1
00:00:03,200 --> 00:00:15,200
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:15,720 --> 00:00:19,360
Speaker 1: Millions protested across the country over the death of George

3
00:00:19,400 --> 00:00:23,200
Speaker 1: Floyd as then police officer Derek Chauvin knelt on his

4
00:00:23,280 --> 00:00:27,600
Speaker 1: neck on a Minneapolis street corner, and then, while Chauvin

5
00:00:27,720 --> 00:00:31,600
Speaker 1: was on trial for Floyd's killing, just ten miles away,

6
00:00:31,840 --> 00:00:35,240
Speaker 1: Dante Wright, a twenty year old black man, was shot

7
00:00:35,320 --> 00:00:40,760
Speaker 1: to death by police officer Kim Potter during a traffic stop.

8
00:00:44,760 --> 00:00:48,199
Speaker 1: Potter said she mistook her handgun for a taser, but

9
00:00:48,280 --> 00:00:51,880
Speaker 1: a jury convicted her in December, just as another jury

10
00:00:51,920 --> 00:00:56,000
Speaker 1: had convicted Chauvin in April after trials in the same

11
00:00:56,080 --> 00:01:01,640
Speaker 1: Minneapolis courthouse. Do these two high profile convictions indicate that

12
00:01:01,760 --> 00:01:05,840
Speaker 1: police are being held more accountable for their misconduct? Here

13
00:01:05,840 --> 00:01:09,200
Speaker 1: are the parents of Dante Right. It sends a message

14
00:01:09,880 --> 00:01:12,880
Speaker 1: saying that, um, you just can't do any just because

15
00:01:12,920 --> 00:01:15,840
Speaker 1: you're a police. You can't just get away with anything.

16
00:01:15,880 --> 00:01:20,240
Speaker 1: You just can't do anything. It gives us some sense

17
00:01:20,280 --> 00:01:24,920
Speaker 1: of hope that there will you know that policing in

18
00:01:24,959 --> 00:01:27,280
Speaker 1: America will not be able to pull their gun instead

19
00:01:27,319 --> 00:01:31,240
Speaker 1: of their taser. Joining me is former public defender Krista Groschek,

20
00:01:31,520 --> 00:01:34,720
Speaker 1: managing attorney of Grosseek Law Christa. There are a lot

21
00:01:34,760 --> 00:01:38,920
Speaker 1: of similarities on the face of these two cases. Two

22
00:01:38,920 --> 00:01:44,520
Speaker 1: black men stopped by veteran white police officers for non violent,

23
00:01:44,880 --> 00:01:48,000
Speaker 1: minor infractions end up dead at the hands of those

24
00:01:48,040 --> 00:01:51,840
Speaker 1: police officers. But what are the differences When we look

25
00:01:51,880 --> 00:01:54,360
Speaker 1: at the Chauvin case, I think that that was quite

26
00:01:54,440 --> 00:01:57,520
Speaker 1: literally an uphill battle. I think the Kim Potter case

27
00:01:57,680 --> 00:02:01,040
Speaker 1: was much more nuanced. I will point that as to

28
00:02:01,160 --> 00:02:05,080
Speaker 1: both situations, they started out over what appeared to be

29
00:02:05,200 --> 00:02:10,040
Speaker 1: relatively benign issues expired tabs as it relates to the

30
00:02:10,160 --> 00:02:12,320
Speaker 1: Potter case, and in the Stovin case, we've got a

31
00:02:12,320 --> 00:02:15,680
Speaker 1: twenty dollar counterfeit bill, and so it's very easy to

32
00:02:15,760 --> 00:02:18,880
Speaker 1: say these cases should never have resulted in the death

33
00:02:18,919 --> 00:02:22,160
Speaker 1: of people. You know, each defendant said, well, there was

34
00:02:22,200 --> 00:02:26,160
Speaker 1: a lot more than that that occurred following the initial inquiry,

35
00:02:26,400 --> 00:02:29,080
Speaker 1: and I think that's particularly true with Kim Potter's case,

36
00:02:29,160 --> 00:02:34,200
Speaker 1: and that situation unfolded rather quickly, as opposed to Chauvin's case,

37
00:02:34,280 --> 00:02:37,320
Speaker 1: which there was a sustained period of time where he

38
00:02:37,480 --> 00:02:40,359
Speaker 1: had his knee on George Floyd's neck. So there were

39
00:02:40,480 --> 00:02:45,280
Speaker 1: videos from bystanders in the Chauvin trial and videos from

40
00:02:45,600 --> 00:02:49,440
Speaker 1: police body cameras and dash cams in the Potter trial.

