Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Mega Edition: Judge Nathan Eviscerates Maxwell's Big Mouth Attorney David Markus (9/26/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: Judge Nathan Eviscerates Maxwell's Big Mouth Attorney David Markus (9/26/26) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Happened when Dr. Loftus was on the stand. Now, we
• 0:05
  Speaker 1: know that Ghislaine Maxwell and her team have had a
• 0:08
  Speaker 1: specific strategy this whole entire time. And that strategy has
• 0:12
  Speaker 1: been to go after the memory of the witnesses as
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: well as go after their credibility as a whole. And
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: what they were hoping was that Dr. Loftus would further
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: those ambitions yesterday. She did not. In fact, it seemed
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: to me that the prosecution had its best day, at
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: least procedurally, since this whole entire thing started. They had
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: a couple of nice one-liners. A couple of times they
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: got the room to laugh, like when they were doing
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: the cross-examination of Kimberly. And when asked if she had
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: ever been to Palm Beach, she says no. And then
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: they just, you know, they end their cross there. That
• 0:55
  Speaker 1: elicited some chuckles from the courtroom. And besides that, I
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: think that they did a fantastic job punching holes in Dr. Loftus,
• 1:07
  Speaker 1: her testimony. That was supposed to be strong testimony for
• 1:12
  Speaker 1: the defense. Glenn Maxwell's team, they were hoping that Dr.
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: Loftus would show out and make it seem like All
• 1:21
  Speaker 1: of the stuff they have been talking about, false memory
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: and the rest of it, is actually legit. But in reality,
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: what happened was they kind of got in their own way. Dr.
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: Loftus seemed to be more useful to the prosecution yesterday
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: on the stand than she was for the defense. And
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: coming into this, I kind of thought the same thing
• 1:46
  Speaker 1: was going to occur. I mean, look, this is somebody,
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: this lady, she's a hired gun. She does this for
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: profit and there is no scumbag scummy enough for her
• 1:57
  Speaker 1: to avoid. And I get it, right? Look, if you
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: have the money and you're fighting for your life at
• 2:04
  Speaker 1: a trial, I would employ all the specialists that I
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: could afford as well. But maybe I would find some
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: specialists that aren't involved in people losing You know, there
• 2:14
  Speaker 1: gotta be a couple out there, right? But what it
• 2:18
  Speaker 1: really comes down to, and I know this is going
• 2:20
  Speaker 1: to be groundbreaking what I'm about to say, but here's
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: an idea. Don't traffic children. Don't abuse children. Don't hurt
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: other people. And don't commit crimes. And you won't have
• 2:33
  Speaker 1: to worry about any of this shit. But Maxwell, her
• 2:38
  Speaker 1: and her friends, you know, they were able to get
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: away with it for so long that it was normalized
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: to them. So when they get caught and they find
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: out they have no friends left to protect them, well,
• 2:50
  Speaker 1: it's a big shock to the system. Meanwhile, the rest
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: of us are sitting around looking at each other like,
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: how weren't these people arrested when Maria told the FBI
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: about them in 96? How weren't they arrested? Insert a
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: million times here. But now that Maxwell is... Finally, facing
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: a jury of her peers, it's not looking good in
• 3:18
  Speaker 1: my opinion for her. Now, obviously, they still have today
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: to go. And remember, they said they had a witness
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: list of 35 people. So who knows what's coming down
• 3:29
  Speaker 1: the old chute here. But they would have to have
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: something earth-shaking. Like ground-rattling, earth-shaking, existential world elimination event. Because
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: what has been provided so far as testimony in defense
• 3:49
  Speaker 1: of Glenn Maxwell, I haven't seen anything that would make
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: the testimony of what those survivors had to say look
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: any less impactful. Or make me question myself saying, oh man,
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: you know, maybe none of that. There has been no
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: material witnesses, just a bunch of what-ifs, right? That's all
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: that Maxwell's defense has provided us. What-ifs. Well, what if
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: the memory is faulty? What if this? What if that? Meanwhile,
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: the survivors are sitting there across the table from Ghislaine
• 4:28
  Speaker 1: Maxwell and saying, this is what you did to me.
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: So I have found that to be way, way, way
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: more impactful than the honestly, nonsensical witness list that was
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: brought forward yesterday. Now, there might be something more to it, right?
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: Some of the other witnesses that they brought up yesterday,
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: the guy from the supply company, they might be setting
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: all of that up for some sort of closing that
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: they have prepared, but as of now, it just doesn't
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: really make all that much sense, their witness list so far.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: If you're going to try and you know, prove that
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: your client is innocent? Shouldn't you have a couple of
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: actual like character witnesses and people who are like, there's
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: no way this happened. I was there at the time.
• 5:19
  Speaker 1: But really what you have when it comes down to
• 5:21
  Speaker 1: it is four women who were girls or young ladies
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: when they were in the clutches of Maxwell and Epstein,
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: who are now saying, look, this is what happened to us.
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: This is what she did. And to me, that is
• 5:37
  Speaker 1: way more powerful than than some quote-unquote expert coming up
• 5:41
  Speaker 1: there and telling me some what-ifs or hypotheticals or about studies.
• 5:48
  Speaker 1: I don't need to see any studies, to be honest
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: with you. I've read what happened here. I have seen
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: the evidence. I have heard what the police department in
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: Palm Beach has had to say about this from the
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: very beginning. So I don't need Ms. Loftus to tell
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: me about false memories. And I think that the jury
• 6:09
  Speaker 1: is going to see it that way as well. Whereas
• 6:12
  Speaker 1: the jury just got done listening to the testimony from
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: the survivors, which was absolutely horrible and gut-wrenching to listen to.
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: And then that anchored by the testimony that Annie gave.
• 6:29
  Speaker 1: You would think that the defense is going to have
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: to come correct. Because what the jury has seen so far,
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: as far as a picture... Being painted. Is that Ghislaine Maxwell.
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: Was at the nexus of all of this. She had
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: her dirty little fingers. On the controls. And she was
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: right there with Jeffrey Epstein. For the whole entire thing.
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: And as far as. The defenses go so far. We
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: haven't seen anything from them. That would make me. or
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: I would think the jury, take a step back and say, oh,
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: maybe we've looked at this the wrong way. Maybe we've
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: missed something throughout this whole entire thing, and this has
• 7:08
  Speaker 1: been the key piece of evidence that proves that Maxwell
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: had nothing to do with this. I've been waiting for
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: that piece of evidence for, oh, I don't know, three
• 7:17
  Speaker 1: years now? And I certainly haven't seen it yet. So,
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: I really wonder what the plan's going to be for
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: the defense today. And... If they don't have something monumental,
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: I honestly don't see how Maxwell's going to get off here.
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: The mountain of evidence is that high, folks. And remember,
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: we're only talking about this small scope. If this was
• 7:43
  Speaker 1: the actual full scope of what went on, forget it.
