Latest / The Epstein Chronicles / Ghislaine Maxwell Opposes The DOJ's Request To Unseal Grand Jury Files

Transcript

Ghislaine Maxwell Opposes The DOJ's Request To Unseal Grand Jury Files · The Epstein Chronicles

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
• 0:02
  Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to take a
• 0:05
  look at Glanne Maxwell's response and opposition to the government's
• 0:10
  motion to unseal the grand jury transcripts case number one
• 0:16
  two zero dash cr DASH zero zero three three zero
• 0:20
  dash PAE United States of America. First Glenn Maxwell. Gleann
• 0:26
  Maxwell's response in opposition to government's motion to unseal grand
• 0:30
  jury transcripts introduction. Jeffrey Epstein is dead. Glenn Maxwell is not.
• 0:38
  Whatever interest the public may have in Epstein, that interests
• 0:41
  cannot justify a broad intrusion into grand jury secrecy. In
• 0:45
  a case where the defendant is alive, her legal options
• 0:48
  are viable and her due process rights remain. When Epstein died,
• 0:52
  prosecutors from the Southern District of New York pivoted and
• 0:56
  made Maxwell the face of his crimes. She became the
• 0:59
  scapegoat and the only person the government would put on trial.
• 1:03
  She was convicted in a media firestorm of false reporting
• 1:06
  and mischaracterizations of the evidence. Oh yeah, sue me, pretty simple,
• 1:11
  right to everybody that defamed you. She won't do that, though,
• 1:15
  because she knows that people are telling the truth about
• 1:17
  her Now, with their case pending before the Supreme Court,
• 1:20
  the government seeks to unseal untested hearsay leyden grand jury transcripts,
• 1:25
  which contain statements presented in secret and never challenged by
• 1:30
  the adversarial process. Maxwell has never been allowed to review
• 1:34
  those transcripts, even though the government did not oppose her
• 1:37
  request to do so. The government seeks to unseal the
• 1:41
  grand jury transcripts citing historical interest, without regard for how
• 1:45
  that release will affect Maxwell's privacy, interests, her appending petition,
• 1:49
  and any future litigation. The government's memorandum Docket seven ninety
• 1:54
  six cloaks itself in Craig, but that case emphasized that
• 1:58
  disclosure requires them most careful judgment and the public's curiosity
• 2:02
  in a defendant's secret conduct at a grand jury hearing
• 2:05
  cannot eclipse the right the defendant has to secrecy and
• 2:09
  overwhelm his objection to public discourse Second Circuit nineteen ninety seven.
• 2:15
  Because this is ongoing litigation in a criminal case involving
• 2:19
  a living defendant with existing legal remedies, the government's motion
• 2:23
  should be denied. The government fails to establish special circumstances
• 2:28
  warranting disclosure of grand jury materials in an ongoing case.
• 2:33
  Section two. There is a tradition in the United States
• 2:37
  that is older than the nation itself, that grand jury
• 2:41
  preceding shall remain secret. In Craig one thirty one ft
• 2:45
  three d At one oh one and one oh two,
• 2:48
  quoting Biagi, Second Circuit, nineteen seventy three, This tradition of
• 2:52
  secrecy is codified in Federal Rule of Criminal Procedures sixt e.
• 2:57
  The rule of secrecy is not without exceptions. However, the
• 3:00
  rule six e three lists several exceptions. The Second Circuit
• 3:05
  has additionally recognized that there are certain special circumstances in
• 3:09
  which release of grand jury records is appropriate, even outside
• 3:13
  the boundaries of Rule sixty three. Importantly, the discretion of
• 3:18
  a trial court in deciding whether to make public the
• 3:21
  ordinarily secret receedings of a grand jury investigation is one
• 3:25
  of the broadest and most sensitive exercises of careful judgment
• 3:28
  that a trial judge can make. In Craig involved a
• 3:33
  petition by a doctoral candidate to unseal the nearly fifty
• 3:37
  year old grand jury testimony of a high ranking government
• 3:40
  and employee Harry Dexter White based on historical interest in
• 3:44
  white suspected role as a communist spy. The Court in
• 3:48
  Craig denied the petition to unseal. On appeal, the Second
• 3:52
  Circuit affirmed the trial court's denial of the petition, finding
• 3:56
  that the court did not abuse its discretion when it
• 3:59
  found that sufficiently exceptional circumstances did not exist to warrant disclosure,
• 4:04
  and affirming the lower court's denial of the motion to unseal.
• 4:08
  The Second Circuit acknowledged historical interest as a potential basis
• 4:12
  for disclosure and offered a non exhaustive list of factors
• 4:15
  that a trial court might consider when confronted with ruling
• 4:19
  on a motion to unseal. Those factors include, but are
• 4:23
  not limited to, one the identity of the party seeking disclosure.
