k7e2MaxC kjc

k7e2MaxC kjc UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. Before: New York, N.Y. 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) x Teleconference Arraignment Bail Hearing July 14, 2020 3:05 p.m. HON. ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge APPEARANCES AUDREY STRAUSS United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York BY: Assistant United States Attorneys COHEN & GRESSER, LLP Attorneys for Defendant BY: MARK S. COHEN CHRISTIAN R. EVERDELL HADDON MORGAN & FOREMAN, P.C. Attorneys for Defendant BY: JEFFREY S. PAGLIUCA LAURA A. MENNINGER SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066216 k7e2MaxC kjc THE COURT: Good afternoon, everyone. This is Judge Nathan presiding. This is United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 330. I will take appearances from counsel, beginning with counsel for the defendant. : Good afternoon, your Honor. Mark Cohen, Cohen & Gresser, for Ms. Maxwell. Also appearing with me today is my partner Chris Everdell of Cohen & Gresser and Jeff Pagliuca and Laura Menninger of the Haddon Morgan firm. Good afternoon, your Honor. THE COURT: Good afternoon, Mr. Cohen. And for the government. : Good afternoon, your Honor. for the government. I'm joined by my colleagues and And also, with the court's permission, we learned that the executive staff for the U.S. Attorney's office were unfortunately not able to Connecticut at the overflow dial-in so, with the court's permission, we would like to dial them in from a phone here if that's acceptable to the court. THE COURT: The last word, the overflow dial-in was not full. Just a moment and we will make sure that they can connect in. And let me say good afternoon, Ms. Maxwell, as well. THE DEFENDANT: Good afternoon, Judge. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066217 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: Ms. Maxwell, are you able to hear me and see me okay? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, thank you. THE COURT: And are you able to hear Mr. Cohen and counsel for the United States as well? THE DEFENDANT: Yes. Thank you. THE COURT: All right. If at any point you have difficulty with any of the technology, you can let someone there know right away, let me know, and we will pause the proceedings before going any further. Okay? THE DEFENDANT: Thank you, Judge. THE COURT: All right. Just a minute while we check on the call-in line. : Thank you, your Honor. (Pause) : Your Honor, apologies. We have also heard from colleagues in the office that the line is full. We have, however, been able to dial in the executive staff to a phone number here and my understanding is that they can hear and participate that way, if that's acceptable to the court. But of course we defer to the court's preference. THE COURT: We are concerned about feedback from being on a speakerphone in that room. The phone number for nonspeaking co-counsel that was provided, that line is not full, and I would assume the executive leadership of the office SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066218 4 k7e2MaxC kjc falls within that category, so they may call in to that number. Yes, your Honor. Thank you. We will do that. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: All right. : Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Then we will go ahead and proceed. I have called the case. I have taken appearances. Counsel, let me please have oral confirmation that the court reporter is on the line. THE COURT REPORTER: Good afternoon, your Honor. Kristen Carannante. THE COURT: Good afternoon, and thank you so much. We also have on the audio line Pretrial Services Officer Leah Harmon and -- THE PRETRIAL SERVICES OFFICER: Hello, your Honor. Good afternoon. THE COURT: Good afternoon. Thank you. We are here today for the arraignment, the initial scheduling conference, and bail hearing in this matter. As everyone knows, we are in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic. I am conducting this proceeding remotely, pursuant to the authority provided by Section 15002 of the CARES Act and the standing orders issued by our Chief Judge pursuant to that act. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066219 k7e2MaxC kjc I am proceeding by videoconference, which I am 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 accessing remotely. Defense counsel and counsel for the government are appearing remotely via videoconference and the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, is accessing this videoconference from the MDC in Brooklyn. Ms. Maxwell, I did confirm that you could hear me and see me; and, again, if at any point you have any difficulty with the technology, please let me know right away. Okay? THE DEFENDANT: Thank you, your Honor. I will do that. THE COURT: Thank you. And if at any point you would like to speak privately with Mr. Cohen, let me know that right away, and we will move you and your counsel into a private breakout room where nobody else will be able to see or hear your conversation, okay? THE DEFENDANT: Again, thank you, your Honor. I appreciate that. Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Cohen, likewise, should you request to speak with Ms. Maxwell privately, don't hesitate to say that. MR. COHEN: Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: We will turn now to the waiver of physical presence. I did receive a signed waiver of physical presence form dated July 10, 2020. Mr. Cohen, could you please is describe the process by SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066220 k7e2MaxC kjc which you discussed with Ms. Maxwell her right to be present and the indication of her knowing and voluntary waiver of that 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 right provided on this form. MR. COHEN: Yes, your Honor. We, given the press of time, we were not able to physically get the form to our client, but my partner Chris Everdell and I went through it with her, read it to her, and she gave us authorization to sign on her behalf and that's reflected on the form in the boxes where indicated, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Maxwell, is that an accurate account of what occurred? THE DEFENDANT: That is completely accurate, your Honor. Yes. THE COURT: And you have had the form read to you or you have it physically now at this point? THE DEFENDANT: That is correct, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. And you have had time to discuss it with your attorney? THE DEFENDANT: I have, your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. And do you continue to wish to waive your right to be physically present and instead to proceed today by this videoconference proceeding? THE DEFENDANT: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. I do find a knowing and voluntary waiver of the right to be physically present for this SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066221 k7e2MaxC kjc arraignment, scheduling conference, and bail hearing. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Counsel, as you know, to proceed remotely today, in addition to the finding I have just made, I must also find that today's proceeding cannot be further delayed without serious harms to the interests of justice. does the government wish to be heard on that? : Yes, your Honor. The government submits that proceeding remotely in this fashion would protect the interests of the parties and the safety in view of the pandemic. We further submit that this proceeding can be conducted remotely with full participation of the parties in view of the preparation and steps everyone has taken to ensure proper participation. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Mr. Cohen? MR. COHEN: Your Honor, we have agreed to proceed remotely as your Honor just laid out. THE COURT: Okay. I do find that today's proceeding cannot be further delayed without serious harms to the interests of justice for, among other reasons, that the defendant, who is currently detained, seeks release on bail. The final preliminary matter I will address is public access to the proceeding, which has garnered significant public interest. As I have indicated in prior orders, the court has SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066222 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 arranged for a live video feed of this proceeding to be set up in the jury assembly room at the courthouse. This is the largest room available and, with appropriate social distancing, it can safely accommodate 60 people. The court has further provided a live video feed to the press room at the courthouse where additional members of the credentialed in-house press corps can watch and hear the proceeding. Additionally, the court has provided a live audio feed for members of the public. My prior order indicated that the line can accommodate 500 callers, but with thanks of the court staff, that capacity has been increased to 1,000 callers. Lastly, the court has provided through counsel a separate call-in line to ensure audio access to nonspeaking co-counsel, any alleged victims identified by the government, including those who wish to be heard on the question of pretrial detention, and any family members of the defendant. That line is operational now as well. Counsel, beginning with Mr. Cohen, any objection to these arrangements regarding public access? MR. COHEN: No, your Honor. THE COURT: : No, your Honor. THE COURT: Then I will make the following findings: First, COVID-19 constitutes a substantial, if not overriding, reason that supports the court's approach to access SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066223 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in this case. As the chief judge of the district has recognized in order number 20MC176, COVID-19 remains a national emergency that restricts normal operations of the courts. Conducting this proceeding in person is not safely feasible. Second, the measures taken by the court are no broader than necessary to address the challenges posed by the pandemic. Although the number of seats in the jury assembly room is limited to 60, it is necessary to do so for public and courthouse staff safety and is closely equivalent to the number of people who would be able to watch an in-court proceeding in a regular -sized courtroom. The number of people who will be able to hear the live audio of this proceeding far exceeds access under normal in-person circumstances. Lastly, given the safety and technology limitations, there are no reasonable alternatives to the measures the court has taken. Accordingly, the access provided is fully in accord with the First and Sixth Amendment public trial rights. With those preliminary matters out of the way, counsel, I propose we turn to the arraignment. am I correct that this is an arraignment on the S1 superseding indictment? : That's correct, your Honor. THE COURT: Can you explain what the difference is between the S1 and the original indictment? SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066224 IC k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 : Yes, your Honor. The difference is a small ministerial correction, a reference to a civil docket number contained in the perjury counts, which are Counts Five and Six of the superseding indictment. Aside from the alteration of those docket numbers, the reference to them, there are no other changes to the indictment. THE COURT: All right. Again, I will conduct the arraignment on the S1 indictment. Ms. Maxwell, have you seen a copy of the S1 indictment in this matter? THE DEFENDANT: I saw the original indictment, your Honor. The original THE COURT: Okay. All right. Mr. Cohen, did you have an opportunity to discuss with Ms. Maxwell the ministerial change that was completed by way of the superseding indictment? MR. COHEN: Yes, yes, Judge. We have, your Honor. THE COURT: Any objection to proceeding on the arraignment of the S1 indictment, Mr. Cohen? MR. COHEN: No, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Ms. Maxwell, have you had an opportunity to discuss the indictment in this case with your attorney? THE DEFENDANT: I have, your Honor. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066225 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: All right. (Indiscernible crosstalk) THE COURT: Go ahead. THE DEFENDANT: No. I said I have been able to discuss it, your Honor, with my attorney. THE COURT: Thank you. You are entitled to have the indictment read to you here in this open court proceeding or you can waive the public reading. Do you waive the public reading? THE DEFENDANT: I do, your Honor. I do waive THE COURT: How do you wish to -- THE DEFENDANT: -- your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. And how do you wish to plead to the charge? THE DEFENDANT: Not guilty, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. I will enter a plea of not guilty to the indictment in this matter. Counsel, we will turn now to the scheduling conference. I would like to begin with a status update from the government. , you should include in your update a description of the status of discovery. Please describe the categories of evidence that will be produced in discovery. 1 will also ask you to indicate how you will ensure that the government will fully and timely meet all of its constitutional SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066226 12 k7e2MaxC kjc and federal law disclosure obligations. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Go ahead, • : Thank you, your Honor. With respect to the items that the government anticipates will be included in discovery in this case, we expect that those materials will include, among other items, search warrant returns, copies of search warrants, subpoena returns, including business records, photographs, electronically stored information from searches conducted on electronic devices. In addition, the materials with respect to the core of the case also include prior investigative files from another investigation in the Southern District of Florida among other items. With respect to the status of discovery, the government has begun preparing an initial production and are prepared to produce a first batch of discovery as soon as a protective order is entered by the court. With respect to the status of the proposed protective order, the government sent defense counsel a proposed protective order last week. We have touched base about the status of that with defense counsel, and they conveyed that they would like to continue reviewing and discussing it with the government, which we plan to do shortly after this conference, with an eye towards submitting a proposed protective order to the court as soon as possible. Following SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066227 13 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the entry of that protective order, as I noted, your Honor, the government is prepared to make a substantial production of discovery. Your Honor, in advance of the conference, the government and defense counsel proposed a joint schedule for discovery, motion practice, and a proposed trial date, in particular, the date selected in that schedule with an eye towards assuring that there was sufficient time for the government to do a careful and exhaustive and thorough review of all of the materials that I just referenced to make sure that the government is complying with its discovery obligations in this case, which we take very seriously. We expect that the bulk of the relevant materials will be produced in short order, primarily by the end of this summer, with additional materials to follow primarily in a category I mentioned before, your Honor, of electronically stored information, which is subject to an ongoing privilege review which we discussed and communicated with defense counsel about. We have proposed a scheduling order again to be very thorough in our review of discovery and in files in various places where they may be located and we are taking an expansive and thoughtful approach to our obligations in this case, your Honor. THE COURT: Let me just follow up specifically, since you have referenced prior investigative files, to the extent we have seen in other matters issues with complete disclosure of SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066228 11 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 materials, it has been in some instances due to precisely that factor. So has there been a plan developed to ensure that down the road we are not hearing that there were delays or problems with discovery as a result of the fact that part of the disclosure obligation here includes materials from other investigative files? : Yes, your Honor. The files in particular that I am referring to are the files in the possession of the F.B.I. in Florida in connection with the previous investigation of Jeffrey Epstein. The physical files themselves were shipped to New York and are at the New York F.B.I. office. They have been imaged and scanned and photographed to make sure that a comprehensive review can be conducted, and they are physically in New York so that we can have access to those files. And again, as we have heard in ongoing information, we are particularly thoughtful about those concerns given the history of this case and the volume of materials and the potential sensitivities, your Honor. THE COURT: Beyond the paper files which you have just indicated, the physical files, have you charted a path for determining whether there is any other additional information that must be disclosed? : Your Honor, just to clarify, is your question with respect to the previous investigation or -- I apologize, your Honor. I wasn't sure what you meant. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066229 15 k7e2MaxC kjc THE COURT: Among other things, but, yes, I'm drilling 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 down specifically on that since that has been, in somewhat comparable circumstances in other matters, the source of issues related to timely disclosures. : Yes, your Honor. Our team met personally with the F.B.I. in Florida to make sure that we had the materials, and it was represented to us that the materials that the F.B.I. provided in Florida were the comprehensive set of materials. We will certainly have ongoing conversations to make sure that that is the case and if, in our review of files, we discover other materials, we will handle that with great care, and we are particularly sensitive to that concern. THE COURT: And I expect here, and in all matters, not just accepting of initial representations made regarding full disclosure, but thoughtful and critical pushing and pressing of questions and issues with respect to actively retrieving any appropriate files. Are we on the same page, : Yes, your Honor. Very much so. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. With that, why don't you go ahead and lay out the proposed schedule that you have discussed with Mr. Cohen, and then I will hear from Mr. Cohen if he has any concerns with that proposal. : Yes, your Honor. We would propose the completion of discovery, to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066230 16 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 include electronic materials, to be due by Monday, November 9 of this year, and following that we would propose the following motion schedule: that defense motions be due by Monday, December 21 of this year; that the government's response be due on Friday, January 22, 2021; and that replies be due on Friday, February 5, 2021. THE COURT: All right. Mr. Cohen, based on the government's description of both the quantity and quality of discovery, is that schedule that's been laid out sufficient from your perspective to do everything that you need to do? MR. COHEN: Your Honor, just two points in that regard. I think counsel for the government did not mention in the e-mail we had sent to your Honor's law clerk that August 21 would be the deadline for production of search warrant applications and the subpoena returns. I think she just failed to mention it for the record. That would also be part of the schedule. THE COURT: Thank you. , do you agree? : That's correct, your Honor. I apologize. We did include that in the e-mail to your Honor's chambers, and that is correct. And thank you, counsel, for clarifying that. MR. COHEN: Two additional points, your Honor. The trial schedule that we are agreeing to, of course subject to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066231 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the court's approval, assumes there will be no substantive superseding indictment. If there is one, which the government has advised us they don't believe is imminent or I assume not at all, we might have to come back to the court to address not just trial schedule but other schedule as well. And I am assuming -- we take your Honor's points about the issues on discovery, and we agree with them, particularly as to electronic discovery; and I am assuming that, as this unfolds, if we spot an issue we think needs further attention, we will be able to bring it to the court's attention. Those are my points. THE COURT: Thank you, Mr. Cohen. Let me go ahead and ask, Mr. Cohen has made a representation but I will ask if you do anticipate at this time filing any further superseding indictments adding either defendants or additional charges? : Your Honor, our investigation remains ongoing, but at this point we do not currently anticipate seeking a superseding indictment. THE COURT: All right. So with that -- and also let me ask, , just because it is next on my list, what processes the government has put in place to notify alleged victims of events and court dates pursuant to the Crime Victims Rights Act. : Yes, your Honor. I am happy to give the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066232 18 k7e2MaxC kjc courts details about the process we used for notification for this conference and also what we anticipate to use going forward. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 So to begin with, the government notified relevant victims or their counsel immediately following the arrest of the defendant on July 2 about the fact of the arrest and the initial presentment scheduled for later that day. In advance of the initial presentment, those victims were provided the opportunity to participate through the court's protocol for appearances in New Hampshire. On July 7, the court set a date for arraignment and bail hearing on July 14, today, and by the following day from the court's order, the government had notified relevant victims or their counsel of that scheduling order and advised victims and counsel of their right to be heard in connection with the bail hearing. On that same day, the government posted to its victim services website, including a link to the indictment, as well as scheduling information relating to the hearing. On July 9, the government updated the website to include the dial-in information that the court provided. In addition, on July 8, the government sent letter notifications to individuals who have identified themselves as victims of Ghislaine Maxwell or Jeffrey Epstein that were not specifically referenced in the indictment. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066233 19 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Our process going forward, as we noted in that letter to victims, is that we will use an opt-in process so we will not notify individuals who do not wish to receive additional notifications but will continue to provide ongoing information about upcoming conferences and relevant details on the government's victim services website. With respect to this specific hearing, the government has been advised by counsel to three victims of their interest in being heard in connection with today's bail proceeding. One victim's views are expressed in the government's reply memorandum; one victim has submitted a statement to the government and asked that the government read it during today's proceedings; and one victim has asked to be heard directly, and the government anticipates that she will make a statement at any time during this proceeding as necessitated by the court. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Then, with that, returning to the schedule that you have laid out, and I thank counsel for conferring in advance, as to a proposed schedule, Mr. Cohen, let me just finalize if you agree to the proposed schedule that has been laid out by and supplemented by you? MR. COHEN: Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. And, you continue to support the proposed schedule? SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066234 20 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 : Yes, your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Then I will set the schedule as jointly proposed by counsel. To reiterate, I am setting let me ask, , if we are going to proceed to trial, how long of a trial does the government anticipate? : Your Honor, the government anticipates that its case in chief would take no more than two weeks. But in terms of the length of time to block out a trial date, in an abundance of caution, in view of the need for jury selection and the defense case, we would propose blocking three weeks for trial. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. With that, I will adopt the schedule. I hereby set trial to commence on July 12, 2021, with the following pretrial schedule: Initial nonelectronic disclosure generally, to include search warrant applications and subpoena returns, to be due by Friday, August 21, 20. Completion of discovery, to include electronic materials, to be due by Monday November 9, 2020. Any initial pretrial defense motions, based on the indictment or disclosure material and the like to be due by Monday, December 21, 2020. If any motions are filed, the government's response due by Friday, January 22, 2021. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066235 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Any replies due by Friday, February 5, 2021. If any motions seek an evidentiary hearing, I will reach out, chambers will reach out to schedule an evidentiary hearing. And, as indicated, trial to commence on July 12, 2021. In advance of trial, following motion practice, the court will put out a schedule regarding pretrial submissions, including in limine motions and the like. With that, counsel, other matters to discuss regarding scheduling? Mr. Cohen? MR. COHEN: Not at this time, your Honor, not from the defense at this time. THE COURT: Thank you. : Nothing further from the government regarding scheduling, your Honor Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. And, , does the government seek to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act? : Yes, your Honor. In view of the schedule and the interests of producing discovery and permitting time for the defense to review discovery, contemplate any motions and pursue those motions, the government would seek to exclude time from today's date until our trial date as court set forth today. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066236 22 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: Mr. Cohen, any objection? MR. COHEN: No, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. I will exclude time from today's date until July 12, 2021, which I have said is a firm trial date. I do find that the ends of justice served by excluding this time outweigh the interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. The time is necessary for the production of discovery and view of that by defense, time for the defense to consider and prepare any available motions and, in the absence of resolution of the case, time for the parties to prepare for trial. To and Mr. Cohen, although I have not set an interim status conference in the case, we do have our motion schedule, but for both sides, if at any point you wish to be before the court for any reason, simply put in a letter and we will get something on the calendar as soon as we conceivably can. With that, Mr. Cohen, let me ask counsel if there is any reason that we should not turn now to the argument for bail? MR. COHEN: No, your Honor. THE COURT: : No, your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: All right. I will hear on that question. It is the government's motion for detention, so I propose SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066237 23 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 hearing from the government first, and then any alleged victims who have indicated that they wish to be heard pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3771(a) (4), and then I will hear from Mr. Cohen. Any objection to proceeding thusly, Mr. Cohen? MR. COHEN: No, your Honor. THE COURT: : Thank you, your Honor. Your Honor, as we set forth in our moving papers, the government strongly believes that this defendant poses an extreme risk of flight. Pretrial Services has recommended detention, the victims seek detention, and the government respectfully submits that the defendant should be detained pending trial. Your Honor, there are serious red flags here. The defendant has significant financial means. It appears that she has been less than candid with Pretrial Services. She has not come close to thoroughly disclosing her finances to the court. She has strong international ties and appears to have the ability to live beyond the reach of extradition. She has few, if any, community ties, much less a stable residence that she can propose to the court to be bailed to. And she has a strong incentive to flee to avoid being held accountable for her crimes. Because the defendant is charged with serious offenses involving