• 7:47
  Speaker 1: Absolutely forget it. This would be the trial of trials
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: with all of the people that would be wrapped up
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: in it, even just on the fringes, right? And I
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: think a lot of people were hoping that that's what
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: this was going to be. And I've tried to tamper
• 8:03
  Speaker 1: down those expectations because I knew exactly what we were
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: getting into here. This was never going to be the
• 8:10
  Speaker 1: full Monty, the full exposure of Jeffrey Epstein and his cohorts.
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: That was never going to occur again. unless there was
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: a RICO case. Now, the only other way that this
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: can happen, where we can really get to the bottom
• 8:24
  Speaker 1: of all of this, is if that non-prosecution agreement is
• 8:28
  Speaker 1: thrown out by one of the higher courts, which would
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: have to be the Supreme Court at this point. Now,
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: if that happens, and all of those protections go away,
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: then it will be a brand new day, if you will,
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: in the world of bringing down the scumbags hanging out
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: with Jeffrey Epstein. But that non-prosecution agreement, it was put
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: in place for a reason. They knew what they were
• 8:52
  Speaker 1: doing and they were looking to provide themselves protection in
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: the future as well. And here we are, all these
• 9:00
  Speaker 1: years later, and that non-prosecution agreement still looming large. When
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: they were going through the process to try and get
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: that thing done away with, it was, I was very
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: hopeful that they'd be able to do that. But unfortunately,
• 9:20
  Speaker 1: the panel ruled 7-4 not to do it. What I'm
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: going to do later is I'm going to post an
• 9:26
  Speaker 1: episode about that. That whole entire situation with the NPA
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: and what occurred. Because it's a big deal and it's
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: a big part of the overall story, right? But when
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: we move back to what we saw yesterday and what
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: we're expecting to see today, I would hope that The
• 9:48
  Speaker 1: prosecution keeps up their good work that they really dove
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: into yesterday, with the procedure anyway. It was nice to
• 9:58
  Speaker 1: see them handle business. from their end. Short and sweet.
• 10:03
  Speaker 1: They didn't get into any kind of long, drawn out,
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: nonsensical BS. And they just hammered home their points. And
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: getting Dr. Loftus to agree about the memory stuff at
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: the end. That was a master stroke. Very, very good work.
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: And just about everybody that I've talked to who is
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: hip to how these things happen in the courtroom has
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: said the same thing about what the prosecution did yesterday
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: and how well things went for the prosecution. So I
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: hope that we can see some of that today as well.
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: I hope that carries over. But before we get there,
• 10:38
  Speaker 1: let's take a look at some of the headlines from
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: overnight that have to do with what we should see today. Now,
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: one of the first headlines we're going to look at
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: is from ABC News, and it's about how the judge,
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: Judge Nathan, she denied the request for anonymity for the
• 10:59
  Speaker 1: witnesses for Maxwell. Let's jump in here and see what's what.
• 11:04
  Speaker 1: Defense attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell, the longtime associate of serial
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, began to present their case on
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: Thursday after a judge denied their request to allow three
• 11:15
  Speaker 1: of their anticipated witnesses to testify under a pseudonym or
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: using only their first names. Now... When this was all
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: first talked about, I said, hey, whatever, who cares? If
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: that's the way the court rolls, then fine. You know, look,
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: I don't want to reinvent the wheel here, right? And
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: I don't want Ghislaine Maxwell having any kind of out
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: because of procedurals. But it is a very odd request
• 11:38
  Speaker 1: when you talk to people who are in the know here.
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: And I'm certainly not a court reporter, folks. I'm not
• 11:43
  Speaker 1: even a journalist. But when you speak to people who
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: follow this thing, this is a this kind of thing.
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: I mean, this is a very odd request, I guess.
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: And not something that is granted very often by the court.
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: So you can see why Judge Nathan wouldn't allow it.
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: This article goes on to say, So there you have it, right?
• 12:03
  Speaker 1: If it's never happened before, certainly not bending any rules
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: for Ghislaine Maxwell. Why would anyone want to do that?
• 12:32
  Speaker 1: The rules have been bent for her for way too
• 12:33
  Speaker 1: long anyway. So that's why Judge Nathan denied that request.
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: And that's why we're not going to see any of
• 12:43
  Speaker 1: these people come and give their testimony anonymously. That's not
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: going to happen. So let's see. What else do we
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: got here? We have... about Ghislaine Maxwell's ex-assistant, Kimberly Espinoza,
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: and how she was called up and how she was
• 13:07
  Speaker 1: gushing about Maxwell and this, that, the other thing. You know,
• 13:11
  Speaker 1: out of all of the people that have worked with
• 13:13
  Speaker 1: Maxwell and Epstein, this is the only one that they
• 13:16
  Speaker 1: have found that could come up there as a character witness?
• 13:19
  Speaker 1: So Kimberly Espinoza, she was the first witness called yesterday,
• 13:23
  Speaker 1: and she told the jury about her time working side-by-side
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: with Maxwell from 96 to 2002. And like we talked
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: about yesterday, she at first thought Maxwell and Epstein were
• 13:35
  Speaker 1: a couple, according to Espinoza's testimony. And then she... worked
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: at the Madison Avenue office with Epstein, and then she
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: worked as Maxwell's assistant, right? Now, Espinoza claimed that Epstein
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: asked her to send flowers to another woman, Selena Middlefart,
• 13:57
  Speaker 1: during that time behind Maxwell's back. What that does, what
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: that goes to show you and why I'm bringing that
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: up is to just to punch home the fact Maxwell
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: and Epstein were never an exclusive couple, right? Like, you
• 14:10
  Speaker 1: or I would be you and your significant other, where
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: you would never think about being with somebody else, or
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: hurting them, or anything like that. That wasn't what Epstein
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: and Maxwell were. It was a business arrangement. And I
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: know the official narrative doesn't state that, but the official
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: narrative doesn't state a lot of things that have been
• 14:28
  Speaker 1: proven to be correct. And I would think that after
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: all of these years... That people would be hip to
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: the fact that the legacy media is being lapped when
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: it comes to this story. The stuff that they bring up,
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: the stuff that they talk about, we have literally talked
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: about years ago. For instance, Shelley Ann Lewis, Gwendolyn Beck.
