Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Mega Edition: The DOJ Lights Ghislaine Maxwell Up In Their Response To Her Appeal Request (Part 1-3) (9/5/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: The DOJ Lights Ghislaine Maxwell Up In Their Response To Her Appeal Request (Part 1-3) (9/5/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: In this episode we're going to begin taking a look
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: at the United States government and the brief in regard
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: to Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt to get an appeal. The United
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Case number 22-1426.
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: United States of America versus Ghislaine Maxwell also known as
• 0:27
  Speaker 1: SEAL Defendant number one. The brief for the United States
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: of America. Preliminary Statement. Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal from a judgment
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: of conviction entered on June 29, 2022, in the United
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: States District Court for the Southern District of New York
• 0:43
  Speaker 1: by the Honorable Allison J. Nathan, United States Circuit Judge,
• 0:48
  Speaker 1: sitting by designation following a four-and-a-half-week jury trial. The superseding indictment, S-2-20-CR-330-AJN,
• 0:54
  Speaker 1: the indictment, was filed on March 29, 2021, in eight counts.
• 1:02
  Speaker 1: Count one, charge Maxwell with conspiracy to entice minors to
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: travel to engage in illegal sex acts in violation of U.S.
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: Code 18, Section 371. Count two, charge Maxwell with the
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: enticement of a minor in violation of 18 U.S. Code,
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: Section 2422. And two, count three, charge Maxwell with conspiracy
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: to transport minors to engage in illegal sexual activity in
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: violation of U.S. Code 18, Section 371. Count 4. Charge
• 1:32
  Speaker 1: Maxwell with transportation of a minor with intent to engage
• 1:36
  Speaker 1: in illegal sexual activity, in violation of U.S. Code 18,
• 1:40
  Speaker 1: Section 2423A and 2. Count 5. Charge Maxwell with sex
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: trafficking conspiracy, in violation of U.S. Code 18, Section 371.
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: Count 6. Charge Maxwell with sex trafficking of a minor,
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: in violation of U.S. Code 18, Section 1591A and B2
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: and 2. Count 7 and 8 charged Maxwell with perjury
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: in violation of U.S. Code 18, Section 1623. Trial on
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: counts 1 through 6 commenced on November 29, 2021, and
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: it ended on December 29, 2021, when the jury found
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: Maxwell guilty on counts 1 and 3 through 6 and
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: acquitted Maxwell on count 2. On June 29, 2022, Judge
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: Nathan sentenced Maxwell to a term of 240 months imprisonment
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: to be followed by five years supervised release and imposed
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: a $ 750, 000 fine and a $ 300 mandatory special assessment. Maxwell
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: is serving her sentence. The statement of facts. A. The
• 2:44
  Speaker 1: government's case. The government's evidence at trial established that over
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: the course of a decade, Maxwell facilitated and participated in
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: the sexual abuse of multiple young girls. From 1994 to 2004,
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein worked together to identify girls, groom them,
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: and then entice them to travel and transport them to
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: Epstein's properties in New York, Florida, New Mexico, and elsewhere.
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: The girls, some of whom were as young as 14
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: years old, were then sexually abused, often under the guise
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: of a massage. The evidence at trial included, among other things,
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: the testimony of four women who described the sexual abuse
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: they suffered at the hands of Maxwell and Epstein, the
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: testimony of former employees of Epstein and Maxwell, the testimony
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: of law enforcement officers corroborating physical evidence, including photographs of
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: and evidence recovered from searches of Epstein's residences and Maxwell
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: and Epstein's black address book, and other corroborating records such
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: as flight logs of Epstein's private planes and FedEx records.
• 3:51
  Speaker 1: Beginning in approximately 1991, Maxwell had a close and intimate
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: relationship with Epstein. Maxwell was Epstein's girlfriend for many years,
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: until the early 2000s, after which Maxwell and Epstein remained
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: close friends. For over a decade, Maxwell traveled with Epstein,
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: a multimillionaire, on his private planes and mingled with rich
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: and famous people, while enjoying a life of extraordinary luxury.
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: Maxwell and Epstein spent time together in Epstein's various properties,
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: including his mansion on the Upper East Side of Manhattan,
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: his villa in the Palm Beach, his ranch in New Mexico,
• 4:26
  Speaker 1: his apartment in Paris, and his private island in the U.S.
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: Virgin Islands. Maxwell also received a townhouse that Epstein bought
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: for her in New York City, and Epstein transferred more
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: than $ 23 million to Maxwell during the time frame of
• 4:41
  Speaker 1: the conspiracy. In addition to her role as Epstein's girlfriend,
• 4:45
  Speaker 1: Maxwell also supervised Epstein's households as the Lady of the House.
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: When she took charge of Epstein's homes, she imposed strict
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: rules for staff, some of which were included in a
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: household manual dictating the operation of the Palm Beach residents.
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: To protect her criminal activities from exposure, Maxwell fostered a
• 5:04
  Speaker 1: culture of silence at Epstein's homes. The household manual made
• 5:09
  Speaker 1: clear that staff were to see nothing, hear nothing, say nothing,
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: except to answer a question directed at that staff member.
