Speaker 1: All right, let's jump into this article from ABC News
and let's see what author James Hill has to say headline.
Judge denies Glaine Maxwell's request for private jurors screening. I mean,
they live in this fantasy world where they think that
anything that they want they're gonna get, and up until
recently that's the case, right, But now in this case,
Glene Maxwell and her team are learning that's not how
it's how we're rocking anymore. So all of your technicalities,
your loopholes, your ps. That shit's dying on the vine.
A federal judge on Thursday denied requests from Gallaine Maxwell,
the accused accomplice, co conspirator, general all around scumbag, fellow
child abuser, and bipedal serpent of deceased sex offender pedophile
Jeffrey Epstein, to have prospective jurors for her criminal trial
question privately outside the view of the public and the press,
and to keep a jury questionnaire questionnaire under seal. Maxwell's
attorneys had argued that the extraordinary measures were necessary to
effectively screen for potential bias and for exposure to a
tsunami of publicity about the high profile sex trafficking case.
I mean, wow, breaking news. I don't know where you're
gonna find somebody who is not biased against alleged child traffickers,
child abusers, and covorters of people like Jeffrey Epstein. Pretty
hard not to find people that aren't biased. I guess
you'd have to go to New York high society to
find those people, right. I wonder what Alan Dershowitz is doing.
Think Leon Black wants to sit on the jury. I mean,
that's how ludicrous these people are. I'm sure that Glenn
Maxwell's team is pining for that. Let's get us some
high society individuals on the jury. That way we can
get ourselves off. Obviously hyperbole from me there, but what
does that even mean? No, everyone is biased against people
who are children except other people who are children. So
good luck, I mean good luck. But the fact that
Judge Nathan smacked them down here and said not, the
public's gonna see the process. The public is gonna see
what's going on here, and none of your winging or
gnashing of the teeth is going to make a difference.
This case amplifies the likelihood that jurors will be more
apprehensive and constrained to respond openly and honestly in an
open court, within earshot of other jurors, members of the public,
and the media. Maxwell attorney Bobby Sternham wrote in a
court filing last week, I mean, look, I get it right,
got to do that for your client, and Maxwell's team
had to try and make this move. Here's the problem,
and this is what I've been pointing out from the
very beginning, and I really not too many other people
are talking about it. The fact of the matter is this.
Have you heard any of her lawyers come out and
talk about her innocence. All they've talked about is her
conditions in jail, the technicalities, the media, the members of
the public. They're trying to set it up for the appeal.
That's all they're doing. They know they're cooked. They have
zero shot at this trial. There's not much I'm sure
about in this world, but I'm pretty sure that they
have zero shot at this trial. And you can see
that with the way her team is behaving, the way
they're going about her defense, and the way they're going
balls to the wall with the technicalities and the loopholes.
They understand. These aren't stupid people, these lawyers. They understand
that if they get into a courtroom and Maxwell gets,
you know, a cross examined by Alison Moe, it's gonna
be an absolute disaster. So what do you do? Try
not to go to trial in the first place, right,
And that's certainly what they're up to. They don't want
to go to trial, folks, No way, no how. The
proposal from Maxwell's defense team, which federal prosecutors opposed, would
have been a departure from typical procedure in the Manhattan
Federal Court, where her trial is scheduled. In most instances,
a judge conducts screenings of groups of prospective jurors and
open court after consulting with prosecutors and defense counsel about
the questions to be posed, and if good for the goose,
good for the gander. She's always expecting some kind of
special treatment. And once again, whenever I hear about her
and special treatment, I just think about Khalif Browder, and
any sort of empathy I had for Maxwell goes right
out the window. I don't care about your sitting in
your jail cell. Oh how bad, how rough on? You
can't go to your parties, Ah, how terrible. No empathy
for her in court filings last week. Prosecutors contended that
Maxwell had presented no persuasive reason to depart from the
well established practice. Absolutely, if everybody else goes about it
this way, and everybody else has to go about it
this way, so does Maxwell. Breaking news, Glenn Maxwell, breaking news,
Maxwell family. You're not in London anymore. You're in the
fucking United States of America, and you're gonna pay the price.
