Lawyers for Ghislaine Maxwell Want Sex Trafficking Conviction Thrown Out

sex trafficker and former Jeffrey. Epstein associate galain Maxwell has. appealed her case and says her. conviction should be thrown out it's an. interesting series of legal arguments. that will break down with former CIA and. FBI agent Tracy Walder welcome to. sidebar presented by Lauren crime I'm. Jesse. Weber gain Maxwell the former associate. Madam accomplice girlfriend of deceased. financier and sex offender Jeffrey. Epstein has filed her appeal and has.

asked a court to throw out her. convictions on sex trafficking charges. there is a lot to break down here so as. we know glan Maxwell was convicted in. 2021 by a federal jury of five charges. related to procuring girls for Jeffrey. Epstein to abuse for years multiple. victims testified that Maxwell also. participated in the abuse herself and. Maxwell was sentenced to serve 20 years. in prison well now her attorneys argue. that she is merely being punished as a.

quote proxy for Jeffrey Epstein to. satisfy quote the public outrage. especially since Epstein can no longer. be prosecuted after all he famously died. in his jail cell in 2019 while awaiting. trial on his own sex trafficking charges. and one of her main defense arguments. something that has been brought up by. her legal team and it's an interesting. legal argument it centers around a very. controversial non-prosecution agreement. that Jeffrey Epstein had entered into. back in 2008 you see Epstein was being.

investigated by both federal and state. authorities when he entered into this. deal and the deal was he agrees to plead. guilty in Florida to the state charge of. soliciting prostitution of a minor and. serves 18 months in jail he ended up. only serving about 13 months spent a. large portion of his days outside of. jail in a work release program and in. exchange for doing that prosecutors. would not charge him with more serious. federal crimes and the agreement also. said said that the US attorney's office.

for the southern district of Florida. would agree to not bring any criminal. charges against any of Epstein's. potential co-conspirators well Maxwell. says there you go right there I'm. covered the trial court in her case did. not agree they said the agreement does. not bind New York prosecutors and it. doesn't cover the conduct that she was. charged for the question now is will the. second Circuit Court of Appeals disagree. they are the higher court because. Maxwell's attorneys argued in front of a.

three-judge panel of this appell at. court this week in fact defense attorney. Diana Fabby Samson argued to this court. quote the plea agreement applies to. preclude this prosecution denying the. viability of this plea agreement strikes. a dagger in the heart of the trust. between the government and its citizens. regarding plea agreements well for that. and more let me bring on Tracy Walder. former CIA and FBI agent news nation. National Security contributor and author. of the unexpected spy Tracy so good to.

see you thanks for coming on thank you. for having me Jesse I'm curious your. opinion on this because it seems it's so. hard to judge what a court is going to. do based on their comments but it seems. like the court may not be persuaded by. Maxwell's arguments in fact Circuit. Judge Richard Wesley said that he read. the US Department of Justice's manual. about non-prosecution agreements and he. said quote it created a strong. presumption that New York prosecutors. were not barred from going after Maxwell.

even telling defense attorney Samson. that the manual suggests the opposite of. what you just said what's your take so I. read the exact same thing actually that. you did so in my opinion I I don't. believe that this is going to be granted. and I don't believe that this is an. appropriate argument for her to make. because it sounds to me that that nonpr. prosecutorial agreement was really Bound. by the southern district of Florida not. New York um where you know she was tried.

and convicted of these crimes also that. agreement really talked about. conspirators right any of his. conspirators wouldn't be prosecuted but. it sounds to me based obviously on the. charges that she was convicted of that. it's not necessarily conspiracy rather. she was an active participant so I think. there's kind of two things one I don't. think that she's bound that agreement. pertains to her and two I don't think. the crimes that she committed are. covered by that agreement and I believe.

there was also a conversation that the. time period of the crimes that we're. talking about in Florida may not be the. same that we're talking about here I. would say in an a day and age post Bill. Cosby when we're talking about promises. that were made to a defendant and and. them essentially either pleading guilty. or saying things that would incriminate. themselves and we know you know his case. was thrown out because of it and he was. released from prison I I would the. argument that I think is interesting did. the government not make a promise here. if you go to the spirit of the deal I.

would say would Jeffrey Epstein have. agreed to plead guilty would he have. agreed to any of this if he knew another. prosecutor outside of Florida could go. after him or his. friends it's a good point right that's. not a bad that's a not a bad argument. right no it obviously I'm processing. that because I think it really I don't. think it's a bad point Jesse but the the. way that I'm coming at it and the way. that I'm looking at it here is we then. have to operate under the offices is. that Jeffrey Epstein cares about someone.

