Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Judge Engelmayer Denies Ghislaine Maxwell's Attempt To Overturn Her Conviction (Part 7) (9/29/26)

Transcript

Judge Engelmayer Denies Ghislaine Maxwell's Attempt To Overturn Her Conviction (Part 7) (9/29/26) · 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 going to get right
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: back to Judge Engelmeyer's order denying Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt to
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: get a new trial. 4. Claim 7. Delayed prosecution. Maxwell
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: next claims that the indictment was untimely in that it
• 0:20
  Speaker 1: charged her for the first time in 2020 for offense
• 0:24
  Speaker 1: conduct that ended in 2004. She argues that this gap
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: in time denied her due process and prejudiced her because
• 0:32
  Speaker 1: evidence had become unavailable during the period. Maxwell's counsel made
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: this argument in the district court no fewer than three times,
• 0:40
  Speaker 1: twice before trial in her motions to dismiss both the
• 0:44
  Speaker 1: S-1 and S-2 indictment, and after trial in her motion
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: to vacate the conviction. Each time, Judge Nathan rejected the argument.
• 0:53
  Speaker 1: Maxwell chose not to appeal those rulings. Maxwell again does
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: not point to any cause for that default. And in
• 1:00
  Speaker 1: addition to being procedurally barred, this claim, as Judge Nathan
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: repeatedly found, is meritless. Relevant Background On February 4, 2021,
• 1:10
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's counsel moved to dismiss S-1 indictment on the grounds
• 1:15
  Speaker 1: of pre-indictment delay. The motion argued that between her crimes
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: and the indictment, four witnesses had died, including Epstein and
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: PBPD detective Joseph Riccardi's investing employees could not be found.
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: On specified witnesses, memories had been corrupted, including as a
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: result of related civil litigation, and documents had been lost
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: or destroyed. On April 16, 2021, Judge Nathan denied the motion.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: She found that Maxwell had not shown either that the
• 1:43
  Speaker 1: government had intentionally delayed bringing charges for an improper purpose,
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: or that such a delay had seriously damaged her ability
• 1:52
  Speaker 1: to mount a defense. findings that were required to establish
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: such a claim. It was highly speculative, Judge Nathan stated,
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: that the death of any witness, forgotten memories, or loss
• 2:03
  Speaker 1: of records would make a meaningful difference in the case.
• 2:07
  Speaker 1: She rejected Maxwell's vague and unsubstantiated assertion that had Epstein
• 2:12
  Speaker 1: or Detective Ricari been alive, they would have provided evidence
• 2:16
  Speaker 1: exculpating Maxwell. And Maxwell's bare assertion that numerous witnesses are
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: engaged in perjurious conspiracy against her was manifestly inadequate to
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: warrant dismissal of the indictment. On May 25, 2021, Maxwell
• 2:31
  Speaker 1: moved to dismiss the S-2 indictment on the same ground.
• 2:35
  Speaker 1: On August 13, 2021, Judge Nathan denied the motion. As
• 2:39
  Speaker 1: with the first motion, Judge Nathan concluded Maxwell had not
• 2:42
  Speaker 1: suffered prejudice from any delay. On February 11, 2022, after
• 2:48
  Speaker 1: her conviction, Maxwell moved for a new trial. including based
• 2:51
  Speaker 1: on pre-indictment delay. She reiterated her claim to have been
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: prejudiced by the unavailability of potential witnesses, now including Albert Pinto,
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: an architect who had worked for Epstein, and lost documents.