41
00:02:49,880 --> 00:02:53,560
Speaker 1: How are the videos key in both trials? I think

42
00:02:53,560 --> 00:02:56,960
Speaker 1: they were incredibly important pieces of evidence. And in the

43
00:02:57,040 --> 00:03:00,799
Speaker 1: Chauvin case, the video was I mean terribly damning. I mean,

44
00:03:01,000 --> 00:03:03,880
Speaker 1: that was something that I don't think any jury could

45
00:03:03,880 --> 00:03:06,880
Speaker 1: get passed. It was something that the process you shouldn't

46
00:03:07,040 --> 00:03:09,400
Speaker 1: smartly hung their hat on. You can believe your eyes.

47
00:03:09,680 --> 00:03:12,359
Speaker 1: In fact, that video was so hard to watch, and

48
00:03:12,440 --> 00:03:15,040
Speaker 1: yet the jury was subjected to it over and over again.

49
00:03:15,240 --> 00:03:18,000
Speaker 1: I mean, there was just no question that what happened

50
00:03:18,000 --> 00:03:20,600
Speaker 1: in that situation for that length of time was not right.

51
00:03:20,840 --> 00:03:23,639
Speaker 1: I think the Kim Potter video was a really important

52
00:03:23,639 --> 00:03:26,400
Speaker 1: piece of evidence, and I do question whether or not

53
00:03:26,520 --> 00:03:29,840
Speaker 1: the jury's verdict was correct. And that that was a

54
00:03:30,120 --> 00:03:32,440
Speaker 1: very short encounter. It was quick, there was a lot

55
00:03:32,440 --> 00:03:35,560
Speaker 1: of things happening, There was information coming out shortly after

56
00:03:35,600 --> 00:03:37,480
Speaker 1: he was stopped, he was attempting to flee. I mean,

57
00:03:37,480 --> 00:03:40,320
Speaker 1: it was just a much different situation. But both videos

58
00:03:40,320 --> 00:03:43,440
Speaker 1: were very, very important to both of these cases. Was

59
00:03:43,640 --> 00:03:46,920
Speaker 1: the use of deadly force and issue in both trials,

60
00:03:47,600 --> 00:03:51,120
Speaker 1: it was and I would say kind of, because both

61
00:03:51,160 --> 00:03:54,360
Speaker 1: officers said that they didn't have any intentions to kill

62
00:03:54,440 --> 00:03:58,400
Speaker 1: the decedents in each case, and so ultimately we know

63
00:03:58,560 --> 00:04:00,920
Speaker 1: that there was what i'd call a use of over

64
00:04:01,000 --> 00:04:04,160
Speaker 1: force or too much force. The question that the jurors

65
00:04:04,160 --> 00:04:07,560
Speaker 1: had to grapple with in both cases was why why

66
00:04:07,560 --> 00:04:10,680
Speaker 1: did that transpire? Let's talk about taking the stand, the

67
00:04:10,720 --> 00:04:14,840
Speaker 1: most important decision that a defendant makes. Chauvin did not

68
00:04:15,000 --> 00:04:18,479
Speaker 1: take the stand. Potter did listen to what one of

69
00:04:18,520 --> 00:04:22,520
Speaker 1: the Chauvin jurors, Brandon Mitchell, said the probably was to

70
00:04:22,560 --> 00:04:24,599
Speaker 1: his detriment that he didn't take the stand, because people

71
00:04:24,600 --> 00:04:27,920
Speaker 1: were curious on what his thoughts were throughout the entire incident.

72
00:04:28,400 --> 00:04:30,880
Speaker 1: But knowing all that, you know, do you think Chauvin

73
00:04:30,920 --> 00:04:34,680
Speaker 1: made the right decision in not testifying. Well, it's hard

74
00:04:34,720 --> 00:04:37,160
Speaker 1: to tell, because you know, he's not my clients and

75
00:04:37,360 --> 00:04:40,320
Speaker 1: a member of the public watching. We didn't really get

76
00:04:40,320 --> 00:04:42,640
Speaker 1: a sense of who he was. We know from his

77
00:04:42,760 --> 00:04:45,880
Speaker 1: prior record it would have made it really difficult for

78
00:04:45,920 --> 00:04:48,400
Speaker 1: him to take the stand because he had numerous previous

79
00:04:48,480 --> 00:04:52,040
Speaker 1: instances where he was disciplined for using too much force

80
00:04:52,320 --> 00:04:56,280
Speaker 1: in somewhat similar ways, to the force he used with

81
00:04:56,400 --> 00:04:59,280
Speaker 1: George Floyd. We also didn't really get to see Mr

82
00:04:59,360 --> 00:05:01,440
Speaker 1: Chauvin to he had a mask on the entire time.