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: Maxwell directed Juan Alessi, the former house manager of Epstein's
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: Palm Beach villa, to speak to Epstein only when spoken
• 5:23
  Speaker 1: to and not to look Epstein in the eyes. This
• 5:27
  Speaker 1: culture of silence provided cover for Maxwell and Epstein to
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: sexually abuse young girls. In the early phase of the
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: conspiracy between 1994 and 2001, Maxwell and Epstein identified vulnerable girls,
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: typically from single mother households and difficult financial circumstances. Maxwell
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: and Epstein then isolated the girls spending time with them
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: away from their family and friends. During that time, they
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: groomed the girls through techniques such as giving them gifts,
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: pretending to be friends, and building trust. Maxwell and Epstein
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: then normalized sexual situations and sexual touching. Finally, they transitioned
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: to sexual abuse, often through the pretext of giving Epstein
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: a massage. In the later phase of the scheme, From
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: 2001 through 2004, Maxwell and Epstein developed a stream of
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: girls who were recruited other girls to visit Epstein at
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: Palm Beach Residence. Maxwell and Epstein paid young girls hundreds
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: of dollars in cash in exchange for meeting Epstein to
• 6:26
  Speaker 1: be sexually abused under the pretext of giving Epstein a massage.
• 6:30
  Speaker 1: Once a girl was introduced to these sexualized massages, she
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: was offered more money if she brought other girls to
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: engage in sexualized massages. The trial evidence focused on six
• 6:41
  Speaker 1: girls who suffered abusive sexual contact as a result of
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's criminal actions. Jane, Kate, Annie, Carolyn, Virginia, and Melissa. 1.
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: Sexual Abuse of Jane Maxwell and Epstein met Jane in
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: 1994 when she was just 14 years old at a
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: summer camp for talented kids. Jane was particularly vulnerable as
• 7:04
  Speaker 1: her father had just died, a fact that she had
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: told both Epstein and Maxwell. and her family was struggling financially.
• 7:11
  Speaker 1: Maxwell and Epstein cultivated a relationship with Jane, spending time
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: with her at Epstein's Palm Beach home and taking her
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: to the movies and shopping. Maxwell and Epstein gave Jane gifts,
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: and Jane came to look up to Maxwell like an
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: older sister figure. Maxwell and Epstein sexually abused Jane starting
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: when she was 14 years old, and the sexual abuse
• 7:33
  Speaker 1: continued for years. When Jane was still only 14 years old,
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: Maxwell and Epstein instructed Jane to follow them to Epstein's bedroom,
• 7:41
  Speaker 1: where Maxwell and Epstein fondled each other, casually giggling while
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: Epstein asked Jane to take her top off. After this
• 7:49
  Speaker 1: sexual interaction, Maxwell and Epstein taught Jane how Epstein liked
• 7:52
  Speaker 1: to be massaged and gave Jane instructions about touching Epstein's penis.
• 7:58
  Speaker 1: Jane was repeatedly sexually abused by Epstein between the ages
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: of 14 and 16 years old, and Maxwell was frequently
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: in the room when the abuse happened. Over time, the
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: abuse escalated as Epstein used vibrators on Jane, put fingers
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: in Jane's vagina, and asked Jane to straddle his face.
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: Maxwell sometimes touched Jane, including her breasts. During these incidents,
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: Jane also traveled with Maxwell, who assisted Jane in making
• 8:25
  Speaker 1: travel arrangements, and Epstein to Epstein's townhouse in New York City,
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: his ranch in New Mexico, where she was sexually abused. 2.
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: Sexual Abuse of Kate Maxwell and Epstein, sexual abuse of Kate,
• 8:39
  Speaker 1: started in 1994, around the same time that Maxwell and
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: Epstein started sexually abusing Jane. After Kate, then 17 years old,
• 8:47
  Speaker 1: told Maxwell that she lived alone with her mother and
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: had a difficult home life, Maxwell introduced Kate to Epstein
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: in London. Maxwell delivered Kate to a naked Epstein in
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's own home for massages and told Kate to have
• 9:01
  Speaker 1: a good time. During these massages, Epstein initiated sexual contact.
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: Kate traveled to meet both Maxwell and Epstein in Palm Beach,
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: the Virgin Islands, and New York City between ages 18
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: and 24. Epstein initiated sexual activity with Kate every time
• 9:19
  Speaker 1: she visited him. Maxwell brought up sexual topics with Kate,
• 9:23
  Speaker 1: ranging from talking about how sexually demanding Epstein was to
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: asking if Kate knew anybody who could come and give
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: Jeffrey a blowjob, to remarking that Epstein liked cute, young,
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: pretty girls like Kate. When Kate was approximately 18 years old,
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: she visited Epstein and Maxwell in Palm Beach. Maxwell left
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: a schoolgirl outfit for Kate and said it would be
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: fun for Kate to wear it for Epstein. Kate alone,
• 9:50
  Speaker 1: in a place she had never previously visited, complied. Epstein
• 9:53
  Speaker 1: initiated sexual contact with Kate and engaged in a sex
• 9:57
  Speaker 1: act with her. Later that day, Maxwell asked Kate, if
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: she had fun and told Kate she was a good
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: girl and one of Epstein's favorites. Epstein engaged in unwanted
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: sexual activity with Kate multiple times during the same trip. 3.