• 4:27
  Two whether the defendant to the grand jury preceding or
• 4:31
  the government opposes the disclosure. Three why disclosure is being
• 4:35
  sought in the particular case, for what specific information is
• 4:38
  being sought for disclosure? Five how long ago the grand
• 4:42
  jury proceedings took place, six, the current status of the
• 4:46
  principles of the grand jury proceedings and that of their families.
• 4:50
  Seven the extent to which the desired material, either permissibly
• 4:54
  or impermissibly has been previously made public. And eight whether
• 4:59
  witnesses to the grand jury proceeding who might be affected
• 5:02
  by disclosure are still alive, and nine the additional need
• 5:07
  for maintaining secrecy in their particular case in question. In Craig,
• 5:12
  the Court noted that all of the factors and their
• 5:15
  precise significance must be evaluated in the context of the
• 5:19
  specific case. The timing of the request to unseal is
• 5:23
  one of the most crucial elements to be considered by
• 5:26
  the District Court. Here, the grand jury convened just five
• 5:29
  years ago, not decades ago. This is not a case
• 5:32
  where the passage of time eroded many of the justifications
• 5:36
  for continued secrecy, nor is it a case where time
• 5:40
  has brought about the death of the principal parties involved
• 5:43
  in the investigations, as well as their immediate families. Epstein
• 5:48
  may be dead, but Maxwell is alive and litigating her case.
• 5:53
  Maxwell's petition for a writ is pending before the Supreme Court.
• 5:57
  She's preparing a habeas petition. Disc Losure of grand jury
• 6:00
  material at this stage risk irreparably tainting the legal process
• 6:05
  by injecting sealed testimony into the public debate while judicial
• 6:09
  review is ongoing. The reputational harm from releasing incomplete, potentially
• 6:15
  misleading grand jury testimony untested by cross examination would be
• 6:19
  severe and irrevocable. Those allegations, if released in raw, untested form,
• 6:25
  would inevitably influence any future legal proceeding should Maxwell succeed
• 6:30
  nor post conviction litigation. The government's proposal to redact victim
• 6:35
  identifying information does not mitigate this harm. The substance of
• 6:39
  the allegations, not the names, creates the prejudice public curiosity
• 6:44
  is insufficient when Maxwell's legal and reputational interests are at stake.
• 6:48
  These factors weigh heavily in favor of preserving the secrecy
• 6:52
  of the grand jury material. Although the government's memorandum sets
• 6:56
  forth that certain aspects and subject matters of the transcript
• 6:59
  became public during Maxwell's trial, Maxwell has never had an
• 7:03
  opportunity to review the entirety of the grand jury materials
• 7:07
  of her case. The government provided a list to the
• 7:11
  court under seal of witnesses whose accounts were conveyed in
• 7:15
  the grand jury, and a corresponding list noting which witnesses
• 7:18
  testified at trial. That list has not been disclosed to us.
• 7:23
  The government's memorandum, however, acknowledges that the law enforcement witnesses
• 7:27
  who testified before the grand jury are alive and remain
• 7:31
  active in the NYPD and FBI, respectively. The government's memorandum
• 7:37
  also disclosed that many of the complaining witnesses who formed
• 7:41
  the subject matter of the grand jury witness testimony are
• 7:44
  also alive. This factor, likewise, counsels against disclosure of the
• 7:48
  grand jury transcripts, given the need to protect both active
• 7:52
  law enforcement personnel and alleged victims. Three, there is no
• 7:57
  precedent supporting release of grand jury transcripts appending case like
• 8:01
  this one. Yeah, no precedent for your client get moved either,
• 8:04
  But here we are. None of the cases cited by
• 8:08
  the government justified disclosure here in National Security Archive involved
• 8:13
  a decade old grand jury proceeding against Julius and Ethel
• 8:17
  Rosenberg relating to charges of conspiracy to commit espionage by
• 8:21
  providing information about the atomic bomb to Soviet agents. In
• 8:26
  nineteen fifty one. The Rosenbergs were tried, convicted, and sentenced
• 8:30
  to death. They were executed in nineteen fifty three. In
• 8:34
  twenty fifteen, upon a motion by a nonprofit institution and others,
• 8:39
  Judge Hellerstein granted a petition to unseal the grand jury
• 8:43
  testimony of David Greenglass, ethel Rosenberg's brother. In granting the
• 8:48
  petition to unseal green glass grand jury testimony, the court
• 8:54
  observed that in the sixty five years that had passed
• 8:56
  since the Rosenberg trial, many believe that ethyl Rol Rosenberg
• 9:00
  was innocent and had been framed by green Glass. As
• 9:03
  a result, and only after green Glass had passed away,
• 9:07
  the Core concluded that green glass grand jury testimony should
• 9:10
  be released since it provided information in a case of
• 9:14
  historical interest to the public. It's noteworthy that Judge Hellerstein
• 9:18
  refused to unseal the transcript while green Glass was alive,
• 9:21
  finding that green glass interest and preserving the secrecy of
• 9:25
  his grand jury testimony was sufficient to prevent its unsealing
• 9:29
  during his life to despite the public interest in the case.
