Defamatory Socialist Ghislaine Maxwell is due to be convicted of crimes related to human trafficking on June 28.
Judge Alison Nathan set the date for the sentence on Friday afternoon.
The late verdict was based on a lawyer’s decision due to recent “convincing” evidence that could reverse the trial and Maxwell’s conviction.
Maxwell, 60, was sentenced on December 29 to aid in the sexual abuse of minors by her ex-partner Jeffrey Epstein. She faces 65 years in prison, which means she could spend the rest of her life behind bars.
She was found guilty of five of the six cases of sex trafficking – a spectacular fall for a former girl from a London company who later moved to the highest circles of the New York social scene.
Maxwell’s lawyers called for a new trial last week after the jury revealed that he had helped convict a former socialist by telling jury members about his experience of sexual abuse.
Ghislaine Maxwell may have spent the rest of her life behind bars after a jury convicted her last month of recruiting and caring for young girls to be sexually abused by the late American financier and pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.
Maxwell was found guilty of five of the six sex trafficking cases – a spectacular fall for a former London-based girl who later moved to the highest circles of the New York social scene. Pictured: Maxwell with Epstein
According to court documents of January 10, the US government has now offered to drop two perjury charges related to the claims that Maxwell made in 2016 in a separate civil dispute if the conviction for sexual crimes survives. There is a maximum of five years in prison for each perjury charge.
The accused alleges that the convicted sex smuggler lied under oath by concealing his involvement in Epstein’s offenses during a separate civil proceeding against her by prosecutor Prince Andrew Virginia Giuffre.
The U.S. government reaffirmed its position in a letter to Judge Alison J. Nathan, stating: from re-testimony.
Judge Alison Nathan set the date of the verdict at June 28
Meanwhile, Prince Andrew is under strong pressure to settle with Virginia Roberts Giuffre after a New York judge refused to drop her case – paving the way for a nine-month lawsuit to investigate allegations that she was repeatedly forced to have sex with him. she was a teenager.
This decision is a devastating blow to the Duke of York, who is now facing an extremely costly and reputable court case in September next year if he does not try to pay Giuffre at least $ 5 million.
If he decides not to settle, or if Giuffre rejects any offer, Andrew faces the questioning of her lawyers in a testimony filmed on video in London, which could be replayed in court, although the ninth in a row cannot be forced to testify due to a civil dispute. in another legal jurisdiction.
In addition, he could simply ignore the case and let the court rule in his absence, although this would probably further damage his reputation.
Virginia Giuffre has long claimed to have been a victim of Jeffrey Epstein, and in 2015 she sued Maxwell for defamation for calling her a liar.
Prince Andrew is seen with his arms around Virginia Roberts while Ghislaine Maxwell stands in the background, in a now infamous photograph from early 2001.
Giuffre’s lawyers asked Judge Loretta Preska Wednesday to unseal material about Epstein and Maxwell’s “sex trafficking operations” from her 2015 civil lawsuit against Maxwell, which contains references to eight anonymous John Does.
Individuals are referred to in court documents only as “non-participants 17, 53, 54, 55, 56, 73, 93 and 151”.
It is not clear if the Duke of York is one of them. Six objected to unsealing.
In a letter to Judge Preska on Wednesday, Maxwell’s attorney, Laura Menninger, said her client would “leave it to court” to determine if the names should be sealed.
“After a careful examination of the detailed objections he has made [the eight Non-Party Does], Ghislaine Maxwell’s lawyer writes to inform the Court that she does not wish to pursue these objections further, “the letter states.
“Each of these services has a lawyer who has skillfully enforced his or her own privacy rights. Ms Maxwell therefore leaves it to that court to carry out an appropriate inspection in accordance with the regulation and the protocol for the sealing of decided motions. ‘
Maxwell, who was reportedly Epstein’s mistress and his ex-girlfriend, is seen posing with a pedophile in evidence in court.
DailyMail.com also revealed last week that a juror, Scotty David, had suffered sexual abuse. He said he didn’t remember being asked about his own sexual past, but vaguely remembered a question in a potential juror’s questionnaire about friends or family.
Maxwell’s lawyers told the Mail on Sunday that they thought they had found a third juror who had lied about being abused, after a second unidentified juror told The New York Times that they had also been abused as a child.
The first juror to expose their sexual abuse, David, said he did not remember answering a pre-trial question about his own history of sexual abuse – which questioned the validity of Maxwell’s conviction – and asked the judge to see his answers.
He has since retained attorney Todd Spodek, who asked the court to provide a questionnaire, according to the New York Daily News. He could face perjury if he was found to have been deliberately lying.
Thirty-five-year-old David claimed to have used his experience of sexual assault to influence other jurors and said, ‘When I shared this, they were able to figure out the memory aspect of sexual abuse.’
But a video released by DailyMail.com last week revealed that David couldn’t remember whether the pre-trial questionnaire asked about the history of sexual abuse – which he did.
Maxwell’s lawyers called for a new trial last week after juror Scotty David, 35, revealed that he had helped convict the former socialist by telling jury members about his experience of sexual abuse.
Court documents obtained by DailyMail.com show that the former Socialist’s defense team has made a vigorous effort to ask two such questions in an effort to rule out anyone who “cannot be a fair juror,” and has done so in the face of strenuous government objections.
Requesting a retrial, Maxwell’s lawyers explained their position in a letter to the court, stating: “The defense demands that the court postpone the setting of the verdict, as there is a convincing basis for the court to overturn Ms Maxwell’s conviction and allow her a new trial based on the discovery of jury 50 during the hearing.
“The defense is therefore opposed to setting a timetable for the imposition of penalties until this proposal is resolved.
“In addition, requiring Ms Maxwell to participate in the preparation of the pre-judgment investigation report while awaiting a decision on her proposal for a new trial will adversely affect her rights under the Fifth Amendment (the right to remain silent so that she is not charged).
“Mrs. Maxwell will be forced not to cooperate with the probation department’s investigation, as any statements she makes in Probation and any documents she provides may be used against her in her new trial.”
Epstein took his life in a federal prison in Manhattan in August 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of sex trafficking
She was found guilty of sex trafficking in a minor, transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, and three conspiracy cases. She was not found guilty of enticing a minor to travel to illegal sexual practices.
Maxwell was convicted after a month-long trial in which the plaintiffs allegedly recruited and adapted teenage girls for Epstein from 1994 to 2004 to sexually abuse them.
Maxwell once had a romantic relationship with Epstein, but later became his employee in his five residences, including a Manhattan mansion and a large property in Palm Beach, Florida.
Epstein took his life in a federal prison in Manhattan in August 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of sex trafficking.
Maxwell’s lawyers argued in court that federal prosecutors had made her a scapegoat after his death.
However, she was found guilty of sex trafficking in a minor, transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, and three conspiracy cases. She was not found guilty of enticing a minor to travel to illegal sexual practices.