Ghislaine Maxill’s brother insists she was denied a fair trial, despite being labeled the most hated woman in history following her arrest.
Ian Maxwell (65), flew from Oxford to New York to assist his sister in trial. He said that Wednesday’s guilty verdicts were shocking and claimed she was innocent.
As she awaits her sentence for child sex traficking, her 60-year old younger sister is under suicide watch in New York.
Maxwell confirmed that the family had planned to appeal immediately and stated: “This shocking outcome reflects Ghislaine’s denial of a fair trial. This includes the horrific conditions she was held in for more than 18 months, and this severely impacted her ability and freedom to defend herself.”
He added: ‘I am confident of the strong grounds for appeal both legal and evidential and that my sister will be vindicated and ultimately found innocent.’
Ian Maxwell, 65, right, pictured with siblings Kevin, Christine and Isabel Maxwell, said the guilty verdicts on Wednesday were a ‘shocking result’
Ghislaine has been supported by her siblings who say they will launch an appeal against the convictions she received for child sextrafficking
Maxwell has been placed on suicide alert in New York as she awaits her sentencing for child sex slavery.
Blaming the authorities’ media manipulation, he said to the Daily Telegraph, “US First Amendment Rights are clearly in conflict with a defendant’s right to a fair trial. The USA doesn’t have an equivalent of contempt or court guidelines, and no guidelines for preventing overt media manipulation by both the prosecution authorities and high paid lawyers who represented both accused and unrepresented accusers to question their claims.”
Maxwell’s relatives were disappointed when the guilty verdicts were announced and they had begun an appeal process.
According to their statement, they stated: “We strongly believe in the innocence of our sister – we are deeply disappointed with this verdict. We believe she will be vindicated.
She has four potential grounds for appeal – including the judge’s decision to force the jury to work through New Year’s Eve holiday due to the coronavirus.
The former socialite is currently facing 65 years imprisonment for trafficking and recruiting underage girls to Jeffrey Epstein.
Lisa Bloom who represented a few of Jeffrey Epstein’s and Ghislaine Maxwell’s accusers said she doesn’t see any chance of Maxwell’s legal team winning the appeal.
Ms Bloom stated that she spoke on BBC Breakfast to Thursday that her team was able to talk courageously about an appeal. However, it is unlikely that they will win because all of the rulings of the judge were correct. They also followed the law, and this would need to be the basis of any appeal.
Maxwell’s attorneys will probably argue that Judge Nathan required the jury to meet every day for the last week of trial until reaching a verdict.
It would have also included New Year’s Eve & New Year’s Day even though they fall on Saturdays and are public holidays, as well as Sundays.
Maxwell’s attorneys claimed that these instructions were telling Maxwell’s jury to “hurry up”
Judge Nathan stated that this was because of the “astronomical” number of Covid-19 cases fuelled by Omicron, which meant there was an actual risk of a “mistrial”.
However, the jury delivered their verdict the next day.
Ghislaine MAXELL is currently facing 65 year imprisonment after she was found guilty by a jury of recruiting and trading underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein. Maxwell is seen in court sketch as her guilty verdict for sex abuse in New York reads.
DailyMail.com’s legal analysis reveals that Ghislaine Maxwell could appeal on four grounds. Maxwell lawyers could focus on Judge Alison Nathan’s handling of the case in an effort to reverse the conviction.
Another issue that could be appealed is Judge Nathan’s handling of a panel question about count 4 – Transportation of an Individual Under the Age of 17 With the Intent to Engage in Illegal Sexual Activity – Maxwell was convicted.
Maxwell’s attorneys are likely to be concerned about Maxwell being found guilty on a jury notice relating to Annie Farmer, Maxwell’s accuser.
Fourth, Maxwell’s attorneys could be dissatisfied with the way Judge Nathan handled their request that US Marshals force one witness into court. This request was ultimately rejected by Maxwell.
Maxwell still has not filed her appeal. However, Bobbi Sternheim, Maxwell’s lawyer stated they would.
Maxwell’s family stated in a statement that Maxwell would be “ultimately vindicated” despite being convicted by the jury of five out of six of her charges.
Maxwell, who is 60 years old, does have some hope in other high-profile sex crime cases, especially that of Bill Cosby.
He was sentenced in 2018 to 10 years imprisonment for the drugging and sexual assault of Andrea Constand 14 years ago at his house.
Cosby’s conviction overturned in appeal after the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court found that Cosby violated his due-process rights as a former prosecutor had agreed to not charge him.
Harvey Weinstein currently appeals the March 2013 sentence that he received for rape/sexual assault of which he was serving a 23-year term.
An appeal court hearing was held in New York this month. Judges asked if it was too much to line up Weinstein accusers and bad character witnesses. The decision is expected in spring 2022.
Maxwell is yet to file an appeal, but her lawyer Bobbi Starheim stated that they will.
After yesterday’s verdicts, Maxwell’s defense team Jeffery Pgliuca and Laura Menninger were seen leaving New York City court.
Maxwell was unable to stand trial on Tuesday when Judge Nathan refused to provide additional instruction to the jury regarding the charge of transporting ‘Jane,’ which Maxwell is charged with. It is likely that they will use it as grounds to appeal
Harvey Weinstein currently appeals the sentence of 23 years for sexual assault and rape that he received in March 2012. The conviction of Bill Cosby was reversed in June by the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court. It ruled that he had violated his due process rights because an earlier prosecutor had agreed not to bring him charges.