83
00:05:01,680 --> 00:05:04,080
Speaker 1: So you know, if the call was made that he

84
00:05:04,080 --> 00:05:07,720
Speaker 1: shouldn't testify because he didn't really have a good explanation,

85
00:05:08,000 --> 00:05:10,839
Speaker 1: and or b he would have been viewed as really

86
00:05:10,960 --> 00:05:14,440
Speaker 1: unlikable by the jury and see his prior record would

87
00:05:14,440 --> 00:05:16,719
Speaker 1: have come out. Then I think that makes sense that

88
00:05:16,760 --> 00:05:19,120
Speaker 1: he didn't take the stand because he just would have

89
00:05:19,160 --> 00:05:22,240
Speaker 1: been even more vulnerable and some of the explanations that

90
00:05:22,320 --> 00:05:27,400
Speaker 1: his lawyer gave them might have been deflated because of

91
00:05:27,640 --> 00:05:30,160
Speaker 1: Chauvin's testimony, So that might have been a smart call

92
00:05:30,200 --> 00:05:34,159
Speaker 1: in that case, not having testified. Now, Potter broke down

93
00:05:34,279 --> 00:05:41,200
Speaker 1: in tears throughout her testimony. I remember yelling teaser, taser, teaser,

94
00:05:43,080 --> 00:05:50,840
Speaker 1: and nothing happened, and then obviously it didn't help her

95
00:05:50,960 --> 00:05:54,280
Speaker 1: case with the jurors. But was it the right decision.

96
00:05:55,279 --> 00:05:57,760
Speaker 1: I think putting her on the stand was the exact

97
00:05:58,240 --> 00:06:01,040
Speaker 1: right thing to do. I think she had to explain herself.

98
00:06:01,080 --> 00:06:02,960
Speaker 1: I think the jury had to hear from her. They

99
00:06:02,960 --> 00:06:06,120
Speaker 1: had to be in a position where they could process

100
00:06:06,200 --> 00:06:08,960
Speaker 1: things through her lens or her eyes. I think that

101
00:06:09,000 --> 00:06:12,760
Speaker 1: her testimony was extraordinarily compelling on many fronts. There was

102
00:06:12,839 --> 00:06:15,919
Speaker 1: two things that I think that unfortunately they we're missing

103
00:06:15,960 --> 00:06:19,280
Speaker 1: from her testimony, and one is just because it was

104
00:06:19,320 --> 00:06:21,520
Speaker 1: the way it was, which is that she didn't have

105
00:06:21,600 --> 00:06:24,159
Speaker 1: a very good recollection of what happened in the most

106
00:06:24,200 --> 00:06:27,919
Speaker 1: critical moments, which it's not unusual in times of trauma

107
00:06:28,040 --> 00:06:30,680
Speaker 1: or moments of high stress, right like, we don't exactly

108
00:06:30,720 --> 00:06:33,560
Speaker 1: remember what happened. We just kind of act, We just do,

109
00:06:33,720 --> 00:06:37,160
Speaker 1: We're sort of on autopilot. And she I think explained

110
00:06:37,200 --> 00:06:39,800
Speaker 1: that well. I know other people who have commented on

111
00:06:39,839 --> 00:06:43,840
Speaker 1: our testimony in the media have criticized her testimony for

112
00:06:43,920 --> 00:06:47,719
Speaker 1: lacking that explanation, but I thought her testimony was very compelling.

113
00:06:48,120 --> 00:06:51,400
Speaker 1: One small criticism I had was that I didn't feel

114
00:06:51,440 --> 00:06:54,000
Speaker 1: the way that she dressed, or the way she was

115
00:06:54,040 --> 00:06:57,320
Speaker 1: told to dress, really matched her persona. I understand they

116
00:06:57,320 --> 00:06:59,760
Speaker 1: were trying to make her very human and make her

117
00:07:00,000 --> 00:07:02,760
Speaker 1: a nice, you know, middle aged woman, but I thought

118
00:07:02,800 --> 00:07:06,440
Speaker 1: that what she wore didn't match with her authority and

119
00:07:06,480 --> 00:07:09,320
Speaker 1: her competency. She was my client. I probably would have

120
00:07:09,320 --> 00:07:12,720
Speaker 1: put her in a white button up, longsleeve shirt with

121
00:07:12,760 --> 00:07:16,280
Speaker 1: a blazer just because we know that she is somebody