• 3:05
  Speaker 1: On April 29, 2022, Judge Nathan denied that motion. She
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: noted that even assuming Maxwell's factual assertions were accurate, she
• 3:14
  Speaker 1: had not made any claim that the government had intentionally
• 3:17
  Speaker 1: delayed the indictment to gain a tactical advantage. As required
• 3:21
  Speaker 1: to establish such a claim, Judge Nathan noted the trial
• 3:24
  Speaker 1: testimony supplied legitimate explanations for the government having not pursued
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: an earlier indictment of Maxwell. For example, several witnesses, including Jane, Kate,
• 3:35
  Speaker 1: and Carolyn, had testified at the trial that their cooperation
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: with the government's investigation was relatively recent, suggesting that an
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: earlier prosecution was not feasible. In any event, Judge Nathan
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: found Maxwell had not shown actual and substantial prejudice from
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: any delay. As to the two major sets of lost
• 3:55
  Speaker 1: evidence Maxwell claimed would have assisted her, one, flight records,
• 3:59
  Speaker 1: financial documents, phone records, and Epstein's property records and testimony
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: by four employees of Epstein's. Maxwell had not shown that
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: such would have supported her defense. Maxwell also failed to
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: show that the loss of such evidence was caused by
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: the pre-indictment delay. Judge Nathan noted that tellingly Maxwell had
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: not explained why the former Epstein employees who had testified
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: at trial or had been on the party's witness list
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: could not have also testified to the information Maxwell asserted
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: had been lost. Nor had Maxwell shown that any unavailable
• 4:35
  Speaker 1: witness would have meaningfully altered her defense as none could
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: testify directly as to whether or not Maxwell and Epstein
• 4:42
  Speaker 1: sexually abused the victims. Assessment This section 2255 claim rehashes
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: the argument Maxwell repeatedly pressed before Judge Nathan that documents
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: and witnesses, including Epstein, Detective Ricari, and Pinto, had become
• 4:57
  Speaker 1: unavailable between Maxwell's crimes and her prosecution and that she
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: was thereby denied due process. This argument is procedurally barred
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: because Maxwell could have pursued it on direct appeal, but
• 5:10
  Speaker 1: did not do so. Maxwell's attempts to avoid this bar
• 5:13
  Speaker 1: are by claiming that new evidence shows that there were
• 5:16
  Speaker 1: 25 men with whom victims' lawyers reached secret settlements who
• 5:20
  Speaker 1: could equally be considered co-conspirators of Epstein. Maxwell argues that
• 5:25
  Speaker 1: she would have called them as witnesses at her trial
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: had she known of their existence. But Maxwell does not
• 5:31
  Speaker 1: support this factual claim. Her only basis for it's a
• 5:34
  Speaker 1: transcript from a May 14th, 2024 podcast featuring a lawyer
• 5:38
  Speaker 1: for various Epstein and Maxwell victims. On that podcast, the
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: lawyer vaguely alleged that Epstein had been sent or had
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: sent victims to be abused by certain friends, who Epstein
• 5:50
  Speaker 1: then blackmailed. The lawyer opined, so let's just say that
• 5:53
  Speaker 1: over the years, there's 25 of those individuals. This is uncorroborated.
• 5:58
  Speaker 1: Conjectural remark is a far cry from evidence that 25
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: unindicted co-conspirators exist, as Maxwell, without naming any of them, posits.
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: Maxwell's implication that most or all of these persons were
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: known long ago to law enforcement is also at odds
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: with the OPR's report findings. As to information known to DOJ,
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: OPR report at 167. Villafana told OPR, None of the
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: victims that we spoke to ever talked about any other
• 6:28
  Speaker 1: men being involved in abusing them. It was only Jeffrey Epstein.
• 6:32
  Speaker 1: USAO SDFL had not indicted or indicated interest in prosecuting
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: anyone other than the four-named female assistants. OPR concludes that
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: the evidence does not show that Acosta, Laurie, or Villafana
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: agreed to the non-prosecution provision to protect any of Epstein's political, celebrity,
• 6:51
  Speaker 1: or other influential associates. Regardless, Maxwell does not adduce any
• 6:56
  Speaker 1: evidence that 1. Had these ostensible co-conspirators existed, their testimony
• 7:02
  Speaker 1: would have exculpated Maxwell. 2. These witnesses would have been
• 7:07
  Speaker 1: available had the charges against her been brought earlier, but
• 7:10
  Speaker 1: no longer were as of trial. Or three, the government
• 7:14
  Speaker 1: deliberately delayed indictment to inhibit Maxwell's ability to call them
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: in her defense. Maxwell thus has not shown any cause
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: or prejudice for her failure to raise this claim on
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: direct appeal, and for the reasons cogently and repeatedly explained
• 7:30
  Speaker 1: by Judge Nathan, this claim is meritless. 5. Claim 8.
• 7:35
  Speaker 1: Sentence Defects Maxwell next claims that Judge Nathan erred in
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: imposing a 240-month sentence and a $ 750, 000 fine. She makes
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: numerous arguments to this end, each is barred and substantively baseless.
