer associated with the defense in this case. His formal representation has involved handling at least one pre-trial issue for Ms. Maxwell—in particular, appeals to the Second Circuit of this Court’s bail-denial determinations.  Nevertheless Mr. Markus argues that he is not subject to Rule 23.1...  Nothing in the rule limits its application to lawyers who have formally noticed an appearance. To the contrary, as the text throughout the rule makes clear, it applies to statements made by lawyers (and others) “associated” with “pending or imminent criminal litigation.” S.D.N.Y. Local Criminal Rule 23.1(a) (last updated Oct. 29, 2018); see also Rule 23.1(b) (“a lawyer participating in or associated with the investigation”); Rule 23.1(c) (“lawyer or law firm associated with the prosecution or defense”). An attorney need not be of record in order to be sufficiently “associated” with a case as to justify application of disciplinary rules regarding extrajudicial statements. Such is the case with Mr. Markus’s role in the pending matter. As noted, Mr. Markus has attended a proceeding in this Court, after which he spoke to the press on Ms. Maxwell’s behalf. He has represented Ms. Maxwell on appeals of this Court’s pre-trial bail determinations. Moreover, Mr. Markus has identified himself as Ms. Maxwell’s appellate lawyer in a published op-ed discussing his opinion of the merits of this case. These facts mean that the public, which includes potential jurors, may perceive Mr. Markus as an authoritative source of information regarding the pending matter and may readily consider his remarks to be accurate and reliable. Mr. Markus is therefore ORDERED to comply with Local Criminal Rule 23.1. The Government does not ask the Court to discipline Mr. Markus based on his op-ed... All those associated with this case must act to ensure the case is tried solely in court or else they risk being deemed responsible for any trial delay or for undermining the integrity of the upcoming trial. See S.D.N.Y. Local Criminal Rule 23.1(h). In addition to the impact it could have on this matter, failure to comply could also result in attorney discipline. Id. Rule 23.1(i)." Order on Inner City Press' DocumentCloud here.

Back on June 15, Maxwell through her lawyers complained that in the MDC jail "last week, raw sewage permeated Ms. Maxwell's isolation cell, necessitating her removal to another cell... vermin droppings fell from air vents." Full letter on Patreon here

On May 10, the US Attorney's Office wrote to Judge Nathan to proposed starting the trial on November 29, noting the Thanksgiving week before and the importance of having AUSA Maurene Comey involved.

And on May 11, Judge Nathan issued an order confirming she will request that date, with jury selection to begin November 15: "ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell: The Court has considered the parties' proposals regarding the commencement of trial. Dkt. Nos. 275, 276. For the reasons stated in the Government's letter, the Court will request November 29, 2021 from the Clerk's Office as the trial start datethat is the date (pending approval from the Clerk's Office consistent with the SDNY COVID protocols) that opening statements will be made to the jury. However, the Court will also request from the Clerk's Office that jury selection occur during the week of November 15."

 On May 6, the US Attorney's Office wrote in that "The Government has now determined that, for a subset of the photographs requested by the defendant, the Government previously provided the defense with scanned images of this subset of photographs from the FBI Florida file. The original photographs are currently in the FBI’s possession. Accordingly, because some of the original photographs are currently in the Prosecution Team’s possession, the Government will make them available to the defendant for inspection upon request." Full submission on Patreon here.

  After Maxwell's complaint about flashlight checks and eye coverings, the US Attorney's Office on May 5 wrote in, full letter on Patreon 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.