The party is over for you people. The court should
ask most questions in open court and ask sensitive questions
such as those that relate to sexual abuse and media
exposure at sidebar, wrote Assistant US attorney Alison Moe. And
that's the procedure that they usually use, right, so why
should it be changed here? This is the first case
ever where there's sensitive material. Of course not there's procedure
for all of this. But Maxwell thinks she's above it all.
Folks think she's better than everybody. Breaking news, boloney, Sandwich, Eeter,
You're not enjoy your stay at the courtesy of the
American taxpayer. But Maxwell's lawyers argue those conventional procedures are
inadequate to ferret out potential bias and prejudice because of
the sensitive nature of the charges and the intense negative
media coverage about Maxwell and Epstein in every conceivable form, Well, yeah,
that's what happens. Okay. I hope this is a warning
shot over the bow to the rest of these fucking
disgusting people. We're not gonna tolerate your bullshit anymore. We're
paying attention now. You wanted us locked up in our
houses for nineteen months, Well guess what time to reap
what you sew negative media coverage. That's usually what happens
when you're running a human trafficking ring that abuses children
and women. Just saying the negative publicity has been so pervasive,
vitriolic and extreme that Miss Maxwell has been demonized in
the press. Sternham wrote, no wrong, she's been demonized by
her own actions. Nice try to, you know, refurbish her
image here, but that's not gonna that's not gonna work.
Zero chance that's working. The coverage has been this way
because they have avoided justice for so long and people
have had enough. Even their pals and the legacy media
are forced to report on it now. And I know
that much must stick in their crawl when they have
to do it. But you know, private and individual questioning
would encourage a potential potential jurors to answer questions more
completely and honestly, because the jurors would not be influenced
by or influence the answers given by fellow jurors or
fear embarrassment in giving an honest response. Turnam added, what
all of a sudden, she's the advocate of all these jurors. Oh,
I don't want them to feel uncomfortable. Shut up, all right,
I'm so glad that Judge Nathan told them to kick
rocks here. Such a ridiculous ask, folks, an absolutely ridiculous ask,
always about the special treatment for this lady and at
the same time crying that she's being treated so bad.
US District Judge Alison Nathan, who's overseeing Maxwell's trial, also
denied her request to allow Maxwell's lawyers and prosecutors to
question each potential juror individually for up to three minutes
after the court concludes its inquiries. The initial jury pool
for the case is estimated to include about six hundred
people who will fill out jury questionnaire as in early November,
Nathan said she had expects to reduce the pool to
about fifty to sixty people before she questions each prospective
juror in person. The final panel will consist of twelve
jurors and six alternates, So this is pretty much standard
operating procedure, right. They weed down the pool of jurors,
a nice big pool of six hundred people, right, gives
you a nice wide range of people. Then they whittle
that down to fifty or sixty. Then she questions those
fifty or sixty, and they decide who the twelve jurors
are going to be in conjunction with the defense and
the prosecution. So I'm very interested to watch this process unfold. Again,
I'm not like somebody who usually follows the procedurals, right,
so this is all kind of new to me as
far as you know, the nuances of all of this.
So it's always nice to learn something along the way.
Late Wednesday, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
and a coalition of seventeen media organizations registered objections to
Maxwell's proposed secrecy surrounding the jury selection process. So the
news media obviously is dead set on having this stuff
be open to the public, and it's nice to see that,
you know, the media is finally paying attention here instead
of trying to, you know, run cover for their friends.
But it's funny that ABC News is one of these
outlets that was arguing for this, considering they had a
Virginia Roberts interview that they squashed, so talk about it, pop.
The questioning is a critical stage of criminal proceedings, and
the public interest in favor of access is correspondingly weighty.
RCFP attorney Katie Townsend wrote in a letter to the
US District Judge Allison Nathan, who's overseeing Maxwell's case. The media.
A coalition which includes ABC News, argued that a proposed
Jerry questionnaire that was filed under seal last week by
Maxwell's attorneys without government objection, should be made part of
the public record. Maxwell's lawyers contended the documents should remain
sealed to avoid media coverage that may prejudice the jury
selection process. So again, this is just all the back
and forth that you see in cases like this between
the lawyers, just at a higher degree because of the
level of this case. So these right now as we speak,
I guarantee these lawyers are going back and forth behind
the scenes trying to hammer out the particulars. I mean,
we're only a little more than a month out from
the trial, so things are going to start moving a
lot quicker now. Given jurors the opportunity to view the
questionnaire before they come to court to fill it out
is like a take home exam and they can fill
out all the answers and do all the research and
decide what answers they want to put on those papers.