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: Sexual Abuse of Annie Farmer Maxwell also took steps to
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: normalize sexual contact with Annie Farmer who was then 16
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: years old. Annie first met Epstein on a trip to
• 10:23
  Speaker 1: New York, where she and her older sister visited Epstein's
• 10:27
  Speaker 1: Manhattan townhouse, and during which Epstein began to groom Annie
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: by stroking her hand and leg while watching a movie
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: with her. In the spring of 1996, Annie's mother, at
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: Epstein's request, agreed to send Annie to Epstein's ranch in
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: New Mexico for a retreat for a group of students
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: who were academically gifted. Annie felt more comfortable going once
• 10:49
  Speaker 1: she understood that Maxwell, a grown woman in a romantic
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: relationship with Epstein, would be there. During the New Mexico trip,
• 10:57
  Speaker 1: Maxwell took steps to normalize sexual contact under the ruse
• 11:01
  Speaker 1: of massage. Maxwell instructed Annie to hold Epstein's foot and
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: showed her how to give Epstein a foot massage. Maxwell
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: then offered to give Annie a massage. After telling Annie
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: to get undressed, Maxwell gave Annie a massage on a
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: massage table while Annie was naked. During the massage, Maxwell
• 11:18
  Speaker 1: directed Annie to roll over so that Annie was laying
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: on her back. After Annie complied and rolled to her back,
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: Maxwell pulled the sheet down and exposed Annie's breasts. Then,
• 11:29
  Speaker 1: while Annie was naked, Maxwell rubbed Annie's breasts. During this
• 11:33
  Speaker 1: same trip to New Mexico, Epstein later got into Annie's bed,
• 11:36
  Speaker 1: cuddled with her, pressed his body into her, and rubbed
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: against her. But when Annie managed to extricate herself from
• 11:42
  Speaker 1: the situation by running to the bathroom... Thereby denying Epstein
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: further sexual contact, Maxwell seemed very disinterested in Annie for
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: the remainder of the trip. All right, we're going to
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: wrap up part one here, and in the next episode,
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: we're going to pick up where we left off, and
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: that's with the sexual abuse of Virginia Roberts. All of
• 12:01
  Speaker 1: the information that goes with this episode can be found
• 12:04
  Speaker 1: in the description box. What's up, everyone, and welcome back
• 12:08
  Speaker 1: to the Epstein Chronicles. We're going to pick up where
• 12:11
  Speaker 1: we left off with the U.S. government's brief in response
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: to Glenn Maxwell's attempt at an appeal. Number four, the
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: sexual abuse of Virginia Roberts. Beginning in or about the
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: summer of 2000, Maxwell and Epstein entered into a new
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: phase of their scheme to sexually abuse teenage girls. That summer,
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: Maxwell recruited a 17-year-old girl named Virginia Roberts from the
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: parking lot of a Mar-a-Lago to provide Epstein with massages.
• 12:39
  Speaker 1: Over the next several months, Virginia was paid to provide
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: Epstein with sexualized massages at his Palm Beach residence in
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: exchange for hundreds of dollars in cash for each massage.
• 12:50
  Speaker 1: Virginia also traveled with Epstein and Maxwell to other locations,
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: including New York and the Virgin Islands, on Epstein's private plane.
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: Virginia brought other teenage girls to Epstein's Palm Beach house.
• 13:02
  Speaker 1: One of those girls was a 14-year-old girl named Carolyn Epstein.
• 13:06
  Speaker 1: who Virginia introduced to Maxwell and Epstein at the Palm
• 13:09
  Speaker 1: Beach Villa in 2001. 5. The Sexual Abuse of Carolyn
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: Carolyn met Maxwell the very first time she went to
• 13:18
  Speaker 1: Epstein's house, and she interacted with Maxwell multiple times thereafter.
• 13:23
  Speaker 1: On Carolyn's first visit to the house, Maxwell greeted Virginia,
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: who introduced Carolyn to Maxwell. Maxwell then told Virginia, you
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: can bring her upstairs and show her what to do.