the sexual abuse of minors, your Honor, there is a SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066238 2, k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 legal presumption that there are no conditions that could reasonably assure her return to court and, your Honor, the defendant has not come anywhere close to rebutting that presumption. Turning first to the nature and seriousness of the offense and the strength of the evidence, the indictment in this case arises from the defendant's role in transporting minors for unlawful sexual activity and enticing minors to travel to engage in unlawful sexual active and participating in a conspiracy to do the same. The indictment further charges that the defendant perjured herself, that she lied under oath to conceal her crimes. Your Honor, the charged conduct in this case is disturbing and the nature and circumstances of the offense are very serious. The defendant is charged with participating in a conspiracy to sexually exploit the vulnerable members of our community. In order to protect the privacy of the victims, I'm not going to go into details, your Honor, about the particular victims beyond what's contained in the indictment and our briefing; but, as the indictment alleges, the defendant enticed and groomed girls who were as young as 14 years old for sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein, a man who she knew was a predator with a preference for underaged girls. The indictment alleges that the defendant participated in some of these acts of abuse herself, including sexualized massages in which the victims SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066239 25 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 were sometimes partially or fully nude. She also encouraged these minors to engage in additional acts of abuse with Jeffrey Epstein. The indictment makes plain, your Honor, this was not a single incident or a single victim or anything isolated but, instead, it was an ongoing scheme to abuse multiple victims for a pattern of years. This is exceptionally serious conduct. Given the strength of the government's evidence and the serious charges in the indictment, there is an incredibly strong incentive for the defendant to flee, an incentive for her to become at that fugitive to avoid being held accountable and to avoid a lengthy prison sentence. The history and characteristics of the defendant underscores the risk of flight that she poses. The Pretrial Services report confirms that the defendant has been moving from place to place for some time, your Honor; and most recently it appears that she spent the last year making concerted efforts to conceal her whereabouts whilst moving around New England, most recently to New Hampshire, which I will discuss momentarily with respect to that particular THE COURT: : -- property. THE COURT: there is one assertion in the defense papers that I don't think I have seen the government's response to, and that is the contention that Ms. Maxwell, through counsel, kept in touch with the government since the SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066240 Lb k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 arrest of Mr. Epstein. Is that accurate and did that include information as to her whereabouts? : Your Honor, that information did not include information about her whereabouts for starters; and, second, your Honor, the defendant's communications through counsel with the government began when the government served the defendant with a grand jury subpoena following the arrest of Jeffrey Epstein. So it is unsurprising that her counsel reached out to the government, which is in the ordinary course when an investigation becomes overt. The government's communications with defense counsel have been minimal during the pendency of this investigation. Without getting into the substance, those contacts have not been substantial, your Honor. And to the court's question, they certainly have not included any information about defendant's whereabouts. THE COURT: All right. Go ahead. : Thank you, your Honor. It appears that the defendant has insufficient ties to motivate her to remain in the United States. With respect to her family circumstances, she does not have children, she does not appear to reside with any immediate family members, and she doesn't have any employment that would require her to remain in the United States. But, by contrast, she has extensive international SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066241 27 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ties. While she is a naturalized citizen of the United States, she is a citizen of France and the United Kingdom. She grew up in the United Kingdom and has a history of extensive international travel. She owns a property in the United Kingdom. Your Honor, there is a real concern here that the defendant could live beyond the reach of extradition indefinitely. The government has spoken with the Department of Justice attach6s in the United Kingdom and France. With respect to France, we have been informed that France will not extradite a French citizen to the United States as a matter of law, even if the defendant is a dual citizen of the United States. As well, we have been informed that there is an extradition treaty between the United Kingdom and the United States. The extradition process would be lengthy, the outcome would be uncertain, and it's very likely that the defendant would not be detained during the pendency of such an extradition proceeding. Those circumstances raise real concerns here. Particularly because the defendant appears to have the financial means to live beyond the reach of extradition indefinitely. As we detailed in our briefing, your Honor, the defendant appears to have access to significant and undetermined and undisclosed wealth. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066242 28 k7e2MaxC kjc In addition to the financial information described in 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the government's memoranda, we note, your Honor, that in the Pretrial Services report it appears that the defendant tried initially to brush off the subject of her finances when the Pretrial Services officer asked her, noting that she didn't have those details. The defendant ultimately provided limited, unverified, and questionable information that now appears in the Pretrial Services report. She listed bank accounts totaling less than a million dollars and a monthly income of nothing. Zero dollars per month of income. In addition to the matter of her finances, the report raises other concerns about whether the defendant has been fully transparent with the court or whether she is being evasive. THE COURT: you have emphasized the indication on the financial report of zero dollars of the income. Does the government think that there is income? Is there some uncertainty as to whether that is investment income as opposed to employment income or the like? What is the reason for the emphasis on that or to the extent it is an indication that the government finds that implausible? : Yes, your Honor. Separate from the matter of employment, it is very unclear whether the defendant is receiving proceeds from trust accounts or an inheritance or means of other kinds. It is SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066243 29 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 simply implausible that the defendant simply has a lump set of assets and no other stream of income, especially given the lifestyle that she has been living and as detailed in the Pretrial Services report. It just doesn't make sense. Either there are other assets or there is other income. We can't make sense of this lifestyle and this set of financial disclosures. This just doesn't make sense. And as I will detail in a moment, your Honor, it is inconsistent with the limited reference we have been able to obtain as we have been making an effort to trace the defendant's finances. On that subject, your Honor, the report does raise concerns about whether the defendant has been fully transparent about her finances. As one example, the defendant told Pretrial Services that the New Hampshire property was owned by a corporation, that she does not know the name of the corporation, but that she was just permitted to stay in the house. It is difficult to believe that that was a forthcoming answer because it is implausible on its face and very confusing, but the government has continued to investigate the circumstances surrounding the purchase of that New Hampshire property. This morning, your Honor, I spoke with an F.B.I. agent who recently interviewed a real estate agent involved in that transaction in New Hampshire. The real estate agent told the F.B.I. that the buyers to the house introduced themselves to SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066244 30 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 her as Scott and Janet Marshall, who both have British accents. Scott Marshall told her that the -- that he was retired from the British military and he was currently working on writing a book. Janet Marshall described herself as a journalist who wants privacy. they told the agent they wanted to purchase the property quickly through a wire and that they were setting up an LLC. Those conversations took place in November 2019. Your Honor, following the defendant's arrest, the real estate agent saw a photograph of the defendant in the media and realized that the person who had introduced herself as Janet Marshall, who had toured the house and participated in these conversations about the purchase, was the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell. That series of facts, which I just learned about this morning, your Honor, are concerning for two reasons. First, additionally, it appears that the defendant has attempted to conceal an asset from the court, and at the very least she has not been forthcoming in the course of her Pretrial Services interview; and, second, it appears that the defendant has used an alias and that she was willing to lie to hide herself and hide her identity and we discussed the additional indicia in our briefing your Honor. So that raises real concerns. Moreover, the defendant's claims about her finances to Pretrial Services should be concerning to the court for additional reasons. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066245 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: I'm sorry, , if I may pause you before moving on from those points. There is a basic dispute within the papers as to, I think, efforts similar to the ones you have described that are efforts to hide from authorities, which would certainly be an indication of risk of flight or whether, in light of the notoriety and public interest that the case has generated following the indictment of Mr. Epstein, whether it was an effort to protect privacy and hide from press for privacy reasons. How does the government suggest that that factual determination be resolved, if you agree that it should, and what is your general response to the veracity of that assertion? : Yes, your Honor. As we discussed in our reply brief, your Honor, in our view, there is no question these circumstances are relevant to the court's determination with respect to bail for a number of reasons. The first is, irrespective of the defendant's motive, these facts make clear to the court that the defendant has the ability to live in hiding, that she is good at it, that she is willing to do it even if it compromises her relationship and contacts with other people and, as the information provided by the real estate agent underscores, she is good at it and that SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066246 32 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 she passes. In other words, even though, as defense claims, that she is widely known, that there is press everywhere, she