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: Those episodes, I uploaded those episodes a year and a half,
• 14:57
  Speaker 1: two years ago in some cases. So we've been talking
• 15:00
  Speaker 1: about these people for a very, very long time. And
• 15:03
  Speaker 1: to see that some of them are being brought up
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: here in the proceedings, it's certainly a step in the
• 15:08
  Speaker 1: right direction, but they need to go further. Because there
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: are so many other people that were involved in this
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: that it's insane to me that we're not seeing people
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: like Sarah Kellen Vickers or Adriana Ross. It's just almost
• 15:25
  Speaker 1: impossible for me to understand how... people who had such
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: a huge role in what went on here and people
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: who have actually been fingered by survivors have been able
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: to stay out of the firing line. And again, it
• 15:42
  Speaker 1: goes back to the scope, right? But at the very least,
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: these people should have been called up by the prosecution,
• 15:52
  Speaker 1: should have been hit with some kind of indictment or
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: pressured to come up and speak. Now, that's not what
• 16:00
  Speaker 1: this turned into, though. This is, you know, this is
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: very specific when it comes to the crimes that they're
• 16:08
  Speaker 1: talking about. And the fact that it is just being
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: brought up now, the fact that Ghislaine Maxwell was able
• 16:18
  Speaker 1: to avoid prosecution for so long is really... one of
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: the biggest issues with all of this, and one of
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: the biggest issues that has to be discussed even after
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: this case ends, this trial's over. Because the implications for
• 16:35
  Speaker 1: what occurred here are gigantic. The fact that there were
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: so many people who were hip to what's going on here,
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: and people that are in positions of power. The fact
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: that Acosta was left holding the bag when there are
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: so many people above him That should have been clipped
• 16:55
  Speaker 1: as well. The fact that the prosecutors in Florida the
• 16:59
  Speaker 1: first time around worked with the defense attorneys to undercut
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: the testimony and the credibility of the witnesses. This is
• 17:11
  Speaker 1: the kind of thing that has been happening in this
• 17:13
  Speaker 1: case since the very beginning. So when people are worried
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: that things are going to continue to go that way.
• 17:22
  Speaker 1: It's a legit concern, right? But what I will say
• 17:26
  Speaker 1: is this, folks. So far, when it comes to this
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: specific trial, this specific case, I don't think Maxwell has
• 17:35
  Speaker 1: done enough as far as her defense team and the
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: legal arguments that they have brought forward. I think that
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: what they have so far is really nothing. They're hoping
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: that the playbook from the early 2000s is going to
• 17:50
  Speaker 1: be relevant now. But just like Urban Meyer found out
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: down in Jacksonville, these are the pros. This isn't college anymore.
• 18:01
  Speaker 1: And it's the same for Maxwell. Things have changed. The
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: whole landscape has changed. The way people look at these
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: kinds of crimes has changed. And whenever there is a
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: woman involved in a manner such as this, people are
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: not very happy about it, right? And people are not
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: willing to look the other way. It becomes even more
• 18:27
  Speaker 1: heinous when a woman is involved. And a lot of
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: times when the jury sees that, they go hard in
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: the paint. So I'm expecting, unless there's some sort of
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: super bombshell that we can't anticipate... that we're going to
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: get a little bit more of the same today, and
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: that the prosecution is going to set themselves up for
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: another great day. I just don't see how any of
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: these witnesses that Maxwell's going to call are going to
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: be enough or have enough knowledge of what went on
• 18:58
  Speaker 1: here to punch holes in the argument of the four
• 19:02
  Speaker 1: survivors and the testimony that they've brought forward. Their stories
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: are all locked in together and everything that they talk about,
• 19:12
  Speaker 1: you can see the pattern in each separate case, how
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: it lines up. You could see how Maxwell and Epstein
• 19:20
  Speaker 1: groomed them. You can see how they brought them into
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: their orbit. And those are those foundational blocks that have
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: been built over the first two weeks of testimony. And
• 19:31
  Speaker 1: I think that as we get closer to a judgment
• 19:35
  Speaker 1: on Ghislaine Maxwell's future, I'm getting a little bit more
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: confident as these days go by. Now, I'll tell you what,
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: I really wasn't all that confident last week when the defense,
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: I mean, when the prosecution rested their case. I really,
• 19:49
  Speaker 1: you know, it took some time for me to sit
• 19:52
  Speaker 1: down and really say, all right, well, we'll see what's
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: going to happen here. But now after yesterday and seeing
• 20:00
  Speaker 1: how Dr. Loftus's testimony really didn't play well, I don't
• 20:05
  Speaker 1: see how they're going to be able to bring anyone
• 20:08
  Speaker 1: forward to punch holes in the memory argument here. If
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: their doctor, their big shot professional couldn't do it, I
• 20:17
  Speaker 1: doubt any of these other witnesses are going to be
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: able to do it. So today, we're going to see
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: what's up. We know we have three witnesses that the
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: defense is talking about calling. One of them, Eva. Another, Michelle.
• 20:32
  Speaker 1: And I believe one is Kelly. And for me, the
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: most interesting out of those names is Eva. I'm wondering
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: if it's Eva Dubin, but I highly doubt it. So
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: we'll see in a little while, I guess. Anyway, folks,
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: I'll be here, same as usual, taking notes, getting ready
• 20:48
  Speaker 1: for the evening update so we can go over a
• 20:52
  Speaker 1: little bit, at least, of what went on in the courtroom.
• 20:56
  Speaker 1: All right, everybody, until then, I hope you all have
• 20:59
  Speaker 1: a great day, and I will be back later. If
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: you'd like to contact me, you can do that at
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: bobbycapucci at protonmail.com. That's B-O-B-B-Y-C-A-P-U-C-C-I at protonmail.com. You can also
• 21:15
  Speaker 1: find me on Twitter at B-O-B-B-Y underscore C-A-P-U-C-C-I. Let's jump
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: into this article from Law and Crime and let's see
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: what the esteemed Adam Klassfeld has to say. Headline. Jeffrey
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: Epstein's plea deal doesn't protect Ghislaine Maxwell. Judge rules in
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: rejecting dismissal motions. Now, you all know how I feel
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: about Twitter. Place is an absolute shitshow. In fact, I
• 21:43
  Speaker 1: can't even log on to it right now. Some weird
• 21:45
  Speaker 1: message keeps popping up. Whatever. But if you're on Twitter
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: and you're interested in true crime and cases that are
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: working their way through the court, I highly suggest following
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: Adam Klassfeld. Dude's on point with all of the, uh,
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: all of the law situations that are going on in D.C.
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: and elsewhere, and he gives a very good overview and
• 22:09
  Speaker 1: puts things into a way that the common person can
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: understand what's going on, right? So, very rare I'll suggest
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: that you even use the cesspool known as Twitter, but
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: if you are on there and you aren't following Adam
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: Klassfeld and you you're interested in this kind of stuff,
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: not just Epstein and Maxwell, but other cases working their
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: way through the courts, then I definitely suggest giving him
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: a follow. Before being slapped with the new sex trafficking charges,
• 22:41
  Speaker 1: Ghislaine Maxwell filed a flurry of motions trying to scuttle
• 22:45
  Speaker 1: her case by arguing her indictment was time-barred and violated
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: a deal the U.S. government made with Jeffrey Epstein and
• 22:54
  Speaker 1: more than a decade ago. Now, usually federal cases are
• 23:00
  Speaker 1: time barred by five years, but when there's a child involved,
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: a youth involved, then you can prosecute people for their
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: whole entire life, right? There's no getting off on statute
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: of limitations when there's a little kid. Usually it's five years,
• 23:20
  Speaker 1: but Not in the case of children being abused. So, Maxwell,
• 23:28
  Speaker 1: she was trying to get all of this stuff thrown out,
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: as you all well know. She wants all of this
• 23:32
  Speaker 1: stuff tossed. She says none of this stuff is viable.