• 13:33
  Speaker 1: after Virginia showed Carolyn how to perform sexual massages on Epstein. Thereafter,
• 13:39
  Speaker 1: Carolyn performed over 100 paid sexualized massages for Epstein when
• 13:43
  Speaker 1: she was between 14 and 18 years old. The vast
• 13:47
  Speaker 1: majority involved the same course of abuse, through which Epstein masturbated,
• 13:52
  Speaker 1: touched Carolyn's breasts and buttocks, and directed Carolyn to touch
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: his nipples. Epstein also attempted to touch Carolyn's vagina with
• 14:00
  Speaker 1: a vibrator, brought other females into the room to engage
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: in oral sex with Carolyn, and raped Carolyn by penetrating
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: her vagina with his penis. At first, Maxwell personally scheduled
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: Carolyn's appointments with Epstein, including all phone calls from New York,
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: and sometimes sent a car to pick Carolyn up because
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: she was too young to drive. Maxwell also engaged Carolyn
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: in conversations during which Carolyn revealed that she had previously
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: been sexually abused by a relative, that her parents were separated,
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: and that her mother struggled with addiction. Maxwell invited Carolyn
• 14:34
  Speaker 1: to travel with Maxwell and Epstein, but Carolyn responded that
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: because she was only 14 years old, she would not
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: be able to get permission to travel. Carolyn was paid
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: several hundred dollars in $ 100 bills after each massage, and
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: Carolyn also received gifts of lingerie from Epstein and and
• 14:51
  Speaker 1: Maxwell shipped from Manhattan to her home in Florida. Usually
• 14:55
  Speaker 1: the money was laid out on the table or by
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: the sink in the bathroom, but Maxwell personally paid Carolyn
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: after a few massages. Maxwell saw Carolyn fully nude in
• 15:05
  Speaker 1: the massage room on approximately three occasions when Carolyn had
• 15:09
  Speaker 1: already undressed in preparation for the massage but before Epstein
• 15:13
  Speaker 1: entered the room. On one such occasion when Carolyn was
• 15:16
  Speaker 1: 14 years old, Maxwell told Carolyn that she had a
• 15:20
  Speaker 1: nice body and touch Carolyn's breasts. At some point, Epstein
• 15:24
  Speaker 1: asked Carolyn if she had any young friends that she
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: could bring for massages. Carolyn ended up bringing multiple girls
• 15:30
  Speaker 1: to Epstein for sexualized massages, including multiple minors. When Carolyn
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: brought girls to massage Epstein, both the girl and Carolyn
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: would be paid hundreds of dollars in cash. 6. Sexual
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: Abuse of Melissa One of the minor girls Carolyn brought
• 15:46
  Speaker 1: to provide paid sexualized massages to Epstein, was a 16-year-old
• 15:50
  Speaker 1: girl named Melissa. Melissa went to Epstein's residence to provide
• 15:55
  Speaker 1: Epstein with massages on multiple occasions when she was under
• 15:58
  Speaker 1: the age of 18. When Melissa and Carolyn went to
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: the Palm Beach house, they remained in the home for
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: about an hour and then returned with hundreds of dollars
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: in cash. B. The defense case, verdict, and sentencing. Maxwell
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: called nine witnesses in her defense case, including former employees
• 16:17
  Speaker 1: and associates, as well as an expert on memory. On
• 16:21
  Speaker 1: December 29th, 2021, the jury found Maxwell guilty of counts 1, 3, 5, 4,
• 16:28
  Speaker 1: and 6. On April 1st, 2022, Judge Nathan denied Maxwell's
• 16:33
  Speaker 1: motion for a new trial pursuant to FedR Rule of
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: Criminal Procedure 33 based on a juror's provision of inaccurate
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: information during jury selection, as discussed in greater detail in
• 16:45
  Speaker 1: point 3. On April 29th, 2022, Judge Nathan denied all
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: but one of Maxwell's remaining post-trial motions. Judge Nathan found
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: that the three conspiracy counts, count one, three, and five,
• 16:57
  Speaker 1: were multiplicitous and that she, therefore, would enter judgment on
• 17:02
  Speaker 1: count three alone among the conspiracy counts. On June 29th, 2022,
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: Judge Nathan sentenced Maxwell to 60 months imprisonment on count three,
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: 120 months imprisonment on count four, and 240 months imprisonment
• 17:16
  Speaker 1: on count six, all to run concurrently to be followed
• 17:20
  Speaker 1: by five years supervised release and imposed a $ 750, 000 fine
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: and a $ 300 mandatory special assessment. Argument point one. The
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: district court correctly concluded that Jeffrey Epstein's non-prosecution agreement does
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: not bar Maxwell's prosecution in the Southern District of New York.
• 17:40
  Speaker 1: In 2007, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District
• 17:44
  Speaker 1: of Florida entered into a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein.
• 17:48
  Speaker 1: Maxwell argues that this agreement, which neither she nor the U.S.
• 17:52
  Speaker 1: Attorney's Office for the SDNY signed, nevertheless bars her prosecution
• 17:57
  Speaker 1: in the Southern District of New York in this case,
• 18:00
  Speaker 1: and she twice sought dismissal of the charges in the
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: indictment on that ground. The district court denied the motions
• 18:06
  Speaker 1: to dismiss. correctly recognizing that Maxwell's argument is precluded by
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: the text of the agreement and the court's long-standing precedent. Accordingly,
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: this court should affirm the denial of the motion to dismiss.
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: The Relevant Facts In 2005, the Palm Beach Police Department
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: in Florida opened an investigation into Epstein on the complaint
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: of the parents of a 14-year-old girl. The Palm Beach
• 18:31
  Speaker 1: Police ultimately brought the investigation to the Federal Bureau of
• 18:35
  Speaker 1: Investigation in West Palm Beach, which it turned, opened an
• 18:38
  Speaker 1: investigation with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: of Florida. That investigation culminated in a draft 60-page indictment
• 18:47
  Speaker 1: proposing to charge Epstein for the sexual abuse of multiple victims.
• 18:52
  Speaker 1: In 2007, the USAO, SDFL, and Epstein entered into a
• 18:57
  Speaker 1: non-prosecution agreement. The agreement was signed on the authority of R.