was able to pass during the purchase of a real estate transaction under a fake name and not be detected. So there really can be no question that the defendant is willing to lie about who she is, that she can live in hiding, that she has the means to do so. All of those things should be extremely concerning to the court, your Honor, as the court evaluates whether the defendant has the ability and willingness to live off the grid indefinitely. A year is an extremely long period of time to live in hiding, undetected by the public. And so all of those things are concerning. With respect to the question of motive, your Honor, the government submits the court need not reach that ultimate issue, but we noted, your Honor, that there are indicia during the circumstances of the defendant's arrest that suggested that there was a motive to evade detection by law enforcement. But the bigger picture, your Honor, is the defendant's -- THE COURT: : -- ability -- THE COURT: -- I was surprised that that information wasn't provided until the reply brief. Was there a reason for that? Yes, your Honor. The government wanted to be very careful to make sure we had full and accurate SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066247 33 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 information. So we were first notified about the circumstances the morning of the defendant's arrest, but I wanted to personally confer with the agent who was involved in breaching the door and verify that before including that information in a brief before the court. That's the reason for the delay, your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. But the government has done that confirmation process and is confident of the information provided and the basic contention there is -- the basic contention there is that she resisted opening the door in the face of being informed that authorities were seeking entry and there is a suggestion of an effort to conceal location monitoring of some type by placing a cell phone in foil of some kind. Could you explain what the government's understanding factually is and what you think I should derive from that? : Yes, your Honor. And, with apologies, we were very careful to make sure that the specific language in our briefing was accurate in consultation with the agents, so I don't want to add additional facts or speak extemporaneously about that; but, in short, that is correct that the defendant did not respond to law enforcement announcing their presence and directing her to open the door; that, instead, she left and went into a separate room. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066248 k7e2MaxC kjc And then, separately, the details about the cell 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 phone, as the court noted, are contained in our brief and we submit that there could be no reason for wrapping a cell phone in tinfoil except for potentially to evade law enforcement, albeit foolishly and not well executed. THE COURT: All right. Go ahead. : Thank you, your Honor. I believe I was discussing the defendant's finances, which underscore the concern about the defendant's ability to flee and about her questionable candor to the court. We submit there are concerns there for two reasons, your Honor. The first is that we learned that records relating reflecting to client information for a SWIFT bank include self-reported financial information from the defendant. In other words, when the account was opened, there were disclosures made about the defendant's finances. In those records, which are dated January 2019, the defendant's annual income is listed as ranging from $200,000 to approximately half a million dollars. And both her net worth and liquid assets are listed as ranging from $10 million and above. Second, as we noted in our reply, the defendant is the grantor of a trust account in the same SWIFT bank with assets of more than $4 million as of last month. Bank documents reflect that the trust has three trustees, one of whom has the authority to act independently. One of those trustees is a SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066249 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 relative of the defendant and the other appears to be a close associate. Despite having put millions of dollars into this trust, your Honor, and despite its assets being controlled by a relative and close associate, the defendant mentions it not once in her motion before the court or in her Pretrial Services interview; and, in fact, despite the fact that the government said in its opening brief that the defendant's finances and her uncertain amount of wealth, including issues about whether her wealth was stored abroad, are serious concerns with respect to the defendant's risk of flight, the defendant's opposition does not discuss this at all. There is no mention of the defendant's finances and no effort to address those concerns whatsoever. In sum, your Honor, the court has been given virtually no information about the defendant's possession of and apparent access to extensive wealth. The court should not take that concealment, your Honor, we respectfully submit, as an invitation to demand further details, but instead to recognize that if the court can't rely on this defendant to be transparent at this basic initial stage, the court cannot rely on her to return to court if released. In short, she has not earned the court's trust. Finally, your Honor, turning to the defendant's proposed bail package, in light of all of the red flags here SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066250 36 k7e2MaxC kjc 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the defendant's demonstrated willingness and ability to live in hiding, her ability to live comfortably beyond the reach of extradition, her strong interactional ties and lack of community ties, significant and unexplained wealth, and the presumption of detention in light of very serious char