other than himself right and obviously I. don't know him don't want to know him. glad I don't know him I don't believe. that he does so I don't know if he would. have cared one way or another if other. people could have been prosecuted I. believe he would have cared if himself. um was prosecuted but I'm not so sure. that he cares necessarily about that. those other co-conspirators just in my. opinion based on his behavior that we've. seen and Maxwell's legal brief it went.

on to say quote in its Zeal to pin the. blame for its own incompetence and for. Epstein's crimes on Maxwell the. government breached its promise not to. prosecute Maxwell charged her with Time. bar offenses resurrected and recast. decades old allegations for conduct. previously ascribed to Epstein and other. named assistants and joined forces with. complainant civil attorneys whose. interests were Financial to develop new. allegations that would support charges. against Maxwell and then there's an. interesting part where uh in the.

arguments that were heard this week. circuit uh judge Jose Cabanas asked the. prosecutors if anyone else was being. investigated at the time this deal was. made and was that someone that Florida. prosecutors were thinking of that they. were that was going to be covered by. this agreement and Andrew roorbach who. has prosecuted Maxwell said no so I. thought that was really interesting. there that apparently from his. understanding that they weren't looking. at other people.

out in Florida so I guess my question. then back to that and sorry to be. rhetorical is if they weren't looking at. other people why was that included in my. opinion as part of a deal and also I. think you know I don't mean to be blunt. I guess about that point but if if that. was truly the case then why is that was. that such an important part of that 2008. deal that you had mentioned before and I. also think too they really trying to. paint Maxwell into being a scapegoat. right for Epstein but the the reality is.

is she's not she's a criminal too she's. been tried and she's been convicted of. different crimes some similar but some. different um than Epstein and so it's. getting in my opinion obviously we don't. operate under a court of public opinion. but it's not a good look and you know I. watched an interview with her brother. actually yesterday um saying that just. like these victims are victims of sexual. abuse his sister is also the victim of. abuse.

I find that pretty reprehensible uh. quite frankly to say that you know to. these victims um of abuse so I think. we're sort of just it's just not a good. look for her and also he's sort of. saying that they tampered with the jury. pool because some of them had been. victims of sexual abuse but didn't feel. comfortable it's just not a good look. well well there's an interesting point. that you make yes in the eyes of the. public opinion in the eyes of a judge. who would sentence her you could say her. arguments that she was a victim and that.

you know it wouldn't look good and it. could hurt her but when you're talking. about her appellant rights and you're. talking about her legal rights to get a. fair trial or whether she should have. been prosecuted we do have to separate. it now this is not saying that I feel. any sort of sympathy for glain I know. you don't but from an legal point of. view as an attorney I think it's. interesting and you mentioned a good. point because in her legal brief her. pellet brief something that wasn't. argued um in front of this panel this. week specifically specifically was an.

interesting point about the women who. testified against her and these were. women who said that they were abused and. more specifically that three out of the. four at trial had used pseudonyms when. testifying now gain Maxwell argued in. her brief quote the result transformed. the trial into a form of Kabuki theater. designed to remind the jury at every. turn that these adult women were being. protected because their privacy. interests and not Maxwell's. constitutional right to a public trial. were Paramount and then Maxwell goes on.

to say that this was theater because. right after the trial one of those women. did an interview with the daily maale. under her real name Carolyn andreano so. I thought that was interesting that. they're saying you know that prejudiced. her because the jury's looking at these. women and saying that you know they're. they're so affected by what happened to. them they don't even want to use their. real names then right after the trial. one of them comes out so do you think. that that's an interesting argument to. put forward I do think that that's an. interesting argument and you're right.

she has constitutional rights right this. is something that I talk about you know. with my criminal justice students in. college everyone does whether you like. that or not right and she does have. rights but at the same time and she does. have the right to face her accusers. right we all know that and so maybe. that's kind of the point that she's. laying on there but the reality is is. victims also have rights and so if. whether the Optics of that may look bad. or look unted isn't really for us to to. say and in my opinion really can't play.

into her legal argument because these. crimes occurred when these women were. Girls when they were underage and so. they do have a right um to hide their. names and to hide their identities. whether we agree with that or not. whether she agrees with that or not so. just like Maxwell has rights so do these. victims and maybe maybe because I've. seen in these cases sometimes once they. got to the stand and once they discussed.