• 19:01
  Speaker 1: Alexander Acosta, United States Attorney for the Southern District of
• 19:05
  Speaker 1: Florida and Under the terms of the NPA, Epstein agreed
• 19:08
  Speaker 1: to plead guilty in a pending Florida state case and
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: to receive a sentence of at least 18 months imprisonment
• 19:15
  Speaker 1: and 12 months community control. He also consented to jurisdiction
• 19:19
  Speaker 1: in the Southern District of Florida for civil suits involving
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: victims specified by the USAO-SDFL, among other terms. In exchange,
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: USAO-SDFL agreed to defer prosecution in the district. Once Epstein
• 19:34
  Speaker 1: completed his half of the bargain, the NPA provided that
• 19:38
  Speaker 1: no prosecution for the offenses then under investigation by the
• 19:42
  Speaker 1: Federal Bureau of Investigation and the U.S. Attorney's Office will
• 19:46
  Speaker 1: be instituted in this district. The NPA provided also provided
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: that if Epstein complied with the agreement, the United States
• 19:54
  Speaker 1: also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited
• 20:02
  Speaker 1: to four named individuals, none of whom was Maxwell. Indeed,
• 20:06
  Speaker 1: Maxwell was neither a party to the agreement nor involved
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: in negotiating its terms. This provision appears to have been
• 20:13
  Speaker 1: added with little discussion or consideration by the prosecutors. The
• 20:18
  Speaker 1: MPA continues that upon execution of this agreement and the
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: plea agreement with the state's attorney's office, the federal grand
• 20:25
  Speaker 1: jury investigation will be suspended. The agreement was executed on
• 20:30
  Speaker 1: September 24, 2007, and Epstein pled guilty in state court
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: on June 30, 2008. In 2019, the Department of Justice
• 20:39
  Speaker 1: Office of Professional Responsibility conducted an investigation into the negotiations
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: surrounding the NPA and issued a 290-page report containing detailed,
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: factual findings. After the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: District of New York charged Maxwell in this case and
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: the Southern District of New York She twice moved to
• 20:59
  Speaker 1: dismiss the charges on the grounds that they were barred
• 21:02
  Speaker 1: by the NPA. The district court denied the motions, concluding
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: that the NPA does not bind the USAO-SDNY. B. Applicable
• 21:12
  Speaker 1: Law The court has long held that a plea agreement
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: binds only the office of the United States Attorney for
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: the district in which the plea is entered unless it
• 21:21
  Speaker 1: affirmatively appears that the agreement contemplates a broader restriction. United
• 21:26
  Speaker 1: States v. Anabee 771 The requisite affirmative appearance may be
• 21:30
  Speaker 1: established by an express statement. in the plea agreement, or
• 21:55
  Speaker 1: it may be inferred from the negotiations between the defendant
• 21:59
  Speaker 1: and the prosecutor, as well as from the statements at
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: the plea colloquy. United States v. Russo, 801 F. 2D, 624,
• 22:07
  Speaker 1: 626 Second Circuit, 1986. This court reviews de novo both
• 22:14
  Speaker 1: the denial of a motion to dismiss an indictment and
• 22:18
  Speaker 1: the interpretation of a plea agreement. United States v. Montauk, 67F, 4th, 520-527,
• 22:24
  Speaker 1: 2nd Circuit, 2023, United States v. Padilla, 186, F. 3d, 136, 139,
• 22:26
  Speaker 1: 2nd Circuit, 1999. This court reviews for abuse of discretion
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: a district court's denial of an evidentiary hearing before ruling
• 22:32
  Speaker 1: on a motion to dismiss. United States v. Walters, 910, F. 3d, 11, 22, 28,
• 22:34
  Speaker 1: 2nd Circuit, 2018. United States v. Greenberg, 835 F. 3D, 295, 305,
• 22:59
  Speaker 1: 2nd Circuit, 2016. C. Discussion. The district court correctly rejected
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's argument that the NPA bars this prosecution. Maxwell has
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: no right to invoke the protections of the NPA because
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: she is neither a party to nor a third-party beneficiary
• 23:17
  Speaker 1: of the agreement. But even if Maxwell had standing under
• 23:21
  Speaker 1: the NPA... It would not bar this prosecution because it
• 23:24
  Speaker 1: was plainly intended to bind only the USAO SDFL. Thus,
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: Judge Nathan rightly concluded that under longstanding Second Circuit precedent,
• 23:34
  Speaker 1: the NPA does not bind USAO SDNY. Accordingly, this court
• 23:40
  Speaker 1: should affirm the denial of Maxwell's motions to dismiss. All right,
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: we're going to wrap up this episode here. And in
• 23:46
  Speaker 1: the next episode, we're going to pick up where we
• 23:48
  Speaker 1: left off. And that's with Maxwell is not entitled to
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: enforce the NPA. All of the information that goes with
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: this episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone?
• 24:00
  Speaker 1: And welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode,
• 24:04
  Speaker 1: we're going to continue on taking a look at the
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: United States government's brief in response to Glenn Maxwell's attempt
• 24:11
  Speaker 1: to appeal her sentence. 1. Maxwell is not entitled to
• 24:16
  Speaker 1: enforce the NPA. As an initial matter, Maxwell has no
• 24:20
  Speaker 1: right to invoke the protections of the NPA. Maxwell was
• 24:23
  Speaker 1: not a signatory of the agreement, while the third-party beneficiary
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: doctrine is a tenant of contract law. Its application to
• 24:31
  Speaker 1: plea agreements under federal law is a separate question because
• 24:34
  Speaker 1: plea agreements differ from commercial contracts in meaningful respects. United
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: States v. Feldman 939 F. 3D 182 189 2nd Circuit 2019.
