Crime Stories with Nancy Grace - FRIDAY NIGHT SPECIAL: Lady Diddy Wants Out of Jail, Ghislaine Maxwell Appeals Conviction

Episode Date: July 5, 2025

Ghislaine Maxwell was convicted for her role in a scheme to sexual exploit and abuse multiple minor girls with financier Jeffrey Epstein.  Specifically the charges were conspiracy to entice minors to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, conspiracy to transport minors to participate in illegal sex acts, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts, sex trafficking conspiracy, and sex trafficking of a minor.  Prosecutors alleged from at least 1994 to 2004, Maxwell knowingly recruited, groomed, and ultimately abused victims under the age of 18. Some were as young as 14.   Facts laid out in court proved Maxell  befriended victims by asking them about their lives, and taking them to the movies or on shopping trips.  Then, provided guidance for how to deal with Epstein, as in giving massages which lead to sexual acts.    Maxwell was sentenced to  20-years. Maxwell first appealed her conviction, but the Appeals Court denied her motion.  Now Ghislaine Maxwell has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn her sex trafficking conviction,  arguing she was covered by a non-prosecution agreement the government made with her former lover, Jeffrey Epstein. The Supreme Court has not yet ruled on Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal, and has not even decided whether to take the case.         See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This is an iHeart podcast. Crime stories with Nancy Grace. Four people, four souls lost in connection with the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking case. Epstein sex trafficking case. Virginia Jafray, one of them, her body just found. Does it never end? I'm Nancy Grace. This is Crime Stories. I want to thank you for being with us. In the last days, we learned Epstein's henchperson, his so-called madam, that's certainly putting perfume on the pig, Ghislaine Maxwell, the jailed Epstein accomplice, is appealing her conviction all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. It never ends.

And yes, you're paying for it. Again, this is Crime Stories. I want to thank you for being with us. On our Friday night special tonight, we take a look. How can Elaine Maxwell fix her mouth to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court? And again, on our dime, remember, Maxwell actually went, I visited the scene, to playgrounds in New York and many urban areas. The public playgrounds are densed in chain link.

They're usually asphalt, like, you know, a basketball court, outdoor basketball court. And you can pull up, her case in a limo beside the playground, and she would actually spot girls at recess on the playground, such as it is, to lure them, to attract them into becoming sex slaves for her lover, Jeffrey Epstein. And now she's appealing her conviction

all the way to the US Supreme Court. What happened? What do we know about what was proven against? Yelaine Maxwell. Now to crimeonline.com's Levi Page. Levi, we know what Epstein did about much of the molestation of young girls he committed and got away with it because he was rich.

But what about the women who enabled him? Who is Ghislaine Maxwell? Ghislaine Maxwell, Nancy, is a woman who is from the UK. Her father is very rich and powerful from there. She inherited a lot of money after his death. She came to the United States, New York City, and she was a socialite. She hung out with Ivanka Trump.

She met Jeffrey Epstein, would hang around with him, and it is alleged that she would find underage girls under 18, tell them that, hey, I have a friend, his name is Jeffrey Epstein, he needs a masseuse, we'll pay you to come give him a massage. It wasn't a massage, they were raped. And she is the woman that allegedly entrapped these young women in his evil plot. Take a listen now to Netflix, Filthy Rich. How did you meet Ms. Revsey?

We were friends. Like two years ago or so. About two years ago? Yeah. When you first met him? Yeah. You were 17 then? What is it that you were told you would have to do?