122
00:07:16,280 --> 00:07:19,320
Speaker 1: who can take control of situations. She made the wrong

123
00:07:19,400 --> 00:07:22,040
Speaker 1: call here, and so there was a little bit of

124
00:07:22,080 --> 00:07:25,240
Speaker 1: a disconnect for me and how she was presenting physically

125
00:07:25,440 --> 00:07:28,600
Speaker 1: and what we came to understand of the job that

126
00:07:28,680 --> 00:07:32,080
Speaker 1: she did and how she did it. If that makes sense. Absolutely,

127
00:07:32,320 --> 00:07:35,360
Speaker 1: you can't underestimate the importance of how a defendant appears

128
00:07:35,440 --> 00:07:39,480
Speaker 1: to the jury. So in the opening statements in both trials,

129
00:07:39,520 --> 00:07:45,040
Speaker 1: the prosecution talked about the defendants betraying the badge. Were

130
00:07:45,120 --> 00:07:49,480
Speaker 1: they held to a higher standard because their police officers,

131
00:07:49,840 --> 00:07:53,440
Speaker 1: not by the jury instructions, of course, but by the

132
00:07:53,560 --> 00:07:57,560
Speaker 1: prosecutor and by the jurors. Absolutely, And I don't know

133
00:07:57,560 --> 00:08:02,120
Speaker 1: if there was litigation about trying to limit prosecution statements

134
00:08:02,200 --> 00:08:05,920
Speaker 1: about that betraying the badge. There is no special standard

135
00:08:06,000 --> 00:08:09,600
Speaker 1: for police officers versus regular civilians. There's an inmate, I

136
00:08:09,640 --> 00:08:14,680
Speaker 1: think understanding that police officers, through their special training, are

137
00:08:14,720 --> 00:08:16,880
Speaker 1: people that we should be able to trust to make

138
00:08:16,920 --> 00:08:20,560
Speaker 1: the right call. I do think though, that those statements

139
00:08:20,720 --> 00:08:25,160
Speaker 1: sort of elevated what jurors came to expect of a

140
00:08:25,200 --> 00:08:28,920
Speaker 1: person on the job of police officer, Like they were

141
00:08:28,960 --> 00:08:32,199
Speaker 1: basically told that a police officer shouldn't make a mistake

142
00:08:32,280 --> 00:08:36,240
Speaker 1: like this, And so anytime a juror is looking at

143
00:08:36,520 --> 00:08:39,800
Speaker 1: a professional and judging their competence, I think that takes

144
00:08:39,880 --> 00:08:42,480
Speaker 1: us into an entirely different realm, which, to your question,

145
00:08:42,760 --> 00:08:44,880
Speaker 1: are we holding them to a different standard? And I

146
00:08:44,920 --> 00:08:48,760
Speaker 1: think that's why the defense was trying to humanize Potter,

147
00:08:49,200 --> 00:08:52,000
Speaker 1: because that's the only way they could get jurors to

148
00:08:52,120 --> 00:08:55,240
Speaker 1: perhaps see that he was just a person trying to

149
00:08:55,280 --> 00:08:57,760
Speaker 1: do a job, and a hard job at that. The

150
00:08:57,840 --> 00:09:00,439
Speaker 1: defense seemed to try to shift the blame onto the

151
00:09:00,559 --> 00:09:05,360
Speaker 1: victims at both trials. Did that backfire on them? As

152
00:09:05,440 --> 00:09:08,760
Speaker 1: the law is written, there's a question of causation, and

153
00:09:08,800 --> 00:09:12,280
Speaker 1: so in Chauvin's case, his knee on the neck caused

154
00:09:12,280 --> 00:09:14,520
Speaker 1: the death or was it because George Floyd had a

155
00:09:14,600 --> 00:09:16,960
Speaker 1: large amount of a sentinel in his system, And so

156
00:09:17,320 --> 00:09:19,480
Speaker 1: that's what the laws says. The state had to prove,

157
00:09:19,520 --> 00:09:23,080
Speaker 1: and so the defense has to defend their client and

158
00:09:23,280 --> 00:09:26,840
Speaker 1: presents alternative theories and arguments for the jury to consider.

159
00:09:26,920 --> 00:09:29,120
Speaker 1: So while that could be looked at, as you know,

160
00:09:29,240 --> 00:09:31,960
Speaker 1: victims shaming or blaming, I don't think that's a fair

161
00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:34,360
Speaker 1: assessment of the defense has to be able to push

162
00:09:34,440 --> 00:09:37,400
Speaker 1: back on the state's evidence and present alternative theories, just

163
00:09:37,559 --> 00:09:41,920
Speaker 1: as Kim Potter did. Kim Potter's attorneys brought forth the

164
00:09:41,920 --> 00:09:44,560
Speaker 1: defense that, look, she had a really hard choice to make.

