Press "Enter" to skip to content

Jeffrey Epstein: Prosecution rejects Struggle from financier’s former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell

Prosecutors on Thursday contested claims by attorneys for a British socialite which they’re too gradually releasing signs and withholding the names of girls who were mistreated by financier Jeffrey Epstein while they were kids.

“To date, the defendant has to ask the Government one significant question” about proof, prosecutors informed U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan. “The Government is also ready to participate in good faith discussions with the defense regarding a suitable program for disclosure.”

Maxwell, 58, has pleaded not guilty to charges she recruited three women, including one that was 14, also combined Epstein from the misuse from the 1990s.

Her attorneys said earlier this week in a letter to the judge that they can not properly inquire into the charges against Maxwell since prosecutors won’t inform them of the identities of their three accusers.

Also, they said Maxwell has been treated at a federal prison in Brooklyn, in which”uniquely threatening states” are preventing her from adequately preparing for a trial scheduled for next July.

Prosecutors say they’re shielding the identities of both sexual assault victims and therefore are under no legal responsibility to instantly identify them.

The authorities said it has given citizenship attorneys over 165,000 pages of proof, such as search warrant software and subpoena yields, even though the deadline to turn on the substance remains a week off.

And they indicated defense lawyers could work out the identities of their three accusers because the indictment lists applicable time intervals and events along with references Maxwell’s interactions and conversations with sufferers, together with identifying where they happened.

They also voiced doubts about the capability of the defense attorneys to adhere to principles about the secrecy of proof before trial, saying that they were”deeply worried” by current activities by Maxwell’s attorneys.

They said that the Treaty had”openly claimed at a civil filing they supposedly had obtained crucial new information’ in the criminal case it couldn’t disclose” due to its secrecy agreement about proof in the criminal case.

However, prosecutors mentioned, Maxwell’s attorneys also stated openly they would like to alter their secrecy arrangement to utilize substances from the criminal situation from the civil case.

Prosecutors said the secrecy bargain”expressly precludes” that.