Mega Edition:  Ghislaine Maxwell And The Go  No Where Argument Made To The 2nd Circuit (10/11/25)

Mega Edition: Ghislaine Maxwell And The Go No Where Argument Made To The 2nd Circuit (10/11/25)

Ghislaine Maxwell’s efforts to secure a retrial faced daunting legal obstacles from the start. One central hurdle was proving that a significant procedural or constitutional error occurred during her original trial—mere disagreement with the result isn’t enough on appeal. Her team advanced arguments such as a juror failing to disclose a history of sexual abuse (which Maxwell’s lawyers claimed influenced deliberations) and prosecutorial overreach in applying “conscious avoidance” instructions to the jury. But trial judges largely rejected those arguments, and appellate courts are historically very deferential to trial-level rulings on admissibility, jury selection, and instructional issues.


On appeal to the Second Circuit, Ghislaine Maxwell challenged multiple elements of her conviction. Among her central arguments was that Jeffrey Epstein’s 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida included a clause protecting co-conspirators, and that it should have shielded her from prosecution in New York. She contended that because the NPA referred broadly to “the United States” (rather than naming a specific district), it was intended to bind all federal prosecutors, not just those in Florida. She also raised claims about the statute of limitations, alleged juror nondisclosure, potential constructive amendment of her indictment, and that her sentence was not procedurally reasonable.


The Second Circuit rejected all those arguments and affirmed the conviction. It held that the NPA did not bind the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York, reasoning that unless an agreement “affirmatively shows” an intent to bind beyond its district, it is limited to the district in which it was made. The court also determined that the indictment was timely, that no abuse of discretion occurred in handling jury or procedural questions, and that Maxwell’s sentence was lawful under the relevant standards.



to contact me:


bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Suosittua kategoriassa Politiikka ja uutiset

rss-ootsa-kuullut-tasta
aikalisa
ootsa-kuullut-tasta-2
rss-podme-livebox
politiikan-puskaradio
rss-vaalirankkurit-podcast
otetaan-yhdet
the-ulkopolitist
linda-maria
et-sa-noin-voi-sanoo-esittaa
rikosmyytit
mita-koulussa-ei-opetettu
rss-hyvaa-huomenta-bryssel
popcorn-with-esko
rss-kovin-paikka
rss-kaikki-uusiksi
rss-merja-mahkan-rahat
rss-tyolinjalla-pekka-sauri
rss-raha-talous-ja-politiikka