165
00:09:44,760 --> 00:09:47,280
Speaker 1: Either her partner was going to be killed or she

166
00:09:47,400 --> 00:09:49,480
Speaker 1: had to subdue ms her right and stopped him from

167
00:09:49,520 --> 00:09:52,319
Speaker 1: leaving the scene. So I see that as a defendant

168
00:09:52,840 --> 00:09:55,840
Speaker 1: attempting to get a fair trial and explain things from

169
00:09:55,920 --> 00:09:58,600
Speaker 1: their point of views. Some people are pointing to these

170
00:09:58,640 --> 00:10:03,640
Speaker 1: two trials as indication that police officers are now being

171
00:10:03,679 --> 00:10:07,640
Speaker 1: held accountable. Do you see this as some kind of

172
00:10:07,679 --> 00:10:11,880
Speaker 1: a sea change or just the results of the specific

173
00:10:12,000 --> 00:10:15,760
Speaker 1: facts in these two trials. I think that they are

174
00:10:15,800 --> 00:10:18,439
Speaker 1: standing for that, and that's my concern because I think

175
00:10:18,440 --> 00:10:21,719
Speaker 1: they're very different situations, but yet they're being looked at

176
00:10:21,760 --> 00:10:24,720
Speaker 1: in the same light. The differences in the facts, that's

177
00:10:24,720 --> 00:10:28,160
Speaker 1: all being glossed over, and instead, if there's somebody who

178
00:10:28,200 --> 00:10:31,840
Speaker 1: gets killed, in particular, person of color, then the expectation

179
00:10:31,920 --> 00:10:34,680
Speaker 1: by the public is that cop is getting charged and

180
00:10:35,000 --> 00:10:38,360
Speaker 1: there is a desire to convict that person, and that's

181
00:10:38,400 --> 00:10:41,560
Speaker 1: considered equal justice, and that's considered fairness. I don't think

182
00:10:41,600 --> 00:10:45,120
Speaker 1: that's how our criminal justice system was constructed. We are

183
00:10:45,160 --> 00:10:48,360
Speaker 1: supposed to look at individual facts and each case being

184
00:10:48,600 --> 00:10:51,600
Speaker 1: tried for what it is, versus the type of case

185
00:10:51,640 --> 00:10:53,240
Speaker 1: that it is, like. We need to be looking at

186
00:10:53,280 --> 00:10:55,760
Speaker 1: individual facts, and I think there was a very strong

187
00:10:55,880 --> 00:10:58,400
Speaker 1: momentum here to look at Kim Potter's case in the

188
00:10:58,440 --> 00:11:00,960
Speaker 1: same way we looked at Derek Chauvinz. I don't think

189
00:11:01,000 --> 00:11:03,400
Speaker 1: that's fair. I don't think that's the right lens. But

190
00:11:03,520 --> 00:11:06,840
Speaker 1: I think now there's a wider lens, and more police

191
00:11:06,840 --> 00:11:08,880
Speaker 1: officers are going to get charged, more are going to

192
00:11:09,000 --> 00:11:10,959
Speaker 1: get tried, and I think, frankly, more are going to

193
00:11:11,040 --> 00:11:15,280
Speaker 1: get convicted because there's this consensus, based upon what happened

194
00:11:15,280 --> 00:11:17,800
Speaker 1: in the Chaugun trial, that we must hold people accountable

195
00:11:17,840 --> 00:11:21,800
Speaker 1: and if we don't, we're failing. Thanks Christa. That's Krista Grosseek,

196
00:11:22,000 --> 00:11:27,800
Speaker 1: managing partner of gros Chek Law. Gallene Maxwell's globe trotting

197
00:11:27,920 --> 00:11:32,240
Speaker 1: days are over as she faces decades in prison. A

198
00:11:32,360 --> 00:11:36,640
Speaker 1: jury deliberated for about five days and found Maxwell guilty

199
00:11:36,640 --> 00:11:39,920
Speaker 1: of engaging in a ten year sex trafficking scheme with

200
00:11:40,040 --> 00:11:44,600
Speaker 1: Jeffrey Epstein. A verdict that offers long delayed justice for

201
00:11:44,679 --> 00:11:48,720
Speaker 1: their victims. Like Annie Farmer, who testified at the trial,

202
00:11:49,280 --> 00:11:52,320
Speaker 1: wasn't sure that this day would ever come. And I

203
00:11:52,400 --> 00:11:55,640
Speaker 1: just feel so grateful that the jury believed us and

204
00:11:55,679 --> 00:11:59,800
Speaker 1: sent a strong message that's perpetrators of sexual abuse and

205
00:11:59,840 --> 00:12:02,960
Speaker 1: a plitation will be held accountable, no matter how much

206
00:12:03,160 --> 00:12:07,479
Speaker 1: power and privilege that they have. But Maxwell's brother, Kevin Maxwell,

207
00:12:07,720 --> 00:12:11,160
Speaker 1: says they'll appeal and that his sister will be exonerated.

