Wednesday, December 15, 2021

Ghislaine Maxwell: New York: On-going trial: (The defence): Her lawyer says the case is about, "memory, manipulation and money" - and is expected to call Elizabeth Loftus as one of the defence's expert witnesses - a psychologist who studies how people can be manipulated into having "false memories" and has testified in or consulted for hundreds of trials, including those of O.J. Simpson and Harvey Weinstein..."Maxwell, 59, has pleaded not guilty to eight counts of sex trafficking and other crimes in federal court in New York. During cross-examinations, her lawyers tried to undermine the women's credibility by asking about inconsistencies in their accounts and about awards they received from a fund for Epstein's victims."


STORY: "Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyers to focus defence on 'memory, manipulation and money,"  Reuters (Reporter Luc Cohen) reports on December 15, 2021. 


GIST: "Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys will likely focus on portraying the British socialite's accusers as untrustworthy and motivated by money when they start presenting their case in her sex abuse trial on Thursday, according to legal experts and court filings.


Prosecutors rested their case on Friday after two weeks of emotional, often explicit testimony from four women who said Maxwell recruited and groomed them for abuse by the late financier Jeffrey Epstein when the women were teenagers.


The women portrayed Maxwell as central to their abuse by Epstein, a globetrotting financier who died by suicide in 2019 in jail while awaiting trial on sex abuse charges.


Maxwell, 59, has pleaded not guilty to eight counts of sex trafficking and other crimes in federal court in New York. During cross-examinations, her lawyers tried to undermine the women's credibility by asking about inconsistencies in their accounts and about awards they received from a fund for Epstein's victims.


"This case is about memory, manipulation and money," Maxwell attorney Bobbi Sternheim said in her Nov. 29 opening statement.


One of Maxwell's expected expert witnesses is Elizabeth Loftus, a psychologist who studies how people can be manipulated into having "false memories." She has testified in or consulted for hundreds of trials, including those of O.J. Simpson and Harvey Weinstein.


But undermining the accusers' credibility remains an uphill battle, said Duncan Levin, managing partner at Tucker Levin PLLC.


"It's straight out of the playbook," Levin said. "But ... it's a heavy lift to ask jurors to discount what (the accusers)may be saying because they got money."

The defense has said its case will last between two and four days.


CALLING MAXWELL

Given the women's compelling testimony, the defense's best bet may be calling Maxwell herself to testify, said Zachary Margulis-Ohnuma, principal attorney at ZMO Law PLLC.


The jury is "going to believe the gist of what the witnesses are saying," Margulis-Ohnuma said. "The only real counter to that is (Maxwell's) coming back and saying no, I didn't intend that."


Maxwell's attorneys have not indicated whether or not they plan to call her to the stand.


Maxwell's team also intends to call attorneys for "Jane" and "Carolyn," two of the women who testified that they were 14 when Epstein first abused them. 


Jane testified under a pseudonym and Carolyn testified using only her first name.


At issue is whether Jane's attorney, Robert Glassman, told her that cooperating with prosecutors would assist her claim with the fund, which the defense says could taint her testimony. Jane testified that she was awarded $5 million from the compensation fund established by Epstein's estate.


Similarly, Maxwell's attorneys said they want to question Carolyn's attorney, Jack Scarola, about why Carolyn was "uncooperative until there was the prospect of a payout."


In a Wednesday letter, prosecutors asked U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan to bar the lawyers from being called to the stand, arguing that much of their testimony would violate attorney-client privilege and would not be relevant even in instances where it did not.


Jane testified that she did not believe helping prosecutors would boost her claim. 


Carolyn testified that "money will not ever fix what [Maxwell] has done to me."


The fund considered whether a claimant's assertions matched up with any law enforcement findings, but it is a "stretch" to say that cooperating enhanced the women's claims, said Laurie Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School.


"There is no requirement that a victim cooperate or testify for the prosecution," said Levenson, who reviewed the fund's protocol at Reuters' request."


The entire story can be read at:


ghislaine-maxwells-lawyers-focus-her-defense-memory-manipulation-money-2021-12-15


PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic"  section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com.  Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog;


FINAL WORD:  (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases):  "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————————
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions.   They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FINAL, FINAL, FINAL WORD: "It is incredibly easy to convict an innocent person, but it's exceedingly difficult to undo such a devastating injustice. 
Jennifer Givens: DirectorL UVA Innocence Project.