UPDATE: Verdict is out on the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. She was found guilty on five of six accounts. She faces 60 years in prison. We will have an update on the verdict tomorrow morning.
Subscribe to get full updates for tomorrow morning.
Day 15 (12/21/2021)
Day 15 would set sights for the jury to deliberate after hearing closing arguments from US prosecution (Attorney Moe providing closing arguments, and Maurene Comey providing rebuttal). Proceedings would commence at roughly 10:10am without the jury present. Judge Nathan notified the court that the jury had requested transcripts of Jane, Annie and Carloyn’s testimonies. This would be followed by several hours of discussions between present prosecution and defense accompanied by the challenging testimony in effort to reorganize documentation.
At 1:22pm Maxwell would be brought out to the defense’s table. Shortly after a discussion with her defense lawyer Sternheim, Maxwell would be returned to her holding cell, while both parties agreed that no redaction would be necessary for transcript prints that the jury would be receiving.
A jury note would be received at 2:50pm; when several members of prosecution would arrive and begin to shuffle into the courthouse. Maxwell’s lawyer would propose an amendment to Carolyn’s testimony on the basis of impeachment (a detail that they claimed was not relevant to evidence). Maxwell’s lawyer would request a copy of the jury’s note. Judge Nathan would suggest that jury deliberation could complete on the 22nd, if not the 23rd. The jury would arrive after 5:00pm; only to receive instruction from Judge Nathan to aim to complete deliberation by the 23rd. Judge Nathan would adjourn after asking both prosecution and defense if they had both agreed on the redaction; which they both replied to affirmatively.
Day 16 (12/22/2021)
Further jury deliberation would unravel in a similarly private fashion on Wednesday the 22nd. The jury would request further text copies of Juan Alessi’s witness testimony heard earlier in the trial to help them deliberate each specific count and charge. Judge Nathan would conclude proceedings.
Day 17 (12/27/2021)
Thursday’s proceedings would commence with further Jury deliberations; journalists surveying the courthouse while the jury deliberated.
The jury would request the testimony of Gregory Parkinson; a now retired police officer who recanted his participation in the raid of Jeffrey Epstein’s Palm Beach address. They would also request a clearer definition of the term “enticed” used in accusation documents. The jury would also request the testimony of “Matthew” (Jane’s boyfriend who confirmed he had been told of Maxwell’s abuse when dating Jane).
Day 17 would end yet again following multiple requests of previously heard witness testimony, as the jury. It seems clear that the jury is taking their time to deliberate this decision with serious intent.
Day 18 (12/28/2021)
Tuesday’s proceedings commenced with claims of jury confusion from Maxwell’s defense team. Specifically in reference to the whereabouts of Maxwell during the trafficking of Epstein victim Jane to New Mexico. This would be followed by a series of suggestions from the defense that posited the jury should discount New Mexico from being included in the sex trafficking charge; attempting to re-direct discussion towards flights from NYC to Florida.
The defense would “request that the court give additional instructions in regard to counts two and four” stating that the jury had inquired about Maxwell’s role in the trafficking of Jane to New Mexico. What the defense failed to understand, is that even if Jane was trafficked above the age of 17 (the legal age of sexual consent in New Mexico) prostitution and solicitation of sex for payment is still illegal in the state of New Mexico. This still constitutes a sex trafficking conspiracy. Judge Nathan would respond to the defenses’ request; suggesting Maxwell’s team was attempting to overstep due process. Nathan responded to the defense’s inquiry stating it is “just plain wrong” to request such action. Judge Nathan rightfully posited that her intervening in the instruction the jury in this fashion would be an egregious overreach of Nathan’s role in allowing for non-biased deliberation.
Judge Nathan would declare conclusion of proceedings following the Jury request to end the day’s session at 5pm, stating “our deliberations are moving along, and we are making progress”. Judge Nathan would address the prosecution and defense to inform them that the Jury will be expected to deliberate from 9am-6pm every day from now on, until reaching a verdict. The defense raised concerns regarding the jury “rushing” a decision due to a possible desire to conclude proceedings before the holidays; Judge Nathan did not seem interested in engaging with Sternheim’s wild speculation any longer. Maxwell’s defense team has normalized straw-grasping throughout this trial, and it seems Judge Nathan has had enough of it.
Judge Nathan would finish addressing the jury by focusing on the developing omicron outbreak which is prevalent in NYC; encouraging jurors to take available precautions (face mask, sanitation, limit socializing) to ensure they can complete deliberation.
Renewed criticism regarding the unavailability of a call-in line (present in every single other case in SDNY; highlighted here by Russell Lee Peters of Inner City Press) is now especially warranted, as individuals without press credential have no access to the trial. This is setting a troubling precedent for Judge Nathan’s regard for due process and calls to question her intent. Efforts made in pursuits of censorship are readily apparent from Judge Nathan; she has made several decisions that have resulted in a reduction of accessibility to the trial for the public. Judge Nathan’s actions directly challenge the virtues of transparency fraudulently touted by our justice system; showing once again the federal courts have a farcical concern for legitimizing transparency within their processes.