Maxwell’s appeal will likely be heavily influenced by Judge Nathan’s handling of jury instructions on the coronavirus.
Day 16 Judge Nathan suggested that the jury sit at 6pm rather than 5pm due to the possibility of one member becoming infected.
Laura Menninger Maxwell’s lawyer strongly disagreed.
The court heard her tell it: “Because they have only had three days, any suggestion they should stay longer is starting to sound like telling them to hurry up when they clearly know they can deliberate as long and as much as they wish.”
Menninger pointed out that Judge Nathan offered the jury another day of deliberation the week before but they refused it. They stated in a note that they had made plans for Christmas break and had “made plans” for it.
The jury was instructed by Judge Nathan that they can stay up to 6 pm, but Judge Nathan also stated there is no pressure and they are free to take their time.
Judge Nathan was more depressed the next day. She stated that there had been an “astronomical rise” in Covid-positive cases in New York.
Judge Nathan said that there is a high-risk scenario in which jurors (or participants such as Maxwell), may be required to take precautions, thus threatening our ability to finish this trial.
A note was sent by the jury at the conclusion of the day, stating they were “making progress”.
The jury requested clarification on their week’s schedule Wednesday morning, which turned out to have been the last day of deliberations.
Judge Nathan said that she would make them sit on every day of the week, until they reach a verdict. Previously they had been told that they could only sit Monday through Wednesday.
It would be New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day, respectively on Friday and Saturday.
Maxwell’s legal team appealed, and the judge added the exact same qualification: ‘Officially, I’m not trying to press you. It is important that you take as much time as possible.
That very same day, the jury delivered their verdict.
The appeal could also be influenced by Maxwell’s arguments with Judge Nathan, who was arguing on the 16th day of trial over a juror note about count 4. This related to Jane.
It was a count of transportation for a minor under the age 17 in an effort to engage illicit sexual activity.
Maxwell was found guilty of this charge and could spend up to 10 Years in prison.
Maxwell’s siblings Christine, Kevin, and Isabel fled court in New York yesterday. They declined to talk with reporters. Maxwell’s family claimed that Maxwell would be “ultimately vindicated” despite her being convicted of five of the six counts.
To prove Maxwell’s relationship with Epstein the prosecution obtained photos taken in Epstein’s house.
Note read, ‘If defendant assisted in Jane’s flight home, but not to New Mexico where/if Jane intended to engage in sexual behavior, can she be found guilt under the second element?
Alison Moe stated that the jury was unable to understand the question, and suggested they refer them to the instructions.
Christian Everdell, Maxwell’s attorney, stated that Maxwell was traveling for a’significant purpose’ and not because Jane engaged in illegal sexual activity as required under the law.
Everdell explained that while she was “just presumably returning home”, it wasn’t for illicit sexual activities.
Judge Nathan stated that the note was unclear and said to the court, “I don’t understand what the question is asking. It’s too hard to interpret factually or legally.”
She then referred the jury directly to her instructions, without making any additional comments.
Maxwell’s attorneys tried to get the judge to reconsider their decision again the next day with a seven-page letter to the court. It stated that Maxwell was wrong and had prejudiced her.
They stated that jurors were confused about count 4 and count 2 respectively. Therefore, they asked for an additional instruction of three paragraphs to help clarify.
Judge Nathan denied the request to address count 2, as it was not raised by the jury.
Everdell told her he was looking for a “third bite of the Apple” and she dismissed it as ‘just wrong’, while remaining true to her initial decision.
Maxwell’s attorneys were enraged by another note that was left on the 14th day of trial. This could be the foundation of an appeal.
A jury was asked by Annie Farmer if it would be possible to take her testimony on the conspiracy charges of transporting a minor for illegal sex act.
Maxwell will spend five years behind bars for each charge.
Judge Nathan stated that she would inform the jury, “The answer to your question is Yes. You may think about it.”
Everdell stated that he was concerned about the possibility of Farmer’s testimony being used’more broadly than necessary’ by the jury.
He wanted the juror to remember that Farmer’s claims were not “illegal sexual conduct” as it was described in the indictment.
Photographed: Ghislaine Maxwell’s Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC), where she is currently being held since July 2020.
Judge Nathan refused to accept the argument and stated that it would not be responsive to their questions.
Maxwell’s lawyers could raise the issue of Judge Nathan’s handling their problem calling defense witnesses in Maxwell’s appeal.
Maxwell’s lawyers were bluntly told by Judge Nathan when Maxwell asked the US Marshals for assistance to force Kelly Bovino to appear in court.
The judge seemed exasperated by the possibility of delay, especially since the defense had known two weeks prior that Bovino would not respond to their subpoena.
She stated that she was not going to delay the trial and all of this must happen by yesterday.
In a heated exchange with Menninger, Judge Nathan stated that an ‘unresponsive witness’ isn’t a small thing.
Menninger, sounding desperate, replied that they had flown people all across the country and across the pond.
“Our client is at risk and we have one day to defend him, and one and a quarter days for his defense. There is also one witness we are having trouble with. It’s not a request for weeks of long delays’.
Maxwell’s lawyer ended up withdrawing their request to the US Marshals. But, they may appeal to get the conviction overturned.