horrific abuse that they underwent maybe. they felt courageous to come forward and. courageous to share their names we don't. know um how that you know proceeded. after the trial and so in my opinion I. don't believe that that's a good. argument um because you know she really. did have a right to face them it's just. that their names were redacted when I. talk about all of these legal issues. surrounding the Epstein case or any of. the stories that we cover I think it's. fascinating I'm a lawyer I do but I get.

it it is complicated I understand that. and look if you find yourself in a. position where you need a lawyer you not. only need an attorney who could explain. the law to you but one that you can. trust and that is especially true in. personal injury cases which can be very. difficult that's why I want to highlight. attorney Tom and Associates our great. sponsor of this episode of sidebar. whether you were hurt in a car accident. a Refinery explosion maybe got sick. because of a drug or a toxic exposure. maybe you're the victim of Securities.

fraud or a data breach attorney Tom can. help you see Tom and his team they have. the legal knowledge they have the legal. skills that's a given but they also care. they have genuine empathy for their. client situations Tom and his team. they're there for you every call is free. it's private you're going to be speaking. with a member of his team straight away. and their track record is very. impressive in these tough cases where it. matters most in times of turmoil having. somebody that you can trust is. invaluable and by the way you won't pay. a dime until you win which just further.

shows their commitment to your success. and look if your case maybe is not the. best fit for attorney toist team don't. worry they still may be able to. recommend you a lawyer using their. national network of attorneys with. attorney tominus team you're not just. hiring a lawyer you are gaining a. powerful Ally who is committed to. Justice and your well-being so if you've. suffered an injury and you need legal. support click the attorney.com sidebar. link pinned in the comments for a free. consultation or dial 855 Tom Wentz I.

will tell you I think there is a one. issue that could have some success um. and you mentioned it before it was. raised in the legal brief not in the. actual arguments in court was that one. of the jurors didn't reveal that he was. a childhood sexual abuse Survivor during. jury selection and he ended up saying. that he made an inadvertent mistake the. trial judge accepted that uh in a. hearing that was postc conviction um the. problem is that he allegedly talked. about his background with the fellow. jurors during deliberations uh Curious.

your thoughts on that you know in my. opinion and again it's hard to hear this. stuff right because we hearing about. sexual abuse or child Predators is just. a difficult thing but I do think in my. opinion the place where she might have a. chance per se is on that I that's just. my opinion you can agree or disagree but. I do feel if that was not disclosed that. really can Prejudice a jury and he could. have prejudiced the entire jury by.

speaking about um what he went through. what he went through was clearly. horrific um but in my opinion he should. have probably been excused um from you. know the jury pool and so I in my. opinion that's the part that has the. most teeth in in in regards to her. appellate argument but again folks May. disagree with me well going back full. circle to the main argument that was. argued this week about the. non-prosecution agreement as I mentioned. that was very controversial and I wanted. to get your persp perspective as. somebody who has worked um in government.

um this deal that was made you mentioned. a little bit about the idea of why were. other people uh able to be protected in. this agreement if no one else was being. investigated when you look at this. agreement you know people say it was a. slap on the wrist for Jeffrey Epstein. and allowed him to uh commit abuses for. years to come that gement ended up. itself what's your take on it I'm just. if it's okay with you I just want to be. very harsh and very blunt about. please do please do that agreement um.

back in 2007 2008 is allowed for more. children to be victimized full stop. period the end um because Jeffrey. Epstein there's no sign based on all the. documents that have still you know been. released as a result of this that he. stopped after you know the his 13 months. that he served going in and out of kind. of a work release in prison there's no. indication that he stopped and our. criminal justice system is supposed to.

Levy consequences right to stop. behaviors it completely failed these. women or girls at that point um. throughout the entirety of the criminal. justice system and I hate to say this. but I do believe that the government is. just as much to blame and is just as. much complicit um in allowing for that. agreement I know that that's harsh but. that's really how I felt about this I'm. glad you mentioned that because I you're. I'll tell you one thing you're not alone. in thinking that I'm sure a lot of. people have the same opinion and I'll.

tell you what we'll see in the comments. what people have to say about it as well. uh Tracy Walder such a pleasure talking. to you thank you for coming on and. giving your perspective and we will see. what happens with glain Maxwell's case. next thank you for having me all right. everybody that is all we have for you. right now on this episode of sidebar. thank you so much for joining us as. always please subscribe on Apple podcast. Spotify YouTube wherever you get your. podcasts I'm Jesse Weber I'll speak to. you next. time.