Good morning from New York.
Now that the prosecution wrapped up its case, legal experts answer some FAQ about the Ghislaine Maxwell trial:
Why didn't the govt call the alleged co-conspirators?
What happened to the big names?
And more, @LawCrimeNews lawandcrime.com/live-trials/gh…
Now that the prosecution wrapped up its case, legal experts answer some FAQ about the Ghislaine Maxwell trial:
Why didn't the govt call the alleged co-conspirators?
What happened to the big names?
And more, @LawCrimeNews lawandcrime.com/live-trials/gh…
🔼 A Ghislaine Maxwell trial guide for the perplexed, with sharp analysis by:
* @MitchellEpner, ex-federal sex trafficking prosecutor.
* @LisaBloom, who reps eight Jeffrey Epstein victims.
* @JenGRodgers, who spent more than a decade prosecuting in the SDNY
* @MitchellEpner, ex-federal sex trafficking prosecutor.
* @LisaBloom, who reps eight Jeffrey Epstein victims.
* @JenGRodgers, who spent more than a decade prosecuting in the SDNY
And if you want to catch up on the first two weeks of trial in podcast form, check out the latest episode of @LawCrimeNetwork's "Objections."
Guest @LisaBloom sheds light on how her eight Epstein victim clients view the trial.
Guest @LisaBloom sheds light on how her eight Epstein victim clients view the trial.
https://twitter.com/lawcrimenews/status/1471306587138453506?s=20
In the previous episode, @MitchellEpner explained why Maxwell trial-watchers should heed the wisdom of famed lawyer Gerry Spence:
“Facts are not persuasive; stories are.” lawandcrime.com/live-trials/gh…
“Facts are not persuasive; stories are.” lawandcrime.com/live-trials/gh…
(As you can see, the podcast is Maxwell-focused as trial proceedings continue.)
More to come soon.
Ghislaine Maxwell's defense calls its first witness: Cimberly Espinosa, who was previously reported to be Epstein's former executive assistant.
She says she was hired by the J. Epstein Company.
Asked by the defense, she clarifies that was Jeffrey Epstein's company.
Q: How did you find the job with Jeffrey Epstein's company?
She says she answered a newspaper ad and interviewed with a job agency.
Asked by the defense, she clarifies that was Jeffrey Epstein's company.
Q: How did you find the job with Jeffrey Epstein's company?
She says she answered a newspaper ad and interviewed with a job agency.
Espinosa: "I highly respected Ghislaine. [...]
"I looked up to her very much."
"I looked up to her very much."
Espinosa is describing the layout of the office where she worked and who worked there.
Espinosa said that she had to sign an NDA when she started working there.
She says she understood it to mean "just not to repeat any of my work. My work was my work."
She said she's signed them before and didn't have any reaction to them.
She says she understood it to mean "just not to repeat any of my work. My work was my work."
She said she's signed them before and didn't have any reaction to them.
Q: Did you ever book massages for Ms. Maxwell?
A: Yes.
Espinosa says these were professional massages.
Asked if she did the same for Epstein, she again answers yes.
A: Yes.
Espinosa says these were professional massages.
Asked if she did the same for Epstein, she again answers yes.
Questioning of Espinosa turns to her meeting "Jane."
Q: Do you remember or recall "Jane" in the office?
A: Yes.
Q: How old did she appear?
A: (Pause) Probably 18.
Espinosa says "Jane" went to the office a "few times," and she recalled "Jane's" mother calling the office.
Q: Do you remember or recall "Jane" in the office?
A: Yes.
Q: How old did she appear?
A: (Pause) Probably 18.
Espinosa says "Jane" went to the office a "few times," and she recalled "Jane's" mother calling the office.
Q: Do you know if Jane ever traveled on Mr. Epstein's planes?
A: I don't know.
The prosecution objects to a question about Espinosa's perception of "Jane" and Epstein's relationship.
Overruled, once the defense lays a foundation.
A: "I thought it was a loving relationship."