• 9:33
  Impetition of American Historical Association involved a similar request by
• 9:38
  historical associations in nineteen ninety eight to unseal transcripts of
• 9:42
  two special grand juries convened from forty seven to nineteen
• 9:46
  fifty pertaining to espionage investigation of Alger Hiss. Hiss, a
• 9:52
  former high ranking State Department official, was convicted of committing
• 9:56
  perjury and responding delegations that he was a Soviet spy.
• 10:00
  Hiss maintained his innocence until his death and publicly suggested
• 10:04
  that his prosecution was a political hit job by Richard
• 10:08
  Nixon to mobilize public opposition to Communism. In granting the
• 10:13
  request to unseal the fifty year old grand jury material,
• 10:17
  the court noted the significant passage a time, along with
• 10:20
  the fact that most of the relevant witnesses, including Hiss,
• 10:23
  had died. The court ultimately ruled that the great historical
• 10:28
  importance of the his case outweighed the minimal interest in
• 10:31
  preserving secrecy IDEA two ninety three. Disclosure is being sought
• 10:37
  in this case due to the immense public interest in
• 10:39
  Jeffrey Epstein and Glenn Maxwell's cases, along with public interest
• 10:44
  in the government's handling of those investigations and prosecutions. The
• 10:49
  public interest identified by the government, while understandable, is insufficient
• 10:54
  to warrant disclosure of grand jury materials at this time.
• 10:58
  The government frames this inst as historical, yet it is
• 11:02
  nothing more than widespread and intense public curiosity about an
• 11:06
  ongoing criminal case. Neither in petition for National Security Archive
• 11:12
  nor petition of American Historical Association support the conclusion that
• 11:17
  the Maxwell grand jury materials should be released. Each of
• 11:21
  those cases involved testimony debting back at least five decades,
• 11:25
  along with grand jury testimony relating to defendants and witnesses
• 11:29
  who were deceased. In Biagi is equally unavailing in Biagi
• 11:35
  for seventy eight, Second Circuit nineteen seventy three. That case
• 11:39
  involved the unsealing of grand jury testimony of a US Congressman,
• 11:43
  Mario Biagi, who had not been indicted and who had
• 11:46
  waived any protection to secrecy by seeking complete disclosure in
• 11:50
  the form of a motion requesting disclosure of his own
• 11:53
  testimony for its own sake. The government in Biagi moved
• 11:58
  to unsealed Biagi's grand jury testimony only after Biagi petitioned
• 12:02
  a three judge panel in the Southern District of New
• 12:04
  York to examine his grand jury testimony and publicly report
• 12:08
  whether he had invoked any constitutional privilege relating to his
• 12:12
  personal finances or assets. The Second Circuit affirm the District
• 12:17
  Court's order directing the public disclosure of Biaggi's testimony based
• 12:21
  solely on his waiver finding that, no matter how much
• 12:24
  or how legitimately the public may want to know whether
• 12:28
  a candidate for high public office has invoked a privilege
• 12:31
  against self incrimination before a grand jury, or has lied
• 12:36
  about having done so, that interest must generally yield to
• 12:39
  the larger one of preserving the salutary rule of law
• 12:43
  embodied in Rule sixty of Federal Rules a criminal procedure.
• 12:48
  But that is not this case. Maxwell, unlike Biagi, has
• 12:51
  preserved her right to grand jury secrecy and vigorously opposes
• 12:55
  disclosure of the grand jury material. Lastly, the Florida case
• 13:00
  the Government sites CIA Florida Holdings versus Dave Ahrenberg, has
• 13:05
  no presidential value in this jurisdiction and involved a civil
• 13:09
  suit under Florida public records, not federal grand jury materials
• 13:13
  protected under Rule sixty. See order granting plaintiff's motion for
• 13:18
  reconsideration of the trial courts, February twenty ninth, twenty twenty
• 13:22
  four Order CIA Florida Holdings, Dave Arenberg and Joseph Abruzzo,
• 13:27
  Fifteenth Circuit, July one, twenty twenty four. It is wholly
• 13:31
  in opposite. There is no precedent for unsealing grand jury
• 13:35
  transcripts in an ongoing matter like Maxwell's case. Accordingly, the
• 13:39
  government motion should be denied. Conclusion, the government's motion to
• 13:44
  unseal the grand jury materials in this matter should be denied.
• 13:48
  This was dated August fifth, twenty twenty five, and it
• 13:52
  was signed by David Oscar Marcus. All of the information
• 13:57
  that goes with this episode can be found in the
• 13:59
  discription option box