Sternham said during the hearing Thursday. I think there's an
opportunity for people motivated to want to sit on this
jury for a variety of reasons. That's valid. You know
what I gotta give her, you know, the tip of
the cap there. That is a valid concern. If I
was being tried, I'd be worried about that too. We
all know how people like to insert themselves and stuff
like this. Everybody wants to be the hero. Everybody wants
to be, you know, the superstar of the show. And
there's a lot of crazy people out there. So I
could see that as a one valid concern, right, but
not valid enough for me to jump on board with
them if I was the judge. But Nathan rule that
maxwell generalized can concerns about media coverage were not sufficient
to overcome the public's First Amendment right of access to
court proceedings, including the jury selection process. Hallelujah. Imagine that
the constitution being upheld. Holy shit, What country am I
in the public has a right to access the First Amendment? Okay,
A lot of times we forget about that, and we
forget that our constitutional rights are being trampled on on
a regular basis these days. The party's sole rationale for
sealing the submission is to avoid at a general level,
media coverage that may prejudice the jury selection process, Nathan said.
But jurors are sworn to give true and complete answers
to the questionnaire. If a juror is being dishonest, we
will smoke that out, the judge added. So, according to
Judge Nathan, they're going to smoke out anybody who is
potentially up here playing games, and, according to her, to
have the proper jerrypool ready to go. Maxwell fifty nine,
has pleaded not guilty to charges that she assisted, facilitated,
and contributed to Epstein's abuse of four minor girls from
nineteen ninety four to two thousand and four. Prosecutors alleged
Maxwell befriended the young girls and helped to put them
at ease, knowing that they would eventually be sexually abused
by Epstein, and she took part. Okay, let's be real.
According to the survivors, not only was she a facilitator,
she also took part in some of the abuse. Okay,
let's keep let let's be very frank about all of this.
Maxwell's lawyers have argued in court filings that federal prosecutors
pursued charges against her as a substitute for Epstein, who
died by suicide in New York. What who died by
suicide allegedly in a New York federal jail in twenty
nineteen while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. Jerry selection
is set to begin in Maxwell's case on November fifteenth,
with the trial schedule to open two weeks later. Oh well,
there you have it, folks. It's heating up. We're getting
closer to this day, we're getting closer to see Maxwell
in court, and we're getting closer to justice. And as
I've said many times, that train has left the station.
It's barreling down the tracks and heading directly for Galaine. Maxwell.
If you'd like to contact me, you can do that
at Bobby Kopuci at ProtonMail dot com. That's bo bb
Y c ap you Cci at ProtonMail dot com. You
can also find me on Twitter at Bobby Underscore c
ap u Cci. All of the links that go with
this episode can be found in the description box. All right, everyone,
and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. Hope everybody's having
a great Saturday morning out there, and hopefully the rest
of your weekend is even better. Today we're going to
talk a little bit more about Gallaine Maxwell and the
new court filings that her and her team are trying
to keep under wraps. Now, we all know the situation
with jur Number fifty at this point, and we all
know that Team Maxwell is pushing hard for a mistrial. Now,
to go along with all of that, they have these
new filings that they want to keep under seal because,
according to them, they don't want Juror Number fifty to
get any information that he might not have right They
want to make sure that they're not making it easy
for him if in the event he gets prosecuted or
what have you. Now, the prosecutors on the flip side
of that, they're calling for transparency, which is crazy he
considering the federal government doesn't even know how to spell
transparency usually, but at least in this case, the prosecutors
are saying, no, we don't want this stuff under seal,
and they're challenging the filings by the defense. So it's
going to come down to Judge Nathan making a ruling
on what's going to be sealed, what's not going to
be sealed, and what's going to be for public consumption.