A: I don't know.
The prosecution objects to a question about Espinosa's perception of "Jane" and Epstein's relationship.
Overruled, once the defense lays a foundation.
A: "I thought it was a loving relationship."
Espinosa said that she saw "Jane" on a soap opera, of which she was a fan.
She says that "Jane" sent her signed headshots from the cast of the soap.
She says that "Jane" sent her signed headshots from the cast of the soap.
Maxwell's lawyer Christian Everdell hands her defense exhibits.
Q: What are they?
A: They are the headshots of three of the cast members and a group cast member shot.
Q: What are they?
A: They are the headshots of three of the cast members and a group cast member shot.
Espinosa confirms the authenticity of the sealed exhibits.
Q: How do you recognize them?
A: They're mine.
Q: How do you recognize them?
A: They're mine.
Espinosa says the inscription read:
"Dearest Cimberly,
Thank you for always being so sweet and such a great help.
Take care,"
Jane
"Dearest Cimberly,
Thank you for always being so sweet and such a great help.
Take care,"
Jane
Questioning turns to Epstein and Maxwell's relationship and interactions.
"I thought they were a couple," Espinosa says of the pair.
"Just their interaction together. They were a little flirty."
"I thought they were a couple," Espinosa says of the pair.
"Just their interaction together. They were a little flirty."
Asked if their relationship changed, Espinosa says Maxwell started dating other men.
"They would not show up at the office around the same time, leave together. Things like that."
"They would not show up at the office around the same time, leave together. Things like that."
The attorney asks Espinosa about Maxwell's relationship with Ted Waitt, the billionaire co-founder of Gateway.
Morning recess.
We're back.
"All rise."
The jury is entering.
"All rise."
The jury is entering.
ICYMI: Ghislaine Maxwell's defense lost their request for certain witnesses to testify anonymously, just like some of the prosecution's did.
Find out why in this story, and read the ruling embedded inside the article.
Find out why in this story, and read the ruling embedded inside the article.
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1471503361392320523?s=20
Questioning turns to Sarah Kellen, who was listed on the 2008 Epstein non-prosecution agreement as a "potential co-conspirator."
(Kellen claims she was a victim.)
She's been a running theme of the defense case.
(Kellen claims she was a victim.)
She's been a running theme of the defense case.
From the Epstein NPA, signed in 2007: 
Espinosa left the job in 2002.
Q: Why did you decide to leave at that time?
A: After 9/11, I decided that it was time to get back to my roots.
That's California, she says.
Q: Why did you decide to leave at that time?
A: After 9/11, I decided that it was time to get back to my roots.
That's California, she says.
Final direct examination questions:
Q: Did you ever see her engaged in any type of inappropriate activity with underaged girls?
A: Never.
Q: Did you ever see [Epstein] engaged in any type of inappropriate activity with underaged girls?
A: Never.
Q: Did you ever see her engaged in any type of inappropriate activity with underaged girls?
A: Never.
Q: Did you ever see [Epstein] engaged in any type of inappropriate activity with underaged girls?
A: Never.
Asked if she ever saw anything that gave her the impression that anything like that was going on, Espinosa gave the same answer.
Short and sweet cross-examination by prosecutors, who ask whether she ever worked in any of Epstein's home, including his Palm Beach house.
She answers no.
She answers no.
Next witness: Raghu Sud, who works for Shopper's Travel.
He appears to be called to authenticate invoices.
He appears to be called to authenticate invoices.
Next defense witness: Elizabeth Loftus, a “false memory” expert relied upon by Harvey Weinstein, Robert Durst, O.J. Simpson and hundreds of other criminal defendants seeking to undermine the credibility of their accusers.
Background: lawandcrime.com/live-trials/gh…
Background: lawandcrime.com/live-trials/gh…
Loftus describes her CV.
She says she received a lifetime award from the American Psychological Association, among the "dozens" of awards and honors she's received.
Loftus details what she describes as the so-called "misinformation effect."
