A Ghislaine Maxwell trial juror speaks to the press and so she wants a new trial

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell

By Robert Willmann

One letter from the Assistant U.S. Attorneys and two from lawyers for Ghislaine Maxwell which were filed Wednesday, 5 January 2022, have started post-trial jousting, with Maxwell now wanting a new trial because a juror has spoken publicly to the press. A jury found Maxwell guilty of sex crimes on five of six charges in federal court in the Southern District of New York in Manhattan, New York City. Prosecutors advised the judge that a juror had given an interview or interviews that appeared in at least three press outlets. They told the defense lawyers about it Tuesday night. The letter also requested that the court have a hearing on the issue and advise the juror that he could ask for a court-appointed lawyer to represent him in the matter. The defendant’s letters asked for a new trial outright.

The judge issued an order in response and did “offer court-appointed counsel to the juror in issue. Subject to the juror’s right to decline court-appointed counsel, the Court will appoint the on-duty CJA [Criminal Justice Act] counsel to represent the juror. If counsel for the juror wishes to be heard on the issue of the appropriateness of an inquiry, briefing by the juror’s counsel may be filed by January 26, 2022”.

The court order also set out a schedule for Maxwell to file a motion for new trial on the issue about the juror, and for a response and a reply to the response. The order is unclear as to whether all of Maxwell’s arguments for a new trial are to be included in the 19 January motion, or whether more grounds for a new trial can be made in an additional document to be filed by 4 February.

Here are the three letters from the lawyers for the government and defense–

The court order offering the juror an appointed lawyer and setting out a schedule for filing post-trial documents can be seen here–

Here are the news articles referred to in the letter from the U.S. Attorney’s Office, but the Reuters article does not now display as cited–



This entry was posted in Current Affairs, Justice, Willmann and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to A Ghislaine Maxwell trial juror speaks to the press and so she wants a new trial

  1. Looks like a get out of jail free card was shuffled in that deck.
    I can imagine Maxwell’s little black book is in a dead mans letter somewhere, so they can’t suicide her, or throw her in jail for life.

    • John Credulous says:

      A familiar “play book”


      On June 7, 2000, the court ordered a breakup of Microsoft as its remedy. According to that judgment, Microsoft would have to be broken into two separate units, one to produce the operating system, and one to produce other software components.

      The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Judge Jackson’s rulings against Microsoft. This was partly because the appellate court had adopted a “drastically altered scope of liability” under which the remedies could be taken, and also partly due to the embargoed interviews Judge Jackson had given to the news media while he was still hearing the case, in violation of the Code of Conduct for US Judges.”

      Embargoed interviews:
      In this case to Ken Auletta

      Larger view:
      For a long time, Microsoft was an amateur at influencing Washington. It has now stepped up its lobbying and campaign contributions. The irony is that a company long identified with a liberal point of view is trying to make up for lost time with money and hired operatives from the conservative wing of the Republican Party. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, it is the leading donor among computer companies to Federal candidates and parties. It has also hired such well-known Republican operatives as Haley Barbour, Michael Deaver, Grover Norquist and former Representative Vin Weber.

      Bill Gates, a pathetic nerd, quickly got the message, don’t play politics with the big boys – we can litigate you to the point of death, and on a whim, return you to life. Gates found a new mission:

      From Robert Kennedy Jr.’s Book on Fauci: page 269:
      ” Furthermore, in 1998 a new HIV funder appeared—one with deep pockets and a
      shared obsession with vaccines.
      That year, the William H. Gates Foundation announced a nine-year, $500 million plan to fund AIDS vaccine development through Gates’s International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI)—the predecessor organization to the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunizations (GAVI).

      Two years after Gates announced IAVI, he summoned Dr. Fauci to Seattle to propose a partnership that, two decades later, would have profound impacts on humanity.”

  2. Christian J. Chuba says:

    From the first link, a jury member was a victim of sexual abuse, failed to disclose that during the screening process, and allegedly told that to the other jury members during deliberations. Not a small detail, this should result in a mistrial.

  3. Ghost_Ship says:

    Under English Law, what is said in the jury room must stay in the jury room even after the trial is over. AFAIK, the same doesn’t apply under American Law, so once the trial is concluded jurors can talk to anyone including the media.

    • Ghost_Ship says:

      Bit more complicated – juror claimed he was victim of sex abuse but did he disclose that on juror selection questionnaire?

  4. JohninMK says:

    I have seen that another juror was also a sex abuse victim. The first basically boasted how explaining his experiences swayed the jury. Was he stupid saying this or part of a plan?

    It seems that Prince Andrew was set up as the fall guy, helped by his own arrogance, but the document released on Tuesday, confirming that his accuser was part of another pay-off deal, apparently opens the way for him to buy his way out with an out of court settlement.

    Very convenient, like some aspects of the Maxwell case, but too many high profile people seem to be caught up in this to risk anyone of them ending up in court and not being prepared to go down on their own.

  5. Sam says:

    The Mystery of Jeffrey Epstein & Ghislaine Maxwell Explained, by @EmeraldRobinson


    Emerald Robinson asks some simple questions. Two things that standout for me is that when Acosta did the sweetheart deal, Bob Mueller and Jim Comey ran the FBI. Then we have Comey’s daughter as the Ghislaine prosecutor. Coincidence?

    In any case the other “johns” must be resting easy.

  6. longarch says:


    The juror in Ghislaine Maxwell’s sex-trafficking trial whose press comments may result in a new trial for the convicted socialite works as an executive assistant at private-equity giant Carlyle Group Inc.

    In video and newspaper interviews since the Dec. 29 verdict, the juror said he was a victim of sex abuse as a child and that his story helped sway other members of the panel who questioned the credibility of some of Maxwell’s accusers. Maxwell, the former girlfriend of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, was convicted on five of six counts related to a sex-trafficking scheme and faces as many as 65 years in prison.

    4th Annual WIE Symposium – Day 1
    Ghislaine MaxwellPhotographer: Laura Cavanaugh/Getty Images
    The verdict was widely hailed as offering long-delayed justice to victims of Epstein, who died in 2019 while awaiting his own trial. Maxwell’s lawyers are now seeking a new trial on the grounds that the juror did not disclose his previous abuse when asked during the jury selection process. Judge Alison Nathan has asked both prosecutors and defense to submit briefs on whether a new trial is needed because Maxwell did not have an impartial jury.


    Comment: Since the “Sexual Revolution,” Western societies have been extremely hypersexualized. Many children experience events that either are sexual abuse or are so similar as to cause confusion. Demanding that prospective jurors provide perfect information regarding childhood events that could cause confusion is an abuse of the law, intended to defeat the trial-by-jury system.

    The Western notion of law may be the greatest notion of law humans have ever devised, but it is only human, not divine. Human systems of law are fallible. The Western notion of law has been corrupted. One might hope that it could be reformed, but I fear that it stopped functioning as intended long ago.

  7. Seamus Padraig says:

    Didn’t some juror go public after the Derek Chauvin conviction? Where’s his mistrial?

Comments are closed.