Now you all know where I stand on this. I
think everything should be for public consumption. Anything that has
been put to rest, if you will, stuff court documents
about Jeffrey Epstein or people who might be dead or arrested, whatever,
all of that stuff should be public knowledge. It should
be open for the public to consume, and there should
be no transparency whatsoever when it comes to the Jeffrey
Epstein criminal enterprise, unless, of course, that we're keeping, you know,
under wraps the name of people who were abused, then
of course you don't want that stuff out there. I'm
talking about information about those who were involved in the crimes.
There should be no blanket of secrecy. There should be
no trans there should be no protection. It should be
all transparent. Right, once these people are outed, once you know,
this case hits the court, I don't want to hear about, oh,
let's keep this under wraps anymore. Enough of that, this
is not a national security issue. We don't have Boris
over here from whatever the new version of the security
services in Russia trying to figure out what's up with
Glean Maxwell. This is CYA type shit when they keep
things sealed. As far as the federal government, like their
investigation into what happened into the Jeffrey Epstein's death in
the jailhouse, it's not because it's national security. It's because
they don't want to have egg on their face and
they know they drop the ball. And we've experienced that
so much here in the Jeffrey app Stein case and
the investigation into what happened. It has been a brick
wall basically when you're looking for information and it has
to do with Jeffrey Epstein's death, forget about it. But
it's just been the way this case has been conducted
from the very beginning, so much secrecy, people who should
be out and not being outed, and somehow these people,
the so called elite, continue to be protected. Thankfully, that's
starting to change, and more people have had enough. More
people like you out there are not buying the bullshit
line that's being fed to them. And that's a good
thing because there is a massive awakening going on. And
I'm not talking about any nonsense about you know, this
conspiracy theory or that I'm talking about in general amongst
people around the world waking up and understanding that the
circumstances that we find ourselves in are not good. And
when you have people like Jeffrey Epstein and the people
protecting him at the very highest levers of control, it's
never gonna work out well for the rest of us.
So if we can't come together and rally to stand
up to people like Jeffrey Epstein and human traffickers, then
I don't know what sort of common ground we can find.
One thing I will say, though, is throughout this whole
entire time I've been researching this case, there have been
people from all walks of the political spectrum who have
come together and dropped all of their political bs beefs
to work to try and bring justice here. And I
think that's the proper way forward, right common ground. I mean,
if we can't find common ground going after people like Epstein.
I don't even know what to say, but thankfully, most
people who are interested in this case have only one
goal in mind, and that is bringing the people who
are responsible for these heinous crimes to justice. All Right,
So we have an article today from Bloomberg headline Maxwell
prosecutors opposed keeping new trial request under seal. This article
was authored by Patricia Hurtado. Glenn Maxwell's prosecutor set her
request for a new trial based on a jurors disclosure
that he was the victim of childhood sexual abuse should
be public one hundred percent. Like I just said in
the monologue there, Honestly, I don't believe that anything should
be under seal at this point unless it has to
do with privacy for the survivors. If you're named as
somebody in this case, a person of interest, somebody who
was hanging around Epstein, I'm sorry to say, but any
kind of privacy that you should be entitled to is
out the window last month. The British socialite, you mean,
human trafficker, Patricia Hurtado, that's what she is. A convicted felon,
not a socialite former socialite. Do we call you know,
Charlie Manson? A former construction worker or whatever the hell
he did before he killed people or sent people off
to kill people. Do we call John Wayne Gacy the engaging,
loving clown? No, of course, not call him a murderer,
serial killer, a sick fuck just like Ala. Maxwell filed
the request under sealed, with her lawyer Christian Everdell, arguing
on Tuesday that public disclosure would provide a roadmap for
the jur and give him an improper preview of information
he shouldn't have. Maxwell's jury was anonymous and the man
was only known as Juror fifty during the trial. So again,
what they're saying is their reasoning for trying to keep
this under seal is that it would give Juror Number fifty,
Scottie David kind of an idea of what's going on here,
and they don't want that to happen, right. They don't
want him to be prepared, they don't want his lawyer,
Todd Spodek to be prepared, So they're trying to keep
it under seal and under wraps for as long as possible.