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: We have long recognized that plea agreements are significantly different
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: from commercial contracts. It's doubtful that a third-party beneficiary can
• 24:54
  Speaker 1: enforce a plea agreement. See United States v. Lopez 944 F. 2D
• 25:00
  Speaker 1: 3337 1st Circuit 1991. Observing that we are unaware of
• 25:05
  Speaker 1: authorities supporting application of a third-party beneficiary principle's to a
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: plea agreement in a criminal case. N.D., Texas, January 11, 2016,
• 25:26
  Speaker 1: explaining that the right to enforce a plea deal does
• 25:28
  Speaker 1: not exist for its own sake. Rather, it is a
• 25:31
  Speaker 1: means to achieve fairness in plea bargaining, and enforcement by
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: third parties adds nothing to protecting the defendant's rights. In
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: any event, even under the third-party beneficiary law on which
• 25:44
  Speaker 1: Maxwell relies, she would have to show that the original
• 25:47
  Speaker 1: parties intended the agreement to directly benefit her as a
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: third party. United States v. Wilson, 216 F. 3D, 645, 663,
• 25:56
  Speaker 1: 7th Circuit, 2000, assuming without deciding that third party could
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: enforce immunity agreement. See also United States v. Florida, International
• 26:07
  Speaker 1: Airways Incorporated, 853F, SUPP, 2D, 1209, 1228, SD, Florida, 2012.
• 26:15
  Speaker 1: Third party must show that a direct and primary object
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: of the contracting parties was to confer a benefit on
• 26:22
  Speaker 1: the third party. Quoting Boche's vs. Town of Ponce, Inlet, 405F. 3D, 964, 982,
• 26:26
  Speaker 1: 11th Circuit, 2005. Here, Maxwell has failed to make the
• 26:27
  Speaker 1: requisite showing. She is not named in the provision, naming
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: four potential co-conspirators, and she has offered no evidence that
• 26:42
  Speaker 1: the parties to the NPA intended to confer a benefit
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: on her specifically. Accordingly, Maxwell may not enforce the NPA. 2.
• 26:52
  Speaker 1: The NPA's terms bind only the USAO SDFL. Even if
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: Maxwell had a right to invoke the NPA's protections, it
• 27:01
  Speaker 1: would not bar the charges in this case. By its terms,
• 27:04
  Speaker 1: the MPA only applies to prosecutions brought by the USAO SDFL.
• 27:09
  Speaker 1: The agreement was signed on the authority of Alexander Acosta,
• 27:13
  Speaker 1: United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida. And
• 27:17
  Speaker 1: in exchange for Epstein's plea in state court, the USAO
• 27:20
  Speaker 1: SDFL agreed to defer prosecution in this district, that is,
• 27:25
  Speaker 1: the Southern District of Florida. The USAO SDFL Further promise
• 27:30
  Speaker 1: that no prosecution by the Federal Bureau of the Investigation
• 27:33
  Speaker 1: and the U.S. Attorney's Office will be instituted in this district.
• 27:38
  Speaker 1: An agreement by the U.S. AOSDFL not to prosecute Epstein
• 27:43
  Speaker 1: in Southern District of Florida is an agreement intended to
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: apply only to the USAOSDFL and only to the Southern
• 27:51
  Speaker 1: District of Florida. Moreover, the agreement was signed by officials
• 27:56
  Speaker 1: of the USAO SDFL and no other components of the
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: Department of Justice. Accordingly, the plain terms of the NPA
• 28:03
  Speaker 1: make clear that the agreement only binds the USAO SDFL.
• 28:09
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's argument that the NPA binds the USAO SDNY relies
• 28:14
  Speaker 1: on a separate provision of the agreement. which says that
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: the United States also agrees that it will not institute
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including
• 28:25
  Speaker 1: but not limited to a list of four individuals, does
• 28:28
  Speaker 1: not include the defendant, but her argument that the term
• 28:32
  Speaker 1: United States means the entire federal government requires the term
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: to be read in isolation. See Salome 152 F. 3d at 120.
• 29:02
  Speaker 1: The mere use of the term government in the plea
• 29:04
  Speaker 1: agreement does not create an affirmative appearance that the agreement
• 29:08
  Speaker 1: contemplated barring districts other than the particular district entering into
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: the agreement. Although paragraph 12b uses the term United States, rather,
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: Then the term government, this is a distinction from our
• 29:30
  Speaker 1: prior case law without difference. Reading the MPA as a
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: whole confirms that conclusion. The very next sentence of the
• 29:38
  Speaker 1: agreement states... that the federal grand jury investigation will be suspended.
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: The grand jury investigation is the one that USAO SDFL
• 29:48
  Speaker 1: agreed to defer in the same agreement and not any
• 29:52
  Speaker 1: potential federal grand jury investigations in other districts. Furthermore, the
• 29:56
  Speaker 1: NPA states Elsewhere refers to the United States on occasion
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: that could only mean the USAO SDFL. For instance, the
• 30:04
  Speaker 1: NPA commits the United States, that is, the USAO SDFL,
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: to providing Epstein with a list of victims. A-177. The
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: United States shall provide Epstein's attorneys with a list of
• 30:16
  Speaker 1: individuals whom it has identified as victims. Another provision states
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: that the NPA will not be made part of the
• 30:23
  Speaker 1: public record and commits the United States again, the U.S. AOSDFL,
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: to providing notice to Epstein if it receives a Freedom
• 30:31
  Speaker 1: of Information Act request requiring disclosure of the agreement. A. 178.
