Ghislaine Maxwell’s defence rested its case on Friday after two days of presenting proof on the British socialite’s behalf. Not amongst that proof: testimony from the longtime Jeffrey Epstein affiliate herself.
Round a half-hour after Maxwell informed the court docket on Friday she wouldn’t testify in her personal defence as a result of “the federal government has not confirmed its case past an affordable doubt,” lawyer Bobbi Sternheim rested.
US District Decide Alison J. Nathan had requested the 59-year-old British socialite to face in court docket on Friday afternoon, explaining that Maxwell had the correct to both testify in her personal defence or decline to.
“Your Honour, the federal government has not confirmed its case past an affordable doubt so there isn’t a purpose for me to testify,” Maxwell responded, perspective defiant.
Maxwell’s legal professionals supplied a spirited defence, portraying her as a scapegoat focused by the federal government as a result of prosecutors may not convey Epstein to justice after he killed himself at a federal lockup in August 2019 whereas awaiting his personal intercourse trafficking trial.
Maxwell, 59, pleaded not responsible to intercourse trafficking prices stemming from her interactions with 4 teenage women from 1994 to 2004. Throughout that span, Maxwell was romantically concerned with after which later labored for Epstein.
Whereas she didn’t testify earlier than the jury, Maxwell appeared energetic in her defence all through the previous three weeks of the trial, steadily writing notes to her legal professionals and hugging them as she enters and leaves court docket every day. As Maxwell declared her intention to not testify, lawyer Sternheim’s arm was wrapped round her decrease again.
Her defence known as one other of Jeffrey Epstein’s one-time paramours to the stand earlier Friday: a former Miss Sweden, New York Metropolis physician and tabloid fixture who informed the jury that she trusted the financier along with her younger daughters and denied collaborating in a gaggle sexual encounter with a key accuser.
Eva Andersson-Dubin, 60, testified that she dated Epstein “on and off” from 1983 to the early Nineties, earlier than he dated Maxwell.
Epstein and Andersson-Dubin remained mates after breaking apart and, in 1994, she married one other moneyed financier, Glenn Dubin, with whom she had three youngsters.
One of many key accusers within the Maxwell trial, recognized in court docket solely as “Jane” to guard her identification, testified {that a} girl named “Eva” joined a gaggle sexual expertise with Epstein.
On Friday, Andersson-Dubin was requested by considered one of Maxwell’s attorneys if she had ever been in a gaggle sexual encounter with Jane.
“Completely not,” she responded.
Requested if she had ever been in a gaggle sexualised therapeutic massage of Epstein with Jane, she responded: “I’ve not.”
Later, Andersson-Dubin acknowledged having points along with her reminiscence upon cross examination.
“It’s very arduous for me to recollect something far again,” Andersson-Dubin stated. “My household notices it, I discover it. It’s been a problem.”
The Dubins have denied understanding something about Epstein’s sexual misconduct, however have been publicly supportive of Epstein when he initially was prosecuted and convicted of intercourse crimes in Florida in 2008. One other Epstein accuser whose allegations are usually not a part of Maxwell’s trial, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, has stated that she was trafficked to Glenn Dubin, amongst different highly effective males, all of whom have denied her accounts.
Because the Dubin youngsters — together with two daughters — grew up, they often joined their mother and father on flights with Epstein, Andersson-Dubin stated.
She testified that Epstein was keen on her youngsters and the kids considered him like an uncle, typically calling him “Uncle F,” an obvious abbreviation of his identify, minus the “J.”
When Andersson-Dubin was requested by a defence lawyer if she ever witnessed any inappropriate conduct between Epstein and teenage women, she responded: “I didn’t.”
Nathan informed jurors on Friday afternoon to return at 9 a.m. Monday, reasonably than 9:30 a.m., and to rearrange to be in court docket as late as 6 p.m. She stated the events will ship their closing arguments, then she’ll instruct them on the regulation and deliberations will start.
Nathan reemphasised that jurors mustn’t talk with one another, or anybody else, concerning the case, or eat any details about the case from any means. In an obvious nod to the coronavirus rampant in New York Metropolis, she additionally informed them to be “cautious on the market.”