• 23:35
  Speaker 1: This never happened. She, wasn't me. I wasn't there. Must
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: have been my twin sister. And the judge just isn't
• 23:46
  Speaker 1: having it. The judge is like, look, you're going to
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: stand trial. You're going to face a jury of your peers,
• 23:53
  Speaker 1: and the chips are going to fall wherever they may.
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: But if you think you're wiggling off this hook before
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: the trial even begins, think again. Maxwell's many motions fell
• 24:07
  Speaker 1: flat before a federal judge on Friday, except for one,
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: dividing her future trial into two. So... She's going to
• 24:15
  Speaker 1: be charged in two separate trials now. The perjury charges
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: are going to be carried into a different trial. That way,
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: it doesn't bleed over from the defamation case into this
• 24:30
  Speaker 1: new case with stuff that might not be admissible. It's
• 24:34
  Speaker 1: a bunch of legal jargon type stuff, folks. You know,
• 24:37
  Speaker 1: we all know the system isn't set up for people
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: like us, right? It's not even set up for us
• 24:42
  Speaker 1: to understand half the time. You have to sit down
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: and like really dive into case law and shit to
• 24:47
  Speaker 1: even understand half of this stuff. And when I'm engaging
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: in that sort of research and I'm reading case law
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: and I'm reading all this other jazz, my eyes start
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: to glaze over. It's just so boring to me. But
• 25:03
  Speaker 1: when you got a case like this, you have to
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: expect all kinds of craziness and bumps in the road
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: and curves and so on. While I never expected the
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: case to get split into two trials, nothing shocks me
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: at this point, right? Nothing at all. So what I
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: hope is that the original trial scheduled for the 12th
• 25:24
  Speaker 1: still goes on. And then this next trial maybe is
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: the one that they do in 2022. That's what I'm hoping.
• 25:32
  Speaker 1: But again, I have no clue how this will all break.
• 25:39
  Speaker 1: One of Maxwell's multiple attacks on her prosecution stemmed from
• 25:43
  Speaker 1: the peculiar provision in the sweetheart plea deal federal prosecutors
• 25:47
  Speaker 1: in Florida signed with Epstein in 2007. A non-prosecution agreement
• 25:53
  Speaker 1: purporting to shield Epstein's potential co-conspirators. It's so weird. Like,
• 26:00
  Speaker 1: who gets a deal like that? I mean, look, let's
• 26:05
  Speaker 1: be very real and very frank. If anybody thinks that
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: I enjoy sitting here talking about this case every single day,
• 26:12
  Speaker 1: putting all of this time into this case every single day,
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: they're wrong. There are plenty of other things I'd rather
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: be talking about. But when you open the curtain a
• 26:24
  Speaker 1: little bit, and you take a look at all the
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: wild shit that occurred in this case, and you see
• 26:30
  Speaker 1: all of the injustice that has taken place, and you
• 26:34
  Speaker 1: see how the federal government has basically just stomped on
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: all of these survivors of Jeffrey Epstein for decades, I
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: don't know how you can ignore it. I just don't
• 26:47
  Speaker 1: know how people ignore this kind of thing. And again,
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: I'm certainly not some sort of advocate for anybody. What
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: I am, though, is tired of the justice system not working.
• 27:04
  Speaker 1: And this just magnifies it to a degree that is blinding. U.S.
• 27:12
  Speaker 1: District Judge Allison Nathan noted that Epstein signed the deal
• 27:15
  Speaker 1: with the Southern District of Florida, not the Southern District
• 27:19
  Speaker 1: of New York. And we've talked about this a bunch
• 27:22
  Speaker 1: and a lot of other people did as well. People
• 27:24
  Speaker 1: that are much more well-versed in the world of legal
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: matters than myself have said the same thing. There's no
• 27:32
  Speaker 1: way the plea deal was going to carry over from
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: Florida to New York. That shit was signed in the
• 27:39
  Speaker 1: state of Florida. So, he's not being prosecuted on those crimes.
• 27:47
  Speaker 1: I mean, she's not being prosecuted on those crimes. They're
• 27:50
  Speaker 1: being prosecuted on a whole new set of crimes that
• 27:53
  Speaker 1: allegedly occurred in New York. The court concludes that the
• 27:58
  Speaker 1: agreement does not apply in the district or to the
• 28:02
  Speaker 1: charged offenses, Nathan wrote in a 34-page opinion. She's definitely
• 28:06
  Speaker 1: not wrong about that, right? I mean, how can you
• 28:09
  Speaker 1: even attempt to try and weasel your way into that
• 28:13
  Speaker 1: plea deal that happened in Florida and try and get
• 28:16
  Speaker 1: it to cover you in New York? That don't make
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: any sense whatsoever. And again it's just her lawyers. Look
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: they're running out of road folks. They are literally running
• 28:27
  Speaker 1: out of road. What are they going to do? The
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: time is coming. Where all the talk. All the BS.
• 28:39
  Speaker 1: It's all going to be over with. The trial is
• 28:42
  Speaker 1: going to start. And then we'll see. Just exactly what
• 28:48
  Speaker 1: Maxwell has. Because as of now, she's in big trouble.
• 28:59
  Speaker 1: When prosecutors first charged Maxwell in July 2020, the indictment
• 29:03
  Speaker 1: related to conduct between 1994 to 1997. Though federal law
• 29:10
  Speaker 1: typically imposes a five-year statute of limitations for most non-capital offenses...
• 29:16
  Speaker 1: Congress granted prosecutors more latitude for crimes involving children through
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: the passage of the Protect Act of 2003, which allowed
• 29:25
  Speaker 1: for prosecution during any time of the life of the victim.
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: So there you have it. That's what I was talking
• 29:33
  Speaker 1: about a little bit ago. And, you know, it's serious
• 29:37
  Speaker 1: jeopardy for these people. And that should have always been
• 29:39
  Speaker 1: the case. There should be no, in this instance, a
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: statute of limitations when there's all this evidence and all
• 29:47
  Speaker 1: of this circumstantial evidence that's been provided to the public even.
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: And Lord knows what the prosecution has. Videos and pictures and,
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: I mean, come on now. When you have this sort
• 30:02
  Speaker 1: of evidence and all of these witnesses, there has to
• 30:07
  Speaker 1: be a remedy. So I'm glad that the PROTECT Act
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: was passed in 2003. And I'm glad that it gives
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: them the opportunity to attempt to right such a grievous wrong.
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: The judge rejected the argument by Maxwell's defense counsel that
• 30:26
  Speaker 1: the law did not have retroactive applications. Maxwell contends that
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: it is unfair to allow the government to prosecute her
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: now for conduct that occurred more than 20 years ago.