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: The mere fact that the co-conspirator's provision of the MPA
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: used the phrase United States rather than U.S. Attorney's Office
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: is not evidence that the parties intended an unusually broad
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: immunity provision. C. Kerstang v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.,
• 30:53
  Speaker 1: 568 U.S. 519 540 2013. We are not aware, however,
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: of any canon interpretation that forbids interpreting different words used
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: in different parts of the same statute to mean roughly
• 31:07
  Speaker 1: the same thing. As Judge Nathan concluded, given the repeated
• 31:11
  Speaker 1: limitations of the commitments in the NPA to the USAO SDFL,
• 31:17
  Speaker 1: including the commitment not to prosecute Epstein, it's not plausible
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: that the party's intended to drastically expand the agreement's scope
• 31:24
  Speaker 1: in the single sentence on the prosecution of co-conspirators without
• 31:28
  Speaker 1: clearly saying so. Maxwell also points to the NPA provision,
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: stating that Epstein seeks to resolve globally his state and
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: federal criminal liability. Based on that statement, Maxwell argues that
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: Epstein's purpose in negotiating the NPA was to obtain a
• 31:44
  Speaker 1: global resolution that would, among other things, provide maximum protection
• 31:48
  Speaker 1: for any alleged co-conspirators. But the cited provision only says
• 31:53
  Speaker 1: that Epstein sought to resolve his liability, not anyone else's. Furthermore,
• 31:58
  Speaker 1: under Maxwell's reading, Epstein bargained for a truly global resolution
• 32:03
  Speaker 1: only for his co-conspirators and limited his own global resolution
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: expressly to the USAO SDFL. There is no reason to
• 32:10
  Speaker 1: believe that Epstein expressly sought and obtained broader immunity for
• 32:15
  Speaker 1: his co-conspirators than he did for himself. Lacking any support
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: in the text of the MPA itself, Maxwell attempts to
• 32:23
  Speaker 1: show the MPA applies here based on the negotiations between
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: defendant and prosecutor, Russo 801 F. 2D at 626. In particular,
• 32:33
  Speaker 1: Maxwell claims that the negotiating history of the MPA shows
• 32:37
  Speaker 1: that senior levels of main justice were directly involved in
• 32:40
  Speaker 1: the negotiation and approval of the MPA. even to the
• 32:43
  Speaker 1: extent that the separate presentations were made to and approval
• 32:47
  Speaker 1: of the NPA, was obtained from the Office of the
• 32:51
  Speaker 1: Deputy Attorney General. This assertion, however, mischaracterizes the record and
• 32:56
  Speaker 1: further underscores the absence of any senior approvals in negotiating
• 33:00
  Speaker 1: the NPA. The pages to which Maxwell cites described activities
• 33:05
  Speaker 1: after the NPA was signed in which Justice Department officials
• 33:08
  Speaker 1: in Washington identified refused to believe Epstein of his obligations
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: under the NPA. The OPR report reflects that the Office
• 33:15
  Speaker 1: of the Deputy Attorney General reviewed the NPA, but only
• 33:19
  Speaker 1: after it was signed when Epstein tried to get out
• 33:21
  Speaker 1: of it. Even then, however, those officials did not approve
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: the NPA. Statement by the Assistant Attorney General that she
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: did not review approved the agreement either before or after
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: it was signed. The department, however, only reviewed the issue
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: of federal jurisdiction in and never review the NPA or
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: any specific provisions. Maxwell also cobbles together instances in which
• 33:44
  Speaker 1: the USAO, SDFL, and the FBI in Florida enlisted the
• 33:48
  Speaker 1: assistance of other components of the federal government or considered
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: acting outside of Florida, such as the USAO, SDFL's contact
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: with witnesses in New York. These disparate, and unconnected events
• 34:01
  Speaker 1: do not show the USAO SDFL acted on behalf of
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: the entire federal government when entering into the NPA, or
• 34:08
  Speaker 1: that Epstein understood the USAO SDFL to be doing so.
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: Maxwell also advances several arguments attempting to minimize or sidestep
• 34:18
  Speaker 1: the court's precedent. For example, Maxwell argues that Anabee applies
• 34:22
  Speaker 1: only if the charges in the indictment are sufficiently distinct
• 34:26
  Speaker 1: from the counts resolved by the earlier agreement. Not so.