Q: Approximately how many times have you testified in a court of law [...]?
A: I've testified in approximately 300 trials since June 3, 1975.
A: I've testified in approximately 300 trials since June 3, 1975.
Loftus says she's been asked to consult with the prosecution only five or six times, only testifying once.
She says her expertise about false memory doesn't fit into the prosecution's "agenda."
She says her expertise about false memory doesn't fit into the prosecution's "agenda."
Loftus: "One thing we know about memory is that it doesn't work like a recording device."
Loftus is diagramming memory for the jurors, starting with what she calls the "Acquisition" phase.
Phase 2: The Retention stage.
"After some time has passed, a person may be asked to remember the event or the events," she notes.
Phase 3: Retrieval Stage
Phase 2: The Retention stage.
"After some time has passed, a person may be asked to remember the event or the events," she notes.
Phase 3: Retrieval Stage
Loftus: "The media is a source of post-event suggestion."
This is a running theme of the defense case, mentioned by Maxwell's attorney Bobbi Sternheim during opening statements.
Sternheim is questioning her now.
This is a running theme of the defense case, mentioned by Maxwell's attorney Bobbi Sternheim during opening statements.
Sternheim is questioning her now.
Loftus says she's not a practicing therapist, but she sometimes studies patients.
Loftus: "We are actually constructing our memories while we retrieve memories."
Q: Outside the laboratory, is there a way to prove that someone had an actual memory?
AUSA: Objection.
Judge: Sustained.
AUSA: Objection.
Judge: Sustained.
Sternheim asks Loftus about her research about the confidence in memory.
"People are a little more accurate when they're confident than when they're not confident."
But people can get "very confident" about "wrong answers" in cases of post-event suggestion, she testifies.
"People are a little more accurate when they're confident than when they're not confident."
But people can get "very confident" about "wrong answers" in cases of post-event suggestion, she testifies.
Sternheim asks about the concept of "rich false memories."
We've been on lunch recess. Loftus's testimony will resume after the break.
The witness returns to the stand.
"All rise."
The jury is entering.
"All rise."
The jury is entering.
Loftus's direct examination resumes with testimony about confidence in memory vs. accuracy.
Q: Are you familiar with the concept that confidence is malleable?
A: Yes.
Q: Are you familiar with the concept that confidence is malleable?
A: Yes.
Loftus:
"People can express a level of confidence and if they then get new information [...] it can artificially increase their confidence in what they are saying."
"People can express a level of confidence and if they then get new information [...] it can artificially increase their confidence in what they are saying."
Sternheim asks Loftus about "prestige-enhancing memory distortion."
"We humans frequently remember ourselves in a better light than perhaps is accurate," she says.
"We humans frequently remember ourselves in a better light than perhaps is accurate," she says.
Loftus testimony:
Q: You're being compensated for your time?
A: I am. I hope so.
She says she's charging $600/hour, and it doesn't depend upon the trial's outcome or the party for whom she's testifying.
Q: You're being compensated for your time?
A: I am. I hope so.
She says she's charging $600/hour, and it doesn't depend upon the trial's outcome or the party for whom she's testifying.
Cross-examination begins:
Of those hundreds of times, you've consulted with the prosecution five or six times, right?
Yes.
Of those hundreds of times, you've consulted with the prosecution five or six times, right?
Yes.
The witness confirms she's testified in about 150 criminal trials, only one of which was for the prosecution.
The prosecutor notes she wrote a book titled "Witness for the Defense."
The prosecutor notes she wrote a book titled "Witness for the Defense."
Q: You haven't written a book called "Impartial Witness," right?
(Objection)
Judge: Overruled.
A: I don't have a book by that title, no.
(Objection)
Judge: Overruled.
A: I don't have a book by that title, no.
Q: It's fair to say that over the years that criminal defendants have paid you millions of dollars for your services.
Loftus says she doesn't know if it's millions.
AUSA notes that she's testified in high-profile cases.
Loftus agreed.