Give him a massage. Yeah, well that's some massage that ended up in molesting young girls. To Ashley Wilcott, a judge and trial lawyer, Court TV anchor, you're hearing one absteem victim speaking to law enforcement. But there were multiple young girls that have the same story. I mean, how likely is it that multiple young girls have the same story, girls that are separated

in time and space and don't know each other? Yeah, it's not at all likely. I, there's so many different pieces, aspects of this that really are bothersome to me, and I don't understand, all of these that really are bothersome to me. And I don't understand. All of these girls do have the same story. If you have an adult that's assisting, that's getting that soliciting that adult should have been charged with child endangerment, accessory, soliciting any of those

things. The other thing, though, is he was smart in a criminal disgusting way that he would use minors to try to get other girls. Well, apparently, according to reports, he didn't just use minors to recruit their friends for underage sex. He used an accomplished, educated woman, Gillian Maxwell. Take a listen to this. In 2005, the parent of a young girl called the police station. Hello? Hi, how are you? I'm good. take a listen to this. and she had over $300 on her. So after asking her and asking her and asking her what was going on, we found out that,

ended up being that they went to Palm Beach to a gentleman's house, and they start off by giving this gentleman a massage, and he pays them if he likes them, and he thinks that they're pretty enough to keep them around to do other things. Okay. Right, I wasn't quite sure if there was an investigation

or if you guys had any word. No, I did not. Well, this is the first hearing of it. Okay. What I will need is some more information. Would your stepdaughter be willing to come in to provide me with a statement? This is a 2005 recorded conversation with a police officer where Officer Pagan returns a call to a grown woman making a complaint, 2005, about billionaire Jeffrey Epstein recruiting young girls from school. From school, she says her stepdaughter

has this huge wad of money. And that the stepdaughter finally admits to her, she went to this rich guy's house, Epstein, gave him a massage, and then it escalated to other things. The woman who allegedly made his underage sex, that's called statutory rape, possible. A jet setter, millionaire in her own right, Gillian Maxwell, who apparently in the last days

brags, it comes out, quote, look for Jeffrey's type and I bring him home. This is according to Prince Andrew of Britain's cousin, tells how Gillan Maxwell Braggs that she recruited young underage girls for Epstein from trailer parks, and that she, Gillan Maxwell, was intent on marrying Jeffrey Epstein. She would go out and recruit young girls to be statutory raped by a billionaire? And why in the

world would she want to marry Jeffrey Epstein? Take a listen to Jeffrey Epstein himself on Netflix. Have you ever been convicted of a crime? Yes. What was the crime of which you were convicted? Two counts, one soliciting prostitution and procuring a minor for prostitution. Do you in fact commit those acts? I'm gonna vote my fifth amendment right. How many times have you solicited a minor for prostitution? Same answer. How many times have you solicited a minor for prostitution in the state of Florida?

Same answer. Have you ever solicited a minor for prostitution in the Virgin Islands? Same answer. Have you ever solicited a minor for prostitution in the Virgin Islands? Same answer. That is the you are invoking your fifth amendment? Yes sir. Right? Yes, Mrs. Scrooge. Have you ever solicited for prostitution in New York? Same answer. Have you ever solicited for prostitution in New Mexico? Same answer. Have you ever solicited for prostitution in Paris? Same answer. Have you ever solicited for prostitution in Paris? Same answer. Have you ever solicited a minor for prostitution anywhere at any time? Again, I'm going to

assert my right. We're going to go off the right. So you are terminating the deposition at this time? Recessing the deposition. If he had not solicited prostitution with a minor, a child, in all of those places in New York, Paris, London, the island in the Caribbean, he would have said, no, I haven't. If someone came up and said, Hey, are you guilty of soliciting prostitution with a minor? I'm like, I'd say no, absolutely not. Instead, he invoked his right to the Fifth Amendment, your right to remain silent. This is after already pleading guilty to prostitution with a minor in Florida, where he got a slap on the wrist. But the billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein is one issue. Another can of worms is the socialite millionaire

in her own right, Gillan Maxwell, who got the girls for him. To Dr. Bethany Marshall, did you hear where a cousin of Prince Andrew, we know it now to be, Christina Oxenberg, talked about how Gillan Maxwell bragged that she would procure, as she said, procure underage girls for Epstein and very often would focus on trailer parks to find his victims.

Did you hear that? It makes me so mad. I want to chew a nail in half. Okay, Nancy. I thought about the pattern of child sex crimes and how they're similar, whether it's Michael Jackson or we have Harvey Weinstein or we have Jeffrey