Questions still remain as to the expected fallout that could take place following a verdict; as many of the larger issues pertaining to Maxwell’s globally influential relationships (many of whom are implicated in the sex trafficking of minors), associations with Israeli and U.S intelligence and the United Nations (who has had an array of child rape scandals and subsequent cover-ups in recent years) has still been yet to surface; a deafening silence that tells all too much.
Free Press Report will continue coverage of The Maxwell Trial following SDNY Courthouse proceedings on Wednesday.
Disclaimer: The publisher does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information provided in this page. All statements and expressions herein are the sole opinion of the author or paid advertiser.
The Free Press Report is a publisher of financial information, not an investment advisor. We do not provide personalized or individualized investment advice or information that is tailored to the needs of any particular recipient.
THE INFORMATION CONTAINED ON THIS WEBSITE IS NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS INVESTMENT ADVICE, AND DOES NOT PURPORT TO BE AND DOES NOT EXPRESS ANY OPINION AS TO THE PRICE AT WHICH THE SECURITIES OF ANY COMPANY MAY TRADE AT ANY TIME. THE INFORMATION AND OPINIONS PROVIDED HEREIN SHOULD NOT BE TAKEN AS SPECIFIC ADVICE ON THE MERITS OF ANY INVESTMENT DECISION. INVESTORS SHOULD MAKE THEIR OWN INVESTIGATION AND DECISIONS REGARDING THE PROSPECTS OF ANY COMPANY DISCUSSED HEREIN BASED ON SUCH INVESTORS’ OWN REVIEW OF PUBLICLY AVAILABLE INFORMATION AND SHOULD NOT RELY ON THE INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN.
No statement or expression of opinion, or any other matter herein, directly or indirectly, is an offer or the solicitation of an offer to buy or sell the securities or financial instruments mentioned.
Any projections, market outlooks or estimates herein are forward looking statements and are inherently unreliable. They are based upon certain assumptions and should not be construed to be indicative of the actual events that will occur. Other events that were not taken into account may occur and may significantly affect the returns or performance of the securities discussed herein. The information provided herein is based on matters as they exist as of the date of preparation and not as of any future date, and the publisher undertakes no obligation to correct, update or revise the information in this document or to otherwise provide any additional material.
The publisher, its affiliates, and clients of the a publisher or its affiliates may currently have long or short positions in the securities of the companies mentioned herein, or may have such a position in the future (and therefore may profit from fluctuations in the trading price of the securities). To the extent such persons do have such positions, there is no guarantee that such persons will maintain such positions.
Neither the publisher nor any of its affiliates accepts any liability whatsoever for any direct or consequential loss howsoever arising, directly or indirectly, from any use of the information contained herein.
By using the Site or any affiliated social media account, you are indicating your consent and agreement to this disclaimer and our terms of use. Unauthorized reproduction of this newsletter or its contents by photocopy, facsimile or any other means is illegal and punishable by law.
patriotone.substack.com (“The Free Press Report”) is a website owned and operated by Substack. The Free Press Report is paid fees by the companies that make investment offerings on this website. Be aware that payment of these fees may put The Free Press Report in a conflict of interest with the investor. By accessing this website or any page thereof, you agree to be bound by the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, in effect at the time you access this website or any page thereof. The Terms of Use and Privacy Policy may be amended from time to time. Nothing on this website shall constitute an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy or subscribe for, any securities to any person in any jurisdiction where such an offer or solicitation is against the law or to anyone to whom it is unlawful to make such offer or solicitation. The Free Press Report is not an underwriter, broker-dealer, Title III crowdfunding portal or a valuation service and does not engage in any activities requiring any such registration. The Free Press Report does not provide advice on investments or structure transactions. Offerings made under Regulation A under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities Act") are available to U.S. investors who are “accredited investors” as defined by Rule 501 of Regulation D under the Securities Act well as non-accredited investors, who are subject to certain investment limitations as set forth in Regulation A under the Securities Act. In order to invest in Regulation A offerings, investors may be asked to fill out a certification and provide necessary documentation as proof of your income and/or net worth to verify that you are qualified to invest in offerings posted on this website. All securities listed on this site are being offered by, and all information included on this site is the responsibility of, the applicable issuer of such securities. The Free Press Report does not verify the adequacy, accuracy or completeness of any information. Neither The Free Press Report nor any of its officers, directors, agents and employees makes any warranty, express or implied, of any kind whatsoever related to the adequacy, accuracy, valuations of securities or completeness of any information on this site or the use of information on this site. Neither The Free Press Report nor any of its directors, officers, employees, representatives, affiliates or agents shall have any liability whatsoever arising from any error or incompleteness of fact, or lack of care in the preparation of, any of the materials posted on this website. Investing in securities, especially those issued by start-up companies, involves substantial risk. investors should be able to bear the loss of their entire investment and should make their own determination of whether or not to make any investment based on their own independent evaluation and analysis.