208
00:12:11,559 --> 00:12:16,199
Speaker 1: I'm absolutely convinced of Jeffrey Epstein's crimes, and I'm equally

209
00:12:16,200 --> 00:12:20,559
Speaker 1: absolutely convinced that my sister is being punished for them

210
00:12:20,640 --> 00:12:24,480
Speaker 1: and for him joining me is Bloomberg Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado,

211
00:12:24,600 --> 00:12:28,920
Speaker 1: who covered the trial. Maxwell is facing what could be

212
00:12:29,080 --> 00:12:32,480
Speaker 1: a life in prison. What was her reaction to the verdict?

213
00:12:33,240 --> 00:12:37,600
Speaker 1: She virtually showed no reaction. She stood and watched and blinked,

214
00:12:37,720 --> 00:12:40,040
Speaker 1: and you know, half of her face was obscured by

215
00:12:40,080 --> 00:12:43,120
Speaker 1: her mask. Before the verdict, we were all waiting for

216
00:12:43,160 --> 00:12:45,880
Speaker 1: the jury to file in and she was sitting and

217
00:12:45,920 --> 00:12:48,720
Speaker 1: looking pensively down at her lap with her hands folded,

218
00:12:48,800 --> 00:12:51,079
Speaker 1: and I saw her brother, Kevin, look up at the

219
00:12:51,080 --> 00:12:53,720
Speaker 1: ceiling I don't know if it was like a moment

220
00:12:53,760 --> 00:12:57,360
Speaker 1: of hopefulness or worry. One of her lawyers, after the

221
00:12:57,440 --> 00:13:00,400
Speaker 1: verdict was announced, patted her on the back, you know,

222
00:13:00,480 --> 00:13:03,360
Speaker 1: to kind of comfort her, and then she was led

223
00:13:03,360 --> 00:13:08,640
Speaker 1: away by the marshals. It seemed that the prosecution had

224
00:13:08,679 --> 00:13:14,160
Speaker 1: an overwhelming amount of evidence against Maxwell. What was the

225
00:13:14,240 --> 00:13:18,480
Speaker 1: strongest piece? I think it was really a masterful putting

226
00:13:18,520 --> 00:13:23,880
Speaker 1: together of small pieces of information altogether collectively. I mean,

227
00:13:24,200 --> 00:13:27,520
Speaker 1: many people criticized the case that it was based on

228
00:13:27,600 --> 00:13:31,000
Speaker 1: the word of the women alone. They had powerful stories

229
00:13:31,000 --> 00:13:36,920
Speaker 1: to tell excruciating detail about being basically hoodwinked by Maxwell

230
00:13:36,960 --> 00:13:42,720
Speaker 1: and Epstein and to coercive, weird sexual domination relationships with Epstein.

231
00:13:42,840 --> 00:13:45,840
Speaker 1: But Maxwell had participated them, and when they're like thirteen

232
00:13:45,840 --> 00:13:48,480
Speaker 1: and fourteen years old, and they had gone on for years.

233
00:13:48,600 --> 00:13:53,400
Speaker 1: You know, these things happened years ago. It's quite compelling,

234
00:13:53,520 --> 00:13:57,160
Speaker 1: but is there actual other evidence to corroborate it? And

235
00:13:57,200 --> 00:14:00,600
Speaker 1: what the government did is they had managed to get

236
00:14:00,840 --> 00:14:05,520
Speaker 1: one pilot of Epstein's Dave Rogers, so he actually corroborated

237
00:14:05,880 --> 00:14:08,600
Speaker 1: that one of the accusers, Jane, was with Maxwell and

238
00:14:08,640 --> 00:14:11,640
Speaker 1: Epstein on one of Epstein's private plane at least four

239
00:14:11,720 --> 00:14:14,720
Speaker 1: times that she had been transported across state line. And

240
00:14:14,720 --> 00:14:19,160
Speaker 1: then records showed that Virginia Guffrey had been transported when

241
00:14:19,200 --> 00:14:22,560
Speaker 1: she was under eighteen at least twenty times. And there

242
00:14:22,640 --> 00:14:26,160
Speaker 1: was also evidence of the FedEx shipments that Epstein had

243
00:14:26,160 --> 00:14:29,920
Speaker 1: sent to a girl named Caroline who was fourteen when

244
00:14:29,960 --> 00:14:34,120
Speaker 1: she started getting into these abusive, sexualized massages with Epstein.

