SDNY COURTHOUSE, July 13 – After the death of Jeffrey Epstein in the MCC prison, on July 2 Acting US Attorney for the Southern District of New York 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?
On July 10, Ghislaine Maxwell through counsel asked to be released on $5 million bond.
One argument: "Ms. Maxwell intends to mount several legal challenges to the indictment, including that: (i) this prosecution is barred by Epstein’s September 24, 2007 non-prosecution agreement with the Department of Justice, which covers “any potential co-conspirators of Epstein” -- Full letter on Patreon here.
Now the US Attorney has opposed, including: "the notion that the defendant is protected from prosecution by the Non-Prosecution Agreement (“NPA”) between Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of Florida (“SDFL”) is absurd. That agreement affords her no protection in this District, for at least three reasons. First, the defendant was not a party to that agreement nor named in it as a third-party beneficiary, and the defendant offers no basis to think she would have standing to claim any rights under the NPA. Tellingly, the defendant cites no authority for the proposition that an agreement she was not a party to and that does not even identify her by name could possibly be invoked to bar her prosecution. Second, and equally important, the NPA does not bind the Southern District of New York, which was not a party to the agreement. See United States v. Annabi, 771 F.2d 670, 672 (2d Cir. 1985) (per curiam) (“A plea agreement binds only the office of the United States Attorney for the district in which the plea is entered unless it affirmatively appears that the agreement contemplates a broader restriction.”)); United States v. Prisco, 391 F. App’x 920, 921 (2d Cir. 2010). This rule applies even when the text of the agreement refers to the signing party as the “Government.” Annabi, 771 F.2d at 672. Third, and perhaps most important, even assuming the NPA could be read to protect this defendant and bind this Office, which are both legally unsound propositions, the Indictment charges conduct not covered by the NPA, which was limited by its terms to conduct spanning from 2001 to 2007, a time period that post-dates the conduct charged in the Indictment, and to violations of statutes not charged in this Indictment. In this respect, the Government further notes that the Indictment brought in this District is entirely independent of the prior SDFL investigation, and two of the victims referenced in the Indictment were never approached or interviewed by the SDFL, and had never spoken to law enforcement until they met with our Office in 2019."
Full US Attorney letter on Patreon here.
After 8 pm on July 7, this (full order on Patreon here) - "ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. An arraignment, initial conference, and bail hearing in this matter is hereby scheduled to occur as a remote video/teleconference using an internet platform on July 14, 2020 at 1 p.m... Given the high degree of public interest in this case, a video feed of the remote proceeding will be available for viewing in the Jury Assembly Room located at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY. Due to social distancing requirements, seating will be extremely limited; when capacity is reached no additional persons will be admitted. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3771(c)(1), the Government must make their best efforts to see that crime victims are notified of, and accorded, the rights provided to them in that section. So that appropriate logistical arrangements can be made, the Government shall inform the Court by email within 24 hours in advance of the proceeding if any alleged victim wishes to be heard on the question of detention pending trial."
Earlier on July 7, after the Bureau of Prisons website listed Ghislaine Noelle Maxwell as in Brooklyn MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center), as Inner City Press was covering an unrelated bail hearing the defense lawyer said, "MDC is in lock-down due to a loose gun." See Inner City Press live tweet here, picked up.
Shouldn't the BOP be more transparent - every day, but particular given what happened with Epstein in MCC, now with Maxwell in MDC? Watch this site.
At 3:30 pm on July 2 Maxwell appeared in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Hampsire, before Magistrate Judge Andrea K. Johnstone. Inner City Press live tweeted it here.
Now on July 6, this from a letter, full copy on Patreon here: "Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Dear Judge Nathan: On behalf of our client, Ghislaine Maxwell, we respectfully submit this letter in response to the Court’s order from earlier today regarding the scheduling of the arraignment, initial appearance, and bail hearing in this matter. We have been attempting to contact our client at the Metropolitan Detention Center; we were able to speak to her for the first time today just before 9:00pm this evening. She has agreed to waive her physical presence for these proceedings. As directed by the Court, we have met and conferred with the Government regarding scheduling. All parties will be able to proceed remotely on the morning of July 14, 2020. The defense will not be able to proceed on July 9, 2020. We will meet and confer further with the Government tomorrow regarding a proposed briefing schedule and anticipate providing a joint proposed briefing schedule for the Court’s consideration by the end of the day."
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.
Now on July 5, after some crowd-sourcing, Inner City Press can report 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.
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.