Prosecutor Maureen Comi on Friday rejected Maxwell's claims as unfounded,
arguing that there was no reason for the filings to
remain sealed because the material was already made public by
the jur when he spoke with the media. Makes sense, right, dude,
spoke to the media, gave up the information already. What
are you talking about under seal? What's the deal with
all of this sealed nonsense? Now, obviously, if you're Glen
Maxwell and her team, I could see why they'd want
to keep everything sealed. They know that it's a bad
look for them no matter what happens. Maybe not in
this instance so much, but as far as documentation throughout
this whole thing, they knew that it would cast a
bad light on their client. So that's why Glen Maxwell
and her team fought so hard to keep those documents
from the original deposition out of the public light. Thankfully,
Judge Presco wasn't having it, and she released a bunch
of those documents and still more are on the way.
But if it was up to Glenn Maxwell and her team,
everything would have been kept in the dark forever. There
can be no need to hide from public view. A
discussion of public materials, Comy said the defensive suggestion that
her defense briefing contains information from some significant investigation into
Juror fifty is not accurate. The motion does not contain
any significant material that is not otherwise public. So that's
Maureen Comy pretty much poo pooing the idea, telling the court, look,
we don't need this to be sealed. We don't need
this to be kept under wraps. There's nothing in there
that would be considered detrimental. So, in our opinion, meaning
the prosecution's opinion, we don't want this documentation sealed, which
is kind of funny considering Maureen Comy and friends usually
love the seal shit. Several media organizations have also urged
US District Judge Alice Nathan to unseal the proceedings Maxwell,
who was convicted in December of enticing, grooming and sexually
abusing underage girls with her former boyfriend Jeffrey Epstein. Again,
you say, right here in this article, mister Toddo, that
she was convicted of enticing, grooming and sexually abusing underage girls.
But you still call her a socialite at the beginning. Okay,
it makes sense with her former boyfriend. You mean co conspirator,
fellow child abuser Jeffrey Epstein. That's what you mean. Right not.
Our boyfriend requested a new trial after the jur told
several media outlets that his revelation of past sexual abuse
helps sway other jurors to convict. And again, that's what
his statement is, right, that's the way he sees things. Now.
I wonder if the other jurors see things quite that way.
Do they feel like they were swayed by Scotty David
or is this another example of Scotty David wanting to
be the hero of the Storyffective jurors were asked whether
they had been victims of sexual abuse. The jur who
identified himself as Scottie David his first and middle names,
told Reuters that he flew through the jury questionnaire And again,
just a public service announcement. If you're ever doing Jerry
duty or you're called to sit in and you know,
be part of a jury, probably a good idea to
answer all of the questions truthfully. Probably a good idea
not to fly through the questionnaire like you're taking a
ninth grade math test, Abba dabba the whole way through
on your you know, it's just it's ridiculous. Pay attention,
do the right thing, and don't try and insert yourself
in the story. I just don't understand that whole entire
mentality these people that want to be the story. What
you're doing is making things much more difficult on these survivors.
If this moron had never came out and spoke all
this nonsense to the media, just kept his mouth shut
and didn't insert himself, we wouldn't even be talking about
this right now. We'd be talking about sentencing, you know,
all of the good stuff that comes after a conviction
of an animal like Maxwell. But no Jerry or juror
number fifty Scotti. David decided he'd come out run his
fat yap and now here we are. So hopefully all
of this stuff that they're talking about remains unsealed and
ready for public consumption because nobody trusts anything that's going on, right,
Nobody wants to hear about, oh well this is under
seal or the public can't consume this. Everyone's out a
belly full of that. And it's time for the federal government,
especially to just be correct when it comes to Maxwell
and Epstein. Unseal all the documentation that should be unsealed,
everything that pertains to the case. Because nobody trusts the
official narrative from Jeffrey Epstein being killed or dying in
prison or jail. I mean to Epstein being protected by
people in intelligence services. Nobody trusts the institutions anymore, and
that is the one thing that everybody seems to agree on.
