Judge Nathan reads a new Ghislaine Maxwell jury note.

"May we please have the following transcripts:"

* Shawn
* Cimberly Espinosa
* Amanda Young
* Jason Richards

Also one name she didn't read.
Of note:

This appears to be the first time they requested transcripts of *defense witness* testimony.

Espinosa was an ex-assistant at J. Epstein & Co.

Young and Richards are FBI agents called by the defense.

Shawn was Carolyn's ex-boyfriend, called by the prosecution.
The remaining (unread) name was apparently illegible. Judge Nathan is seeking clarification from the jury.

The jury also wants to know whether they're being asked to deliberate on New Year's Eve and New Year's Day.
Judge Nathan said that her "inclination" is to say, “Yes, you will continue deliberations as needed, every day, going forward.”

That includes New Year's Eve, New Year's Day and the following Sunday, she adds.
The jury clarifies the illegible name on the note: "We are requesting the transcript of the expert witness on memory."

That's Elizabeth Loftus, Judge Nathan notes.

ICYMI: lawandcrime.com/live-trials/gh…
Unpacking this latest jury note and where things stand, @LawCrimeNews.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Adam Klasfeld

Adam Klasfeld Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @KlasfeldReports

28 Dec
Judge Nathan enters and reads a jury note.

"Our deliberations are moving along, and we are making progress."

They want to adjourn at 5 p.m. and come in at 9 a.m.
🚨 Judge Nathan says she must require the jurors to come in **every day** until they reach a verdict because of the "highly contagious Omicron variant."

"I must require deliberations every day forward until they reach a verdict."
The judge says that this is necessary to avoid a mistrial in the event of an outbreak.
Read 6 tweets
28 Dec
Judge Nathan is addressing this letter now, saying it was filed in the "wee hours."
The prosecutor urges against any change. She says it was a "thorough and carefully considered" legal instruction.

There's nothing wrong with referring them to the correct legal instruction, which was the jury charge they received before deliberations.
Judge Nathan notes that the defense's jury instruction addresses Count Two—which the jury didn't ask about.

She also says the defense's final proposed instruction is "just wrong"; jurors can consider conduct outside of New York in deciding on conduct in New York, she says.
Read 4 tweets
27 Dec
New Ghislaine Maxwell jury note:

Judge Nathan says that jurors made a number of requests, including for different color "Post-Its," highlighters of different colors, whitepaper board, and "Matt's" transcript.

They also want a definition of "enticement."
Variations of the word "entice" appear at least 21 times in Ghislaine Maxwell's superseding indictment.
In part, Judge Nathan has referred jurors to her instructions on page 21.

s3.documentcloud.org/documents/2116…
Read 4 tweets
22 Dec
Remember when jurors wanted transcripts of every Ghislaine Maxwell accuser BUT “Kate”?

Now, they want the testimony of “Kate” and Juan [Alessi, presumably].

They also want “Jane’s” transcript again—this time, in a three-ring binder.
As for those seeking a tea-leaf read on this one, the most that can seemingly be divined here is:

They’re studious.
Also, with the caveat that we do not know the context of the gesture:

Maxwell’s attorneys Laura Menninger and Bobbi Sternheim could be seen giving each other a high-five in court—before the brief conference to discuss plans for Thursday.
Read 4 tweets
21 Dec
Jurors want to scrutinize this FBI note from Carolyn's interview in 2007.

Here's the thing:

Notes from FBI interviews are NOT evidence. Jurors want to know the basis of Carolyn's cross-examination, showing they appear to be engaging with the defense here.
Jurors appear also to have some confusion about the role about FBI 302s.

More on the background of FBI 302s and the law here, courtesy of @MitchellEpner.

NECESSARY DISCLAIMER:

It is generally counterproductive to read the tea leaves from jury notes, which represent snapshots from their deliberations.

We don't know what inside the note sparked the debate.

That said, they do provide a window into what they're scrutinizing.
Read 10 tweets
21 Dec
Only seen by jurors yesterday, the slides shown during the closings in Ghislaine Maxwell's trial have been released.

On the left, a representative slide from the prosecution's summation—a long, enduring relationship.

On the right, the defense's—attacking plaintiffs' lawyers. ImageImage
Interesting sleight of hand on the defense chart, attacking testimony by Annie Farmer:

* The highlighted text supporting the claim on the slide's title is the defense's attorney's question.

* Farmer's answers, not highlighted, contradict the premise of the questions. Image
Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyers know how to hammer home a theme.

(More defense slides—It goes on like this for four more slides.) ImageImageImageImage
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(