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: But there is no dispute that Congress has the power
• 30:43
  Speaker 1: to set a lengthy limitations period or no limitations period
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: at all, the ruling states. So Congress made the ruling, right?
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: Let's remember, Congress makes the law, right? Congress, they're the
• 30:56
  Speaker 1: ones who pass laws, okay? It's the judge's job. to
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: uphold those laws. Not to interpret them like the 11th
• 31:06
  Speaker 1: Circuit Court of Appeals did, but to uphold them. So
• 31:12
  Speaker 1: if Congress has stated with this act that they have
• 31:14
  Speaker 1: passed that Maxwell can be pursued, then gloves are off.
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: Whatever legal remedy there is, they should be pursuing it.
• 31:25
  Speaker 1: I'm talking hit her with every single charge in the book. Hell,
• 31:30
  Speaker 1: that's what they do to regular people. I've seen people
• 31:34
  Speaker 1: get hit with a CVS, Walgreens-type receipt. You know how
• 31:43
  Speaker 1: long those things are? Full of Ricoh charges. Mid-level, minor
• 31:50
  Speaker 1: league-type people. getting the business thrown at them. You know why?
• 31:55
  Speaker 1: Because the government knows that they can do that. The government,
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: in most instances, is the biggest bully of them all.
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: But in this case, when they should be flexing, when
• 32:07
  Speaker 1: they should be bullies, they're not. And I think that's
• 32:13
  Speaker 1: what's so confounding about this case. And I think that's
• 32:16
  Speaker 1: why so many people are fired up. It is done
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: so here, judging that the difficulty of prosecuting these offenses
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: and the harm they work on children outweighs the defendant's
• 32:27
  Speaker 1: interest in repose. Maxwell's fairness argument is a gripe with
• 32:32
  Speaker 1: Congress's policy judgment, not an impermissibly retroactive application of the statute.
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: So again, like I was just saying, it sounds like
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: your beef is with Congress there, Ghislaine. Maybe you guys
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: didn't give them enough money. Maybe you and Jeffrey should
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: have given your buddies a little bit more money. How
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: much did Chuckie Schumer get? Oh yeah, a ton. Should
• 32:56
  Speaker 1: we go through the list again of all the people
• 32:57
  Speaker 1: that got money? How much did good old Pete Buttigieg
• 33:01
  Speaker 1: receive before he gave the money back? Oh, I gave
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: the money back. Give me a break. All these clown-ass politicians.
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: I guess you didn't go far enough though, Ghislaine. I
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: guess you didn't grease enough hands. Stuff enough pockets. You know, before,
• 33:16
  Speaker 1: Before you know it, folks, Ghislaine Maxwell will be talking
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: all kinds of other rubbish, and she'll be saying how,
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: you know, oh, well, I'm at this facility now, and
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: they're giving me a computer, but it doesn't have Netflix.
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: That'll be like the next argument from her. It's just
• 33:37
  Speaker 1: so absurd. Everything about her arguments here, every sort of
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: defense that her or her team brings up is just
• 33:46
  Speaker 1: more ludicrous than the last one. Maxwell did manage to
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: notch a narrow win, allowing her to cut her trials
• 33:55
  Speaker 1: into two, and that's what I was talking about in
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: the beginning. She's going to be charged separately for the perjury,
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: and then for the other counts, that will be the case,
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: the criminal portion of this case that we've been discussing.
• 34:11
  Speaker 1: One will focus on allegations that she groomed and abused
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: women and girls for Epstein's predation. And the other will
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: determine whether she lied in depositions while fighting defamation claims
• 34:23
  Speaker 1: by one of the alleged survivors, Virginia Roberts. So again,
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: we'll have one on the perjury. It's going to focus
• 34:30
  Speaker 1: on the lying. And I'm sure there's going to be
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: some more sultry, disgusting information brought up in that case
• 34:38
  Speaker 1: as well. Stuff we haven't seen yet. Stuff's going to
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: get unsealed. We're going to get to a discovery phase.
• 34:42
  Speaker 1: Going to be pretty gnarly, I'm guessing. And then, of course,
• 34:46
  Speaker 1: we have the big dog. Where Maxwell's looking at life
• 34:50
  Speaker 1: in prison. And that's these other charges. The trafficking charges
• 34:56
  Speaker 1: and those. So, we got ourselves a bit of a
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: split here. You know, we got one trial coming up
• 35:05
  Speaker 1: at hopefully July 12th, and then this next trial. Who
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: the hell knows? I mean, again, I'm certainly not a lawyer.
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: Does this kind of thing happen concurrently? I don't even know, honestly.
• 35:17
  Speaker 1: Although some allegations of sexual abuse are relevant to both
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: sets of charges, many are not, Nathan wrote. At a minimum,
• 35:25
  Speaker 1: this will expand the scope of the trial far beyond
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: the more narrow issues presented. So... she's saying she wants
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: to stay focused on those main charges. And with the
• 35:39
  Speaker 1: other issues and the defamation case blending into it, it'll
• 35:43
  Speaker 1: widen the scope massively, at least according to Judge Nathan's
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: ruling here. And while the court agrees with the government
• 35:53
  Speaker 1: that at least some of Maxwell's concerns are overstated, there
• 35:56
  Speaker 1: is little question that the jury's consideration of the nature
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: of the defamation action will require a significant investment of time,
• 36:05
  Speaker 1: and resources to provide the requisite context. So, she thinks
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: that two trials are going to be necessary so that
• 36:21
  Speaker 1: things can be streamlined. At least that's the way it
• 36:24
  Speaker 1: looks to me. She doesn't want to have this all
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: balled into one trial. She wants to make sure it's
• 36:30
  Speaker 1: two separate dockets so that things are moving at a
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: proper clip. Would be my guess. The pair of new
• 36:44
  Speaker 1: sex trafficking charges that federal prosecutors filed against Maxwell since
• 36:49
  Speaker 1: she filed her motions are not covered by the judge's ruling.
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: Those new charges extend the length of the alleged conspiracy
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: until 2004 and introduce a minor victim, Four, who first
• 37:03
  Speaker 1: agreed to be interviewed by the government last summer. So remember,
• 37:07
  Speaker 1: it was 94 to 97 originally, and then it expanded
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: another seven years into 2004 when they hit her with
• 37:15
  Speaker 1: that superseded indictment. According to prosecutors, coronavirus error restrictions made
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: an in-person interview unworkable until this past January. I mean, okay,
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: I guess, right? That's in the past now though, right? Again,
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: I don't want to hear these coronavirus excuses when it
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: comes to matters of law, folks. We have to keep
• 37:41
  Speaker 1: on getting on, right? Everything's opening up. People are going
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: back to work. Things are starting to move in the
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: right direction. I heard the other day like 50% of
• 37:51
  Speaker 1: American adults have already gotten at least one jab. So
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: the coronavirus stuff, as far as using it as an
• 37:58
  Speaker 1: excuse legally, it's really getting to be annoying to me, honestly.