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: Relevant Background At sentencing after resolving Maxwell's remaining objections, the
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: factual findings in the Prestonance Investigation Report, Judge Nathan heard
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: arguments from both sides on the calculation of the advisory
• 8:04
  Speaker 1: guidelines range. The defense argued that the 2003 guidelines manual
• 8:09
  Speaker 1: applied and that it yielded a range of 51 to
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: 63 months imprisonment. The government argued that the 2004 guidelines
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: manual applied and it yielded a range of 360 to
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: 660 months imprisonment. As to the applicable version of the
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: guidelines manual, Judge Nathan found that the 2004 manual would
• 8:30
  Speaker 1: increase Maxwell's guideline range and that the government had not
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: shown by a preponderance that the conspiracy had extended into
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: November and December 2004. To avoid an ex post facto
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: problem in which Maxwell was subject to a higher sentence
• 8:45
  Speaker 1: on account of law that entirely post dated her offense,
• 8:48
  Speaker 1: Judge Nathan therefore applied the 2003 manual. In calculating the
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: advisory guidelines, range under that manual, Judge Nathan found certain
• 8:58
  Speaker 1: enhancements to apply, including 1. Pattern of Activity under USSG
• 9:03
  Speaker 1: Section 4B1. 5B based on Maxwell's participation in prohibited sexual misconduct
• 9:10
  Speaker 1: with minors on multiple occasions. Leadership under USSG, Section 3B. 1. 1a,
• 9:17
  Speaker 1: based on Maxwell having functioned as an organizer or leader
• 9:21
  Speaker 1: in criminal activity involving five or more participants, or that
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: there was otherwise extensive undue influence. 3. Undue influence under USSG,
• 9:31
  Speaker 1: Section 2G. 1. 1, based on the significant age gaps between Epstein
• 9:35
  Speaker 1: and Maxwell and their minor victims, and at least one
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: victim's financial instability, and four additional victim groups under USSG
• 9:44
  Speaker 1: Section 3D1. 4 and 2G1. 1. D1, based on certain minor victims. Applying
• 9:52
  Speaker 1: the 2003 manual, Judge Nathan calculated guidelines as recommending a
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: sentence between 188 and 235 months. imprisonment and a fine
• 10:02
  Speaker 1: on each count between $ 20, 000 and $ 200, 000. Judge Nathan heard
• 10:08
  Speaker 1: arguments from both sides on how the U.S. Code 18
• 10:11
  Speaker 1: Section 3553A factors applied and heard statements by five victims.
• 10:17
  Speaker 1: Judge Nathan then set out her assessments of the factors
• 10:20
  Speaker 1: favoring a high sentence. These included that Maxwell had directly
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: and repeatedly and over the course of many years participated
• 10:28
  Speaker 1: in a horrific scheme to entice, transport and traffic underage girls,
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: some as young as 14, for sexual abuse by and
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: with Jeffrey Epstein. Maxwell had played a pivotal role in
• 10:40
  Speaker 1: facilitating their abuse through a series of deceptive tactics. And
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: as a sophisticated adult woman, Maxwell had provided an initial
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: veneer of responsibility and even safety, which enabled her to
• 10:52
  Speaker 1: manipulate the victims and normalize sexual abuse through her involvement, encouragement,
• 10:58
  Speaker 1: and instruction. The damage done to these young girls was incalculable.
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: As mitigating factors, Judge Nathan noted, Maxwell was then more
• 11:07
  Speaker 1: than 60 years old, did not have any criminal history,
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: and had experienced a demanding father and the death of
• 11:13
  Speaker 1: her brother early in life. But Judge Nathan noted, even
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: at sentencing, Maxwell had continued to blame others and did
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: not express remorse or acceptance of responsibility. She imposed a
• 11:25
  Speaker 1: slightly above-guideline sentence of 240 months imprisonment and a $ 750, 000 fine, $ 250, 000
• 11:32
  Speaker 1: on each of the counts 3, 4, and 6. Assessment
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: Maxwell makes numerous arguments why her sentence was legally erroneous.
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: Each was either rejected or foregone on direct appeal. Each
• 11:46
  Speaker 1: is also meritless. All right, we're going to wrap up
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: right here. And in the next episode dealing with the topic,
• 11:51
  Speaker 1: we're going to pick up where we left off. All
• 11:54
  Speaker 1: the information that goes with this episode can be found
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: in the description box.