Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Judge Engelmayer Denies Ghislaine Maxwell's Attempt To Overturn Her Conviction (Part 9) (9/30/26)

Transcript

Judge Engelmayer Denies Ghislaine Maxwell's Attempt To Overturn Her Conviction (Part 9) (9/30/26) · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:03
  Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're diving right back in
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: to the order denying Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt to get a
• 0:10
  Speaker 1: new trial. Assessment. On direct appeal, Maxwell did not challenge
• 0:15
  Speaker 1: the decision to receive GX-52 at trial or the denial
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: of Maxwell's motion in limine to exclude it. This claim
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: is thus barred as basis for 2025 relief as Maxwell
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: does not even attempt to to show cause and prejudice
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: for her decision not to raise it on appeal, and
• 0:33
  Speaker 1: for the reasons stated by Judge Nathan, the claim is meritless.
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: Maxwell makes several counter-arguments, all frivolous. She argues, for instance,
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: that a document disclosed under the EFTA would have impeached
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: Alessi's testimony regarding GX-52. That exhibit is a single page
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: from a public criminal complaint against Rodriguez filed on December 9, 2009.
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: It does not impeach Alessi's testimony, at all. If anything,
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: the complaint indicates that additional evidence inculpated Maxwell. It states,
• 1:05
  Speaker 1: for example, that in a Mirandai's post-arrest interview, Rodriguez has
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: stated he had witnessed nude girls whom he believed were
• 1:13
  Speaker 1: underage at the pool area of Epstein's home, knew that
• 1:16
  Speaker 1: Epstein was engaging in sexual contact with underage girls, and
• 1:20
  Speaker 1: had viewed pornographic images of underage girls on computers in
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: Epstein's home. As for Maxwell's related claim that the government
• 1:29
  Speaker 1: violated its Brady obligations by ostensibly not disclosing Edwards' involvement
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: in the procurement of GX-52, that argument is demonstrably false
• 1:39
  Speaker 1: and procedurally barred. Materials the government produced in discovery laid
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: bare Edwards' involvement. Maxwell cited multiple such documents in the
• 1:49
  Speaker 1: instant petition, and her counsel's pretrial filings repeatedly reference the
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: facts of which Maxwell now professes unawareness. See Docket 390
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: at 6. Defense motion in limine to exclude GX52 stating
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: that Rodriguez attempted to sell GX52 to Brad Edwards, 490
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: at 1. Defense supplemental letter stating that Rodriguez possessed GX52
• 2:13
  Speaker 1: until 2009 when he tried to sell it to Brad Edwards.
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's counsel did not raise this argument on direct appeal.
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: It is thus procedurally defaulted, and for the reasons stated
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: by Judge Nathan, this challenge is without merit. C. Claim 10.
• 2:30
  Speaker 1: Epstein's Green Massage Table. In a new claim raised neither
• 2:34
  Speaker 1: at trial nor on direct appeal, the petition claims that
• 2:37
  Speaker 1: the government did not produce the 2006 state grand jury
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: testimony of PBPD detective Gregory Parkinson, who testified at Maxwell's trial,
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: and that this breached the government's Brady obligation. She argues
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: that Detective Parkinson's earlier grand jury testimony would have assisted
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: the defense because it conflicted with his trial testimony. and
• 2:59
  Speaker 1: impeaching the trial testimony might have undermined his authentication of
• 3:03
  Speaker 1: Epstein's green massage table, which she claims was the government's
• 3:07
  Speaker 1: only evidence establishing the interstate commerce element of counts 5
• 3:11
  Speaker 1: and 6. Maxwell relatedly argues that had the massage table
• 3:16
  Speaker 1: been excluded or had it been disregarded by the jury
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: as a result of the impeachment of Detective Parkinson's credibility,
• 3:22
  Speaker 1: she would have been acquitted. She argues that it could
• 3:25
  Speaker 1: not have raised the claim at trial or on direct appeal,
• 3:28
  Speaker 1: because Detective Parkinson's grand jury testimony was only made public
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: in 2024. Assuming our Gwendo that this claim is not
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: procedurally barred, it is without merit. Relevant Background As reviewed above,
• 3:42
  Speaker 1: the SDNY prosecution team disclosure obligation did not include information
• 3:46
  Speaker 1: collected by the PB PD during its 2005-2010 investigation. The
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: USAO SDNY nonetheless made good faith, substantial effort, to collect
• 3:57
  Speaker 1: and review such information. As part of these, USAO SDNY
• 4:02
  Speaker 1: contacted the clerk of court in Palm Beach responsible for
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: grand jury records. The clerk notified USAO SDNY that there
• 4:10
  Speaker 1: were no transcripts of Detective Parkinson's grand jury testimony, and
• 4:13
  Speaker 1: that the audio recordings of such were unplayable. On October 11, 2021,
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: the government produced, to Maxwell, an electronic court reporting witness log.