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: We have to function and we have to keep things moving,
• 38:06
  Speaker 1: all right? Over the next two months, the government worked
• 38:13
  Speaker 1: expeditiously to conduct additional investigation to corroborate minor victim number four,
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: including by interviewing additional witnesses, reviewing documents that have already
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: been produced to the defense in discovery, and subpoenaing additional records,
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: which the government promptly produced to the defense upon receipt,
• 38:34
  Speaker 1: the government revealed earlier this month. So, the government saying
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: that it has met and exceeded expectations when it comes
• 38:45
  Speaker 1: to records and paperwork and things that have to do
• 38:51
  Speaker 1: with the case and with Maxwell's defense according to the
• 38:55
  Speaker 1: government they have been all over that banging it out
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: making sure that it happens making sure Maxwell's team has
• 39:02
  Speaker 1: everything that they need and Maxwell's team on the other
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: hand says that's not the case the computers broke this
• 39:10
  Speaker 1: that the other thing obviously the truth is somewhere in
• 39:14
  Speaker 1: the middle right We're dealing with two prolific liars, folks.
• 39:18
  Speaker 1: The federal government and Ghislaine Maxwell. So who are you
• 39:22
  Speaker 1: going to believe? Maxwell has moved to pause her trial,
• 39:27
  Speaker 1: which is currently scheduled for July 12th, this year. Prosecutors
• 39:32
  Speaker 1: signaled that they will oppose this measure. Her lawyer did
• 39:35
  Speaker 1: not immediately respond to an email requesting comment. And now
• 39:40
  Speaker 1: in the description box, you'll find this link. And inside
• 39:44
  Speaker 1: of this link, you'll have the whole entire ruling from
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: Judge Nathan, all 34 pages. So I suggest if you
• 39:52
  Speaker 1: want to give that a glimpse, that you do so.
• 39:55
  Speaker 1: I always think it's a good idea to read the
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: original documents. And look, folks, this is going to be
• 40:03
  Speaker 1: a journey, right? This is going to be quite the
• 40:08
  Speaker 1: roller coaster. So buckle up and prepare yourselves. One thing
• 40:15
  Speaker 1: is for certain. Ghislaine Maxwell is going to be judged
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: by a jury of her peers. If you'd like to
• 40:25
  Speaker 1: contact me, you can do that at bobbycapucci at protonmail.com.
• 40:30
  Speaker 1: That's B-O-B-B-Y-C-A-P-U-C-C-I at protonmail.com. You can also find me on Twitter.
• 40:45
  Speaker 1: All of the links that go with this episode can
• 40:47
  Speaker 1: be found in the description box. As for this morning, look,
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: we all know I'm not a big fan of David
• 40:55
  Speaker 1: Oscar Marcus, one of Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys. But with that said,
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: I think that the judge did the right thing here
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: by not giving him any kind of penalty for speaking out.
• 41:07
  Speaker 1: I think He's within his rights to speak out on
• 41:10
  Speaker 1: the case, right? I mean, look, at this point, I
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: don't think anything he has to say is going to
• 41:18
  Speaker 1: sway anybody, to be honest with you. Now, with that said,
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: he has certain guidelines he has to follow as a lawyer,
• 41:24
  Speaker 1: just like the prosecutors, and he can't step out of
• 41:27
  Speaker 1: line when it comes to whatever those rules are. But
• 41:32
  Speaker 1: with his editorial, with his article in the Daily News,
• 41:35
  Speaker 1: while I found it to be ridiculous... I don't think
• 41:39
  Speaker 1: that it was something he should be sanctioned for. So
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: let's jump into this article from Law and Crime and
• 41:46
  Speaker 1: let's see what Adam Klassfeld has to say about Oscar
• 41:51
  Speaker 1: David Marcus and the op-ed. Headline, Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyer won't
• 41:57
  Speaker 1: face discipline for writing op-ed comparing his client to Bill Cosby.
• 42:02
  Speaker 1: This article was authored by Adam Klassfeld. Also, if you
• 42:09
  Speaker 1: don't follow Adam on Twitter, I suggest you do if
• 42:13
  Speaker 1: you follow the Epstein case because he has some good
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: stuff and his legal analysis of this case has been
• 42:19
  Speaker 1: spot on. Admonishing the attorney not write another editorial like
• 42:26
  Speaker 1: it again before trial, a federal judge declined to discipline
• 42:30
  Speaker 1: Ghislaine Maxwell's appellate lawyer for writing a New York Daily
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: News op-ed claiming that his client should be freed just
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: as Bill Cosby was. And again, I think that's the
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: right decision, right? Look, I don't think they need to
• 42:43
  Speaker 1: overly censure anybody, right? I believe that people should be
• 42:47
  Speaker 1: able to speak out. I believe people should be able
• 42:49
  Speaker 1: to have their freedom of expression and opinion for sure.
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: But if you're a lawyer attached to this case, not
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: just a pundit or a news person, you have to
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: be real careful what you say, right? You're attached to
• 43:01
  Speaker 1: the case. You're attached to the actual people who are
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: facing trial or whatever it may be. And if you're
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: part of that defense team, you should make sure that
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: you have all of your P's and Q's in order,
• 43:15
  Speaker 1: shall we say, all of your ducks in a row. Now,
• 43:18
  Speaker 1: I thought he towed the line here, right? But I
• 43:21
  Speaker 1: didn't think he went too far, right? I never thought
• 43:23
  Speaker 1: he'd get censured for this. This court is cognizant that
• 43:30
  Speaker 1: criminal matters heading toward trial are especially sensitive to extrajudicial statements, U.S.
• 43:36
  Speaker 1: District Judge Allison Nathan said. All those associated with this
• 43:40
  Speaker 1: case must act to ensure the case is tried solely
• 43:43
  Speaker 1: in court. Or else they risk being deemed responsible for
• 43:48
  Speaker 1: any trial delay or for undermining the integrity of the
• 43:52
  Speaker 1: upcoming trial. Pretty powerful words from the judge. And that
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: was an open-ended statement, right? She's talking to the prosecutors
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: as well. And I think she should. I don't think
• 44:02
  Speaker 1: that the prosecutors have to go out of bounds to
• 44:05
  Speaker 1: nail Epstein, okay? I think there's so much evidence here.
• 44:08
  Speaker 1: Excuse me, Maxwell. There's so much evidence here. to get Maxwell,
• 44:13
  Speaker 1: convict Maxwell, that the prosecution doesn't have to get up
• 44:16
  Speaker 1: to its usual tricks. And when I say its usual tricks,
• 44:20
  Speaker 1: you know what I mean, right? You think the federal
• 44:21
  Speaker 1: government plays fair? Yeah, right. The federal government, if you're
• 44:26
  Speaker 1: in their crosshairs, you better batten down the hatchets, folks.
• 44:31
  Speaker 1: You better be ready for the fight of your life.