245
00:14:34,520 --> 00:14:36,760
Speaker 1: So it's that kind of a little incidental evidence that

246
00:14:36,840 --> 00:14:39,800
Speaker 1: the jury had to really sort through. But the government

247
00:14:39,840 --> 00:14:43,160
Speaker 1: was highlighting look at all these little points, put them

248
00:14:43,240 --> 00:14:45,400
Speaker 1: together like a puzzle, and what does it put it

249
00:14:45,480 --> 00:14:48,040
Speaker 1: together that Maxwell was guilty. I think that's why the

250
00:14:48,080 --> 00:14:50,720
Speaker 1: jury took so long. They were being very careful about it.

251
00:14:51,360 --> 00:14:54,840
Speaker 1: Maxwell didn't take the stand in her own defense. What

252
00:14:55,080 --> 00:14:58,600
Speaker 1: was her defense? Was it just an attack on the

253
00:14:58,640 --> 00:15:02,480
Speaker 1: credibility of the victims? Yeah, it was a sailing every

254
00:15:02,520 --> 00:15:05,360
Speaker 1: moment of these victims. You know, you don't remember what

255
00:15:05,560 --> 00:15:08,120
Speaker 1: you said. Well, didn't you say you met her at

256
00:15:08,120 --> 00:15:10,960
Speaker 1: a party. Oh, it wasn't a party with a little

257
00:15:11,000 --> 00:15:14,280
Speaker 1: get together. Oh didn't someone tell you to lie about

258
00:15:14,320 --> 00:15:18,840
Speaker 1: your age? Didn't you lie? There were many, many attacks

259
00:15:18,880 --> 00:15:22,040
Speaker 1: on the credibility and They also tried to go after

260
00:15:22,440 --> 00:15:25,480
Speaker 1: the women, claiming they were just in it for the money,

261
00:15:25,520 --> 00:15:29,640
Speaker 1: that they had lied about Maxwell and Epstein purely to

262
00:15:29,720 --> 00:15:33,160
Speaker 1: collect money from the Epstein Victims Compensation Fund, which had

263
00:15:33,200 --> 00:15:36,200
Speaker 1: been set up by the Epstein estate to compensate women

264
00:15:36,200 --> 00:15:40,240
Speaker 1: who had been sexually abused by Epstein. And the government

265
00:15:40,520 --> 00:15:44,280
Speaker 1: really showed in enclosing an Arguments and rebuttal that that

266
00:15:44,360 --> 00:15:48,560
Speaker 1: was a patently false lie. The women had long accused

267
00:15:48,560 --> 00:15:52,000
Speaker 1: Maxwell and Epstein, long before there was ever any Epstein

268
00:15:52,160 --> 00:15:57,400
Speaker 1: estate funds, and they had collected money before they ever testified,

269
00:15:57,680 --> 00:16:00,200
Speaker 1: and they weren't going to collect more money after they

270
00:16:00,280 --> 00:16:03,520
Speaker 1: testified because they testified, which is what the defense claimed.

271
00:16:03,920 --> 00:16:07,080
Speaker 1: So the jury was able to see through those allegations

272
00:16:07,120 --> 00:16:10,680
Speaker 1: of the lack of credibility. She's going to appeal. Appeals

273
00:16:10,720 --> 00:16:14,960
Speaker 1: are always very difficult to get your conviction overturned. Were

274
00:16:15,000 --> 00:16:18,640
Speaker 1: there any obvious points of appeal? Well, I think the

275
00:16:18,640 --> 00:16:22,080
Speaker 1: defense is going to argue Epstein got a non prosecution

276
00:16:22,120 --> 00:16:25,240
Speaker 1: agreement from the U. S. Attorney's Office in the Southern

277
00:16:25,240 --> 00:16:29,200
Speaker 1: District of Florida with Alexander Acosta, and so they already

278
00:16:29,320 --> 00:16:32,080
Speaker 1: argued that it was improper for the Southern District to

279
00:16:32,280 --> 00:16:36,920
Speaker 1: prosecute a case that basically Acosta had given Epstein a

280
00:16:37,040 --> 00:16:41,040
Speaker 1: pass for. They had already lost that argument before Judge Nathan,