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: which reflected handwritten notes as to the witness who testified
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: before the Palm Beach Grand Jury and certain topics, questions,
• 4:31
  Speaker 1: and testimony by them at specific timestamps. Importantly, in describing
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: that production to Maxwell's defense team, the government stated that
• 4:39
  Speaker 1: the records reflect that Parkinson testified in the Grand Jury
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: in connection with the investigation conducted by the Palm Beach
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: State's Attorney's Office, but the clerk of court has confirmed
• 4:49
  Speaker 1: to the government that the audio files are unplayable. and
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: therefore there's no record of Parkinson's grand jury testimony. At
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's trial, Detective Parkinson testified that the master bedroom of
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: Epstein's Palm Beach Villa had two master baths. Also see
• 5:07
  Speaker 1: GX-297 floor plan reflecting two bathrooms adjoining master bedroom. He
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: testified that he had seized the green massage table, GX-51,
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: on October 20th, 2005, from the second floor of the
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: south bathroom, where the shower was, and he recognized it
• 5:24
  Speaker 1: from the evidence label that bore unique identifying numbers. Detective
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: Parkinson stated that the other master bathroom had a tub
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: and was located on the north side of the residence,
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: also adjoining the master bedroom. See also GX-283-84. Detective Parkinson
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: testified to recording a walkthrough video on October 20th' s search
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: of the Palm Beach home, which was admitted at trial
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: as GX-296R. The recording showed the two bathrooms adjoining the
• 5:54
  Speaker 1: master bedroom. It showed the green massage table lying against
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: the wall with photographs outside the door to the south
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: bathroom with a shower. In the north bathroom with a bathtub,
• 6:04
  Speaker 1: there was a desk with a photograph of Maxwell stationary
• 6:07
  Speaker 1: with Maxwell's name on it and a portrait above the
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: desk depicting Maxwell with the dog. Also, CGX 285. In
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: July of 2024, Maxwell's direct appeal, a state court circuit
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: judge granted a petition to to release inter alia the
• 6:23
  Speaker 1: grand jury transcripts from the investigation into Epstein by the
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: Palm Beach State Attorney's Office. These included a transcript of
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: Detective Parkinson's testimony proving inaccurate the clerk of court's earlier
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: representation to USAOSDNY that the transcript did not exist. In
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: his 2006 grand jury testimony, Detective Parkinson described the large
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: master bathroom or bedroom and the two large bathrooms adjoining it.
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: Parkinson said, Grand jury transcript at 108 through 10. He
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: appeared to walk through a diagram of Epstein's residence, noting
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: the large bathroom on the south side, a large walk-in closet,
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: and moving back through the bedroom, past the hallway. You
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: then enter another large bathroom, which has a sink, closets,
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: and a large bathtub. He then gave the following testimony. Question,
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: are there toilet facilities here, or is it just sinks
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: in these bathrooms? Answer, I believe that there were toilets
• 7:16
  Speaker 1: also there in the hall. Question, all right. Did you
• 7:19
  Speaker 1: find a massage table? Answer, yes. There was a massage
• 7:22
  Speaker 1: table in the closet, the bathroom. Question, okay. How about
• 7:25
  Speaker 1: massage oils? Were there massage oils up in that bathroom? Answer,
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: I believe there were. I know that we got some
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: kind of jar of material out of the master bedroom,
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: out of the dresser. Question, what about out of the
• 7:38
  Speaker 1: actual room where the massage table was? Answer, that I'm
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: not sure. I was involved in the actual search and
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: photography of that Other investigators would have to comment on it. Assessment.
• 7:51
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's section 2255 claim of a Brady violation is based
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: on the SDNY prosecution team not having produced the grand
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: jury testimony to her before the trial fails on its merits.
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: Maxwell does not allege facts supporting that the SDNY prosecution
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: team had custody or awareness of the grand jury transcript. Second,
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: she is wrong. that had Parkinson's State grand jury testimony
• 8:16
  Speaker 1: been disclosed, it would have had material effect on the
• 8:19
  Speaker 1: outcome of the trial. The disclosure obligation of federal rule
• 8:23
  Speaker 1: of Criminal Procedure 16, Brady, and Giglio apply to material
• 8:27
  Speaker 1: in the government's possession, custody, or control. See United States v. Blazak,
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: SDNY 2018. An individual prosecutor is presumed to have knowledge
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: of all information gathered in connection with his office investigation
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: of the case. Avelino 136F 3D at 255. However, knowledge
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: on the part of a person employed by a different
• 8:51
  Speaker 1: office of the government does not, in all instances, warrant
• 8:56
  Speaker 1: the imputation of knowledge to the prosecutor. See also Locasio 948-49.
• 9:04
  Speaker 1: Declining to infer the prosecutor's knowledge simply because some other
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: government agents knew about certain evidence where the FBI agents
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: uninvolved in an investigation and trial possessed such evidence of
• 9:15
  Speaker 1: which federal prosecutors were unaware. Quinn. F. 2D at 944. Declining
• 9:22
  Speaker 1: to impute knowledge of prosecutor in Florida to prosecutor in
• 9:25
  Speaker 1: New York. An unlimited duty on a prosecutor to inquire
• 9:29
  Speaker 1: of other offices not working with the prosecutor's office on
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: the case in question. would inappropriately require courts to adopt
• 9:36
  Speaker 1: a monolithic view of government that would condemn the prosecution
• 9:40
  Speaker 1: of criminal cases to a state of paralysis. As a
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: result and critical here, disclosure obligations thus extend only to
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: information possessed by the prosecution team, i.e. those who perform
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: investigative duties or make strategic decisions about the prosecution of
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: the case, including police officers and federal agents, who submit
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: to the direction of the prosecutor and participate in the investigation.
• 10:05
  Speaker 1: Where another government agency possesses information, the duty to disclose
• 10:09
  Speaker 1: is only triggered where a prosecutor has conducted a joint
• 10:12
  Speaker 1: investigation with an entity. United States v. Middeldorf, SDNY, August 17,
• 10:19
  Speaker 1: 2018 Whether a joint investigation was conducted depends on multiple factors,
• 10:25
  Speaker 1: including whether the other entity, one, participated in the prosecution's
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: witness interviews, two, was involved in presenting the case to
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: the grand jury, three, reviewed documents gathered or shared, documents
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: with the prosecution, four, played a role in the development
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: of prosecutorial strategy, or five, accompanied the prosecution to court proceedings.
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: All right, folks, we're going to wrap this one up
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: right here. And in the next episode, we're going to
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: finish this bad boy out. All the information that goes
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: with this episode can be found in the description box.