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: Though her ruling concerns an editorial by Maxwell's appellate lawyer,
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: David Marcus, Judge Nathan made clear that the concern is
• 44:43
  Speaker 1: not one-sided. Maxwell's defense attorneys previously accused the U.S. Attorney's
• 44:48
  Speaker 1: Office of compromising the accused sex trafficker's right to a
• 44:52
  Speaker 1: fair trial by speaking about the case when her indictment
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: was first unveiled roughly one year ago. You know, again,
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: I'm very... rough on the prosecution and the Department of
• 45:07
  Speaker 1: Justice and the federal government. You all know that. I
• 45:09
  Speaker 1: am certainly not an ally, okay? Not in the least.
• 45:13
  Speaker 1: And when they step out of line, I like them
• 45:15
  Speaker 1: to get slapped. Nobody is above the law, especially the lawmakers.
• 45:21
  Speaker 1: I know, it's a novel idea. It's like you're at
• 45:23
  Speaker 1: a TED Talk or something, right? I mean, these fucking
• 45:26
  Speaker 1: people are unbelievable. Excuse my language, but man, they really
• 45:30
  Speaker 1: elicit the New York Ginzaloon in me sometimes, and I
• 45:35
  Speaker 1: want to go on a tirade that would make Tony
• 45:37
  Speaker 1: Soprano blush. Going forward, Mr. Marcus and all lawyers associated
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: with the pending case are now clearly on notice that
• 45:48
  Speaker 1: their conduct falls under the purview of local criminal rule 23.1,
• 45:53
  Speaker 1: Judge Nathan wrote in a three-page order referring to the
• 45:57
  Speaker 1: Southern District of New York's fair trial directives. Indeed, The
• 46:01
  Speaker 1: above concerns do not apply only to Mr. Marcus. So
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: all of the lawyers concerned here better be on notice, right?
• 46:11
  Speaker 1: Allison Moe, Maureen Comey, Audrey Strauss, whoever's working the case.
• 46:19
  Speaker 1: No need for it. Keep everything close to the vest
• 46:22
  Speaker 1: like you always do and keep on keeping on. Unless,
• 46:27
  Speaker 1: of course, you're coming out to announce some new Charges,
• 46:30
  Speaker 1: maybe some Rico charges, you know, might be nice. Maybe
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: if Ghislaine Maxwell's last name was like, I don't know, Gambino,
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: there would be some Rico charges. That's why it cracks
• 46:44
  Speaker 1: me up when David Oscar Marcus acts like Ghislaine Maxwell
• 46:48
  Speaker 1: is getting the world dropped on her. She's getting off light.
• 46:52
  Speaker 1: Take a look at people who engage in sex trafficking,
• 46:54
  Speaker 1: human trafficking, these sorts of charges, intimidation, coercion. And look
• 47:00
  Speaker 1: at how the hammer gets dropped on them right away.
• 47:05
  Speaker 1: So from where I'm sitting, Oscar Marcus, your client is
• 47:09
  Speaker 1: getting the top-tier treatment. The latest dust-up over an out-of-court
• 47:19
  Speaker 1: statement in the Maxwell case concerns an op-ed by Marcus titled,
• 47:23
  Speaker 1: Bill Cosby is free. Ghislaine Maxwell should be too. Yeah,
• 47:27
  Speaker 1: not so much, buddy. Apples and oranges, okay? Now, don't
• 47:32
  Speaker 1: get me wrong. Same essence, right? We're in the same neighborhood,
• 47:36
  Speaker 1: but it's not the same address. Bill Cosby, sick bastard.
• 47:41
  Speaker 1: I don't think he should be free. I think that
• 47:43
  Speaker 1: there's enough evidence there that Bill Cosby is more than
• 47:47
  Speaker 1: likely guilty of those crimes. He should be in jail. Now,
• 47:52
  Speaker 1: Ghislaine Maxwell, on the other hand, oh, the evidence is
• 47:55
  Speaker 1: a mountain high, a mountain higher. How much higher do
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: you want to go? If you go any higher, you'll
• 48:00
  Speaker 1: be hanging out with Bezos in space. How much more
• 48:05
  Speaker 1: evidence is needed? We don't get a MANAC charge here.
• 48:08
  Speaker 1: There's no RICO charges. I mean, what do they think?
• 48:12
  Speaker 1: We're all students? The Pennsylvania Supreme Court did the right
• 48:19
  Speaker 1: thing when it threw out Bill Cosby's convictions because prosecutors cheated,
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: Marcus argued in the first line of his op-ed. And look,
• 48:25
  Speaker 1: I agree. When prosecutors cheat, there should be repercussions and
• 48:29
  Speaker 1: the case probably should be thrown out. Put yourself in
• 48:33
  Speaker 1: that position or your loved one. You want your loved
• 48:35
  Speaker 1: one to be railroaded by the federal government, the most
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: powerful entity on earth? And that's not hyperbole, folks. So
• 48:42
  Speaker 1: if the government's going after people, they at least have
• 48:45
  Speaker 1: to be fair about it, right? So I get that.
• 48:48
  Speaker 1: I'm not, I have no beef with that part of
• 48:51
  Speaker 1: the argument. I agree. The government needs to watch its
• 48:54
  Speaker 1: P's and Q's. How many times do we hear about
• 48:57
  Speaker 1: the FBI having, you know, undercover FBI agents or informants
• 49:01
  Speaker 1: incite terrorists into a terrorist act and then act like
• 49:04
  Speaker 1: they stopped the next Al Qaeda movement? So please, we
• 49:09
  Speaker 1: know your track record over at the FBI. Two days
• 49:15
  Speaker 1: after the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling, Maxwell's lawyers claim the
• 49:19
  Speaker 1: accused sex traffickers... case presents a similar situation to Cosby's,
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: in that both supposedly included promises not to prosecute. Then
• 49:29
  Speaker 1: Montgomery County District Attorney Bruce Castor issued a press release
• 49:33
  Speaker 1: passing on charges against Cosby in 2005, which Cosby claimed
• 49:38
  Speaker 1: he relied upon when he sat for a deposition in
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: a civil case filed by his alleged victim, Andrea Constand. So, again,
• 49:47
  Speaker 1: technicalities and loopholes. Now, are you guilty or are you
• 49:51
  Speaker 1: not guilty, Bill Cosby? Right? These loopholes and shit. Again,
• 49:55
  Speaker 1: you notice this isn't for Kalief Browder or your friend
• 49:59
  Speaker 1: who's doing 10 in the penitentiary, right? They're not getting
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: off on any technicalities. Only rich people are. You know why?
• 50:06
  Speaker 1: Because his lawyers, well... You're not paying for their behavior
• 50:10
  Speaker 1: in the courtroom. You're buying their connections. You're buying their friendships.
• 50:14
  Speaker 1: You're buying the relationships that they have created throughout the years.
• 50:19
  Speaker 1: And that's why rich people get off. And that's why
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: you and I, well, that's why we go to jail.
• 50:26
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's lawyers liken that to the unusual 2007 non-prosecution agreement
• 50:32
  Speaker 1: federal prosecutors signed with Jeffrey Epstein, which purported to shield
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: his accused co-conspirators... Of their conduct. Yeah in Florida. In Florida.
• 50:43
  Speaker 1: Okay this has already been established. The appeals court. The
• 50:47
  Speaker 1: judge in the irregular court. The prosecutors. The legal analysts. Experts.
• 50:53
  Speaker 1: The only people that are still. Turning over the same
• 50:56
  Speaker 1: ground here. Is Maxwell's legal team. And I am convinced.
• 51:01
  Speaker 1: That's because they know. They don't have the evidence. To
• 51:04
  Speaker 1: see their client through this. That's because they know. There's
• 51:08
  Speaker 1: no shot. If we're just going on the evidence, we're
• 51:11
  Speaker 1: basing this on the evidence, Maxwell's goose is cooked. There's
• 51:16
  Speaker 1: no way they're going to be able to get her off,
• 51:19
  Speaker 1: in my opinion. Judge Nathan already has rejected Maxwell's argument
• 51:25
  Speaker 1: that the deal insulates her from criminal prosecution. In both cases,
• 51:30
  Speaker 1: the alleged promises were made by attorneys with Donald Trump ties.
• 51:34
  Speaker 1: Why should that surprise anybody at this point? Donald Trump's
• 51:38
  Speaker 1: a fellow traveler with all these dudes. Ken Starr, Castor,
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: you name it. So, shouldn't surprise anybody. Castor, who declined
• 51:53
  Speaker 1: to prosecute Cosby, later went on to represent the 45th
• 51:56
  Speaker 1: president in his second impeachment proceedings. The former U.S. attorney
• 52:00
  Speaker 1: behind Epstein's non-prosecution deal, Alexander Acosta, later went on to
• 52:05
  Speaker 1: become Trump's Secretary of Labor. This connection went unmentioned in
• 52:09
  Speaker 1: the Daily News op-ed. Well, it's because it's kind of
• 52:13
  Speaker 1: pointless to throw in there, right? Look, we all get it.
• 52:15
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump's an unsavory character. I don't think anybody's, you know,
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: declining that, right? We all know that Donald Trump is
• 52:24
  Speaker 1: not a quality human being, all right? But I don't
• 52:31
  Speaker 1: think that It would have helped David Marcus's op-ed if
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: he would have added that little tidbit, I guess is
• 52:37
  Speaker 1: what I'm trying to say. The day after the editorial ran,
• 52:42
  Speaker 1: Assistant U.S. Attorney Allison Moe brought the judge's attention to
• 52:45
  Speaker 1: the article and Marcus's comments to the newspaper's reporter, Stephen
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: Rex Brown, during Maxwell's first in-person court appearance some months earlier.
• 52:55
  Speaker 1: The prosecutor asked the judge to instruct Marcus to comply
• 52:58
  Speaker 1: with local rules. Her letter did not request the attorney's
• 53:02
  Speaker 1: discipline and the judge did not issue any, letting him
• 53:06
  Speaker 1: and all other attorneys on the case off with a warning.
• 53:09
  Speaker 1: And that's the right way to do this, right? I
• 53:11
  Speaker 1: think let's reserve some punishment for when somebody really steps
• 53:16
  Speaker 1: out of bounds. And I don't doubt that it's going
• 53:18
  Speaker 1: to happen as the case gets closer. Guys like David
• 53:21
  Speaker 1: Oscar Marcus can't help themselves. The better call Saul of
• 53:25
  Speaker 1: the appellate court, he can't help himself. The sixth man
• 53:30
  Speaker 1: on the bench, the swing man, he can't help himself. Mr.
• 53:37
  Speaker 1: Marcus has attended a proceeding in this court, after which
• 53:40
  Speaker 1: he spoke to the press on Ms. Maxwell's behalf. Judge
• 53:43
  Speaker 1: Nathan noted, he has represented Ms. Maxwell on appeals of
• 53:47
  Speaker 1: this court's pretrial bail determinations. Moreover, Mr. Marcus has identified
• 53:53
  Speaker 1: himself as Ms. Maxwell's appellate lawyer in a published op-ed
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: discussing his opinion of the merits of this case. These
• 54:00
  Speaker 1: facts mean that the public, which includes potential jurors, may
• 54:04
  Speaker 1: perceive Mr. Marcus as an authoritative source. Yeah, well, let's
• 54:09
  Speaker 1: not get carried away, okay? And anyone thinking he's an
• 54:11
  Speaker 1: authoritative source might need to get a little bit of
• 54:14
  Speaker 1: comprehension work done in their brain. of information regarding the
• 54:19
  Speaker 1: pending matter and may readily consider his remarks to be
• 54:22
  Speaker 1: accurate and reliable. Yeah, I mean, sure, if you thought
• 54:26
  Speaker 1: Baghdad Bob was accurate and reliable as America rolled into Baghdad,
• 54:31
  Speaker 1: then I guess you could look at him as reliable.
• 54:35
  Speaker 1: The judge emphasized that there will be consequences if she
• 54:37
  Speaker 1: finds the rules has been violated. In addition to the
• 54:41
  Speaker 1: impact it could have on this matter, Failure to comply
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: could also result in attorney discipline, she said. Maxwell's trial
• 54:50
  Speaker 1: has been slated for November. And inside of the article,
• 54:54
  Speaker 1: you can see the judge's ruling like usual. This will
• 54:57
  Speaker 1: be in the description box like usual. And once again,
• 55:02
  Speaker 1: I didn't think that there would be any discipline. Prosecutors
• 55:05
  Speaker 1: didn't ask for any discipline. I think it was kind
• 55:07
  Speaker 1: of just a shot over the bow, right? Hey, look,
• 55:10
  Speaker 1: watch your step. Don't be more of a jackass than
• 55:13
  Speaker 1: you usually are, or there will be consequences. And I
• 55:18
  Speaker 1: think that was the message that was trying to be
• 55:20
  Speaker 1: sent by the prosecution in this instance. So we'll see
• 55:25
  Speaker 1: how it all goes, but I highly doubt we've heard
• 55:28
  Speaker 1: the last from Oscar David Marcus moving forward in the
• 55:32
  Speaker 1: Ghislaine Maxwell trial. If you'd like to contact me, you
• 55:36
  Speaker 1: can do that at bobbycapucci at protonmail.com. That's B-O-B-B-Y-C-A-P-U-C-C-I at protonmail.com.
• 55:46
  Speaker 1: You can also find me on Twitter at B-O-B-B-Y underscore C-A-P-U-C-C-I.
• 55:53
  Speaker 1: All of the links that go with this episode can
• 55:56
  Speaker 1: be found in the description box. All right, everybody. I
• 56:00
  Speaker 1: will be back later on, and we will pick up
• 56:03
  Speaker 1: where we belong. Left. Off.