Loftus says she doesn't know if it's millions.
AUSA notes that she's testified in high-profile cases.
Loftus agreed.
In this interview, @LawCrimeNetwork's @RBianchiEsq
asked me about the start of Loftus's testimony in the morning session.
asked me about the start of Loftus's testimony in the morning session.
https://twitter.com/LawCrimeNetwork/status/1471566661060804619?s=20
The prosecutor just asked if Loftus testified on Harvey Weinstein's behalf.
(Long pause as Judge Nathan assesses whether the question is permissible.)
(Long pause as Judge Nathan assesses whether the question is permissible.)
After the hiatus, the AUSA moves onto a different question, and so it looks like the jury won't get an earful of some of the famous, high-profile defendants on whose behalf she's either testified or consulted.
Loftus cross-examination:
Q: You don't treat victims of traumatic events, right?
A: I don't officially treat anyone.
(She previously testified she's not a therapist.)
Q: You don't treat victims of traumatic events, right?
A: I don't officially treat anyone.
(She previously testified she's not a therapist.)
AUSA asks Loftus about a "Bugs Bunny" study, in which subjects mistakenly believed they saw Bugs Bunny at Disneyland.
Loftus says that the point of the study is Bugs Bunny is a Warner Bros character.
Loftus says that the point of the study is Bugs Bunny is a Warner Bros character.
The prosecutor gets Loftus to concede that those who experience trauma may forget "peripheral details" but "core memories" tend to be stronger.
Q: Have you conducted a study where you arranged for girls to be sexually abused?
A: No, absolutely not.
A: No, absolutely not.
The prosecutor asks if she has ever conducted a study trying to implant false memories of childhood sexual abuse.
Loftus replies no.
Loftus replies no.
Loftus's testimony wraps up after redirect from Sternheim seeking to counter the prosecution's implication that the witness is a "profiteer" raking in money from criminal defendants.
Current defense witness:
A CBP official asked to search for "Jane," "Kate," and Annie Farmer's border-crossing records.
A CBP official asked to search for "Jane," "Kate," and Annie Farmer's border-crossing records.
Jurors are excused for afternoon recess as the attorneys discuss evidentiary issues in court.
The CBP witness is back on the stand, inspecting an exhibit.
The witness has been reciting border entry records for three of Maxwell's accusers, which appear to also have date of birth information.
It is unclear to what end the defense sought to enter this information, but they seem interested in establishing ages at particular times.
It is unclear to what end the defense sought to enter this information, but they seem interested in establishing ages at particular times.
Often, the purpose of evidence like this entered into the record isn't apparent on first glance but could become significant during closing arguments.
The prosecution cross-examines the witness.
The prosecution cross-examines the witness.
Prosecutor asks the witness the difference between CBP records before and after 9/11.
Witness: "Prior to 9/11, there was a little bit of a difference between how the records were submitted to CBP systems, and the reliability of the airlines was not as good as it is now."
Witness: "Prior to 9/11, there was a little bit of a difference between how the records were submitted to CBP systems, and the reliability of the airlines was not as good as it is now."
Next defense witness: Dominique Hyppolite, who performs subpoena responses for student records for the Palm Beach County School District
Trial ended for the day.
The parties discuss tomorrow's proceedings when the jury leaves the room.
Asked what the defense case is looking like, Laura Menninger replies: "I think we will be done, your honor."
There may be a short witness Monday.
The parties discuss tomorrow's proceedings when the jury leaves the room.
Asked what the defense case is looking like, Laura Menninger replies: "I think we will be done, your honor."
There may be a short witness Monday.
The government is leaning against calling a rebuttal witness, but the prosecutor said she will answer the question by 8 p.m.
Closings likely will be on Monday.
Closings likely will be on Monday.
The extremely brisk timeline suggests that Maxwell isn't testifying in her defense, and reports have hinted to as much — but it was not explicitly confirmed in court.
Good night from New York—and I'll see you tomorrow.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