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: The relevant portions of Anabi concerned an argument by the
• 34:34
  Speaker 1: defendants that in seeking to have a plea agreement in
• 34:37
  Speaker 1: the Eastern District of New York bar the pending charges
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: in the Southern District of New York, they were seeking
• 34:43
  Speaker 1: only the same protection accorded by the Double Jeopardy Clause,
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: 771 F. 2d at 672. This court rejected that argument, reasoning
• 34:52
  Speaker 1: that even if the Double Jeopardy Clause applied, notwithstanding, to
• 34:57
  Speaker 1: the defendants that were never in jeopardy on those charges
• 35:00
  Speaker 1: in the Eastern District, the defendants would not be entitled
• 35:03
  Speaker 1: to relief because the pending charges extended for an additional
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: two years and thus were not the same charges that
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: were dismissed. Thus, Anabee did not hold that its rule
• 35:13
  Speaker 1: that a plea agreement binds only the office of the
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: United States Attorney for the district in which the plea
• 35:18
  Speaker 1: is entered unless it affirmatively appears that the agreement contemplates
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: a broader restriction. applies only if the charges are sufficiently distinct,
• 35:28
  Speaker 1: and as Judge Nathan recognized, no subsequent 2nd Circuit case
• 35:32
  Speaker 1: applying an obby has so held. Next, Maxwell argues that
• 35:37
  Speaker 1: this court should disregard its own precedents and instead apply
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: 11th Circuit law because the MPA was negotiated in Florida
• 35:44
  Speaker 1: with Southern District of Florida prosecutors in exchange for Epstein's
• 35:48
  Speaker 1: agreement to plead guilty in Florida State Court. But this
• 35:51
  Speaker 1: court has consistently applied an obby even when considering plea
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: agreements from out-of-district districts. Second Circuit, 2004, Southern District, Florida.
• 36:27
  Speaker 1: These decisions are consistent with choice of law principles in
• 36:31
  Speaker 1: criminal cases where the governing law is always that of
• 36:34
  Speaker 1: the forum state and the forum court has jurisdiction. American
• 36:38
  Speaker 1: Conflicts Law, 375, 5th edition, 2021. See two attorney-client privilege
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: in the United States, section 1210. Choice of law scholars
• 36:46
  Speaker 1: have long recognized that criminal law Local in nature, and
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: it's settled that, in criminal prosecutions, the court will routinely
• 36:54
  Speaker 1: apply the substantive law of the forum, American Conflicts Law 390.
• 37:00
  Speaker 1: In any event, 11th Circuit law would not support Maxwell's claim.
• 37:04
  Speaker 1: Maxwell does not cite any 11th Circuit decisions addressing when
• 37:08
  Speaker 1: one U.S. Attorney's Office is bound by a plea agreement
• 37:11
  Speaker 1: with another U.S. Attorney's Office. But in context, the 11th
• 37:14
  Speaker 1: Circuit held that a U.S. Attorney's promise made... In a
• 37:18
  Speaker 1: plea agreement that a criminal defendant would not be deported
• 37:21
  Speaker 1: was unenforceable because the U.S. attorney lacked authority to make
• 37:24
  Speaker 1: that promise. San Pedro v. United States, 79 F.D., 1065-1072,
• 37:31
  Speaker 1: 11th Circuit, 1996. In the 11th Circuit, were to apply
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: the reasoning of San Pedro to the issue in this case,
• 37:38
  Speaker 1: it would likely reach the same result because U.S. attorneys
• 37:41
  Speaker 1: only has authority to act within his district. U.S. Code 28,
• 37:45
  Speaker 1: Section 547. and must seek the approval of each affected U.S.
• 37:51
  Speaker 1: Attorney's Office before entering into any non-prosecution agreement that purports
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: to bind another district. See Justice Manual Section 9, 27.641.
• 38:01
  Speaker 1: No district or division shall make any agreement, including any
• 38:05
  Speaker 1: agreement not to prosecute, which purports to bind any other
• 38:08
  Speaker 1: district or division without the approval of the United States
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: Attorneys in each affected district and or the appropriate Assistant
• 38:16
  Speaker 1: Attorney General. Finally, Maxwell devotes much of her brief to
• 38:21
  Speaker 1: criticizing Anabi, but this court's rule is sound, as it
• 38:24
  Speaker 1: ensures that a criminal defendant, or even, as here, a co-conspirator,
• 38:28
  Speaker 1: will not receive the windfall of immunity that was never
• 38:31
  Speaker 1: intended by the parties to the original agreement, while leaving
• 38:35
  Speaker 1: parties free to enter into legitimate multi-district resolutions if they wish.
• 38:40
  Speaker 1: Nor has Maxwell's parade of horribles come to pass in
• 38:44
  Speaker 1: the decades since Anabi was decided. Furthermore, the same rule
• 38:48
  Speaker 1: has long been applied in the Seventh Circuit. See Thompson v.
• 38:52
  Speaker 1: United States, 431, Appendix 491, 493, Seventh Circuit, 2011. United
• 38:58
  Speaker 1: States v. Rourke, 74, F. 3D, 802, 807, N. 5, Seventh Circuit, 1996.
• 39:05
  Speaker 1: In any event, this court need not engage in a
• 39:08
  Speaker 1: point-by-point analysis of the merits of an obby because it
• 39:12
  Speaker 1: remains binding precedent. See United States v. Wilkerson, Thus, Epstein's
• 39:17
  Speaker 1: NPA with the USAO SDFL does not bar this prosecution
• 39:20
  Speaker 1: of Maxwell. and Judge Nathan correctly denied the motions to dismiss.
• 39:33
  Speaker 1: All right, we're going to wrap up right here and
• 39:36
  Speaker 1: in the next episode, we'll pick up where we left
• 39:38
  Speaker 1: off and that's with the district court did not abuse
• 39:41
  Speaker 1: its discretion in declining to conduct a hearing. All of
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: the information that goes with this episode can be found
• 39:49
  Speaker 1: in the description box.