He also said he didn't remember such a question, but
would have answered honestly if asked. Prosecutors have asked the
judge to question the jur but Nathan hasn't ruled on
the request. So again, we're really waiting on Judge Nathan, Right,
That's what it all comes down to. She's going to
make the decision. She's going to decide if this goes
to more of an investigation, if there is a mistrial,
or whatever it might be. It all is going to
rest on what Judge Nathan eventually decides. So we can
speculate until that day comes, right, But we don't know
what's going on in her head. We don't know which
way she's going to land. Hopefully it's on the side
of transparency and all of this stuff remains unsealed. But
we all know how it works, right, We all know
the deal with this kind of thing and how the
federal government conducts itself. They will say that there's an
active investigation. When you try and get information about insert
situation here, you know how many times people ran into
that try and get freedom of information acts as far
as Jeffrey Epstein's death, what they'll say is, well, this
is an ongoing and active investigation, so we can't release
any of this information to you. And that is how
the government gets by, right when you file a freedom
of information act that all they have to say is up,
this is an active investigation can help you. And we
see that so often with the federal government, and we
have seen that a lot with the Jeffrey Epstein case
for sure, especially after this dude's death. Now, as far
as Maxwell and the situation here, again, I don't really
know how this is going to end up. I don't
know if Maxwell is going to get a mistrial. I
don't know, right, I'm just being honest with you, folks.
I'm not gonna sit here and say, oh, she's not
gonna she's not gonna get a mistrial. This is over
and done with, because we don't know. My feeling is
that Judge Nathan isn't gonna find enough here. I feel
that Judge Nathan will eventually take a look at all
of this, and I believe that the conviction will stand.
Now we can argue until the cows come home about
Scotty David and his his conversation, right, was it improper?
Wasn't it improper? And there's a lot to argue there.
Do I think that he should be talking to the
media after a verdict such as this, No, probably not.
But that said, the stipulations didn't state that they weren't
allowed to speak to the media, so you know, you
can't really blame him there. But for me, it certainly
looks like he was less than truthful, right, And if
that's the case, then he's an absolute clown. That's really
what it comes down to. If you're lying on the
jury questionnaire, you're lying to get on the jury because
you have an axe to grind or something like that,
and it can end up leading to the situation we're
in now, then yeah, you're a clown. Okay, But I'm
very interested to see which way this ends up as
far as from a transparency perspective, because it could tell
the tale moving forward, as far as what we're going
to see unsealed and what we're going to see kept
under wraps and personally, I want everything dumped. And when
Judge Presca was releasing all of those documents, it was very,
very helpful to the investigation, to the research because you
can go and cross reference things now, Right, It's one
thing to hear a report source says, It's a whole
other thing when that same exact information is in court filings, right,
it brings a lot more weight to it. Someone can
say whatever they want, but when you say something under
oath and it's in court documentation, it brings a whole
different feel to it because now you have the threat
of perjury hanging over your head. So if you're not truthful,
the federal government has the end to really make your
life miserable and hell, and believe me, they love to
do it. Whenever you're sitting down with the FBI and
they're doing one of their three to zero two's, Oh,
they love to walk people into perjury traps. So it's
going to be interesting moving forward to see how this
transparency situation breaks down here and to see what Judge
Nathan decides. I'm leaning towards no mistrial. I'm leaning towards
this conviction standing. But that said, Maxwell's definitely going to
appeal one way or the other, and then this case
will get bumped up to the appeals court and they'll
have a look and they'll have a say. The one
thing that Maxwell can't too happy about, however, is that
the same appeals court that's going to get a look
at this Well, Judge Nathan is going to be sitting
on that appeals court soon, so she's gonna know the
case in and out, and I'm sure her colleagues will
rely on her, you know, adjudication of this case to
get information from her clerks or whatever it might be,
so they have a full robust idea about what happened
Maxwell and her chances moving forward. I don't think they're
very good folks. And to be honest with you, I
can't see Glenn Maxwell ever getting out of jail. I
think she's gonna serve this whole sentence, and at her age,
with the years she's facing, looks like maloney sandwiches and
jailhouse case at dias are on the menu for the
rest of her life. All Right, folks, that's gonna do
it for this morning's episode. I'll be back later on
today at some point with some more Then there's some
context episodes coming your way. Hope that everybody has an
awesome day. If you'd like to contact me, you can
do that at Bobby Kapuchi at ProtonMail dot com. That's
b O B B Y c A p U c
c I at ProtonMail dot com. You can also find
me on Twitter at b O B B y underscore
c A p U c c I. The link that
we discussed can be found in the description box.