281
00:16:41,400 --> 00:16:43,440
Speaker 1: and I'm sure they're going to ask the Court of

282
00:16:43,440 --> 00:16:47,960
Speaker 1: Appeals to review the judge's decision on that the government

283
00:16:48,160 --> 00:16:51,760
Speaker 1: used women who had been abused in New York, so

284
00:16:51,920 --> 00:16:55,800
Speaker 1: even and there were new victims. So this woman Jane

285
00:16:55,960 --> 00:16:57,960
Speaker 1: was a new victim. She had never come forward and

286
00:16:58,040 --> 00:17:01,200
Speaker 1: she only came forward after Epstein died it. And then

287
00:17:01,240 --> 00:17:05,440
Speaker 1: they used this woman Caroline, who had was from Palm

288
00:17:05,520 --> 00:17:08,200
Speaker 1: Beach as well, but she was the one that got

289
00:17:08,200 --> 00:17:11,199
Speaker 1: gifts from Epstein in from New York, and there was

290
00:17:11,320 --> 00:17:14,960
Speaker 1: the FedEx records they had of those those gifts. So

291
00:17:15,440 --> 00:17:18,560
Speaker 1: they built a new case using the nexus of the

292
00:17:18,720 --> 00:17:22,480
Speaker 1: crimes happened that were tied to New York. Annie Farmer,

293
00:17:22,560 --> 00:17:25,120
Speaker 1: for example, was one of the victims, and she had

294
00:17:25,160 --> 00:17:29,320
Speaker 1: been invited to New York by Epstein, and the government

295
00:17:29,480 --> 00:17:32,359
Speaker 1: argued that was like the Epstein setting the stage to

296
00:17:32,520 --> 00:17:36,080
Speaker 1: kind of groom and lure this girl, and he allegedly

297
00:17:36,200 --> 00:17:38,840
Speaker 1: lured her to New Mexico and now he's the jury

298
00:17:38,880 --> 00:17:41,680
Speaker 1: found that she was lured to New Mexico by Epstein.

299
00:17:42,040 --> 00:17:44,800
Speaker 1: She was trapped on a ranch with a New Mexico

300
00:17:44,920 --> 00:17:48,960
Speaker 1: when Epstein and Maxwell and they molested her. Is there

301
00:17:49,000 --> 00:17:53,200
Speaker 1: any chance that she could still make a deal with prosecutors.

302
00:17:53,240 --> 00:17:56,320
Speaker 1: Prosecutors usually go up the chain and the top of

303
00:17:56,320 --> 00:18:00,440
Speaker 1: the chain. Here Epstein is dead, But could she name

304
00:18:00,640 --> 00:18:05,239
Speaker 1: names and get herself maybe a lesser prison sentence. I

305
00:18:05,320 --> 00:18:10,720
Speaker 1: don't see how that's going to help Maxwell, because the

306
00:18:10,840 --> 00:18:14,800
Speaker 1: government had a hard road to even get Maxwell convicted.

307
00:18:14,960 --> 00:18:19,120
Speaker 1: There were many people that played roles in the abuse enablers,

308
00:18:19,240 --> 00:18:22,720
Speaker 1: Let's say, people who may have called an arranged her appointments,

309
00:18:22,960 --> 00:18:26,879
Speaker 1: but the actual abuse of the victims was done by Epstein,

310
00:18:27,080 --> 00:18:31,200
Speaker 1: and according to these women, Maxwell as well. And so

311
00:18:31,800 --> 00:18:35,879
Speaker 1: basically you could see Epstein as the head of a

312
00:18:36,000 --> 00:18:39,919
Speaker 1: drug organization. He's the kingpin and she's number two in

313
00:18:39,920 --> 00:18:44,919
Speaker 1: the organization. You don't normally prosecute the customers in the

314
00:18:45,040 --> 00:18:49,320
Speaker 1: same way you would that person who's running the drug operation. Right,

315
00:18:49,440 --> 00:18:52,320
Speaker 1: So Maxwell is at the top, and I don't see

316
00:18:52,320 --> 00:18:55,240
Speaker 1: how she could flip on anyone way way way down

317
00:18:55,320 --> 00:18:59,240
Speaker 1: the food chain. She spot this too hard already, Thanks Patty.

318
00:18:59,520 --> 00:19:04,400
Speaker 1: That's bloom Burg Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado coming up next two,

319
00:19:04,720 --> 00:19:08,520
Speaker 1: Maybe a seizemic year at the Supreme Court. You're listening

320
00:19:08,520 --> 00:19:09,159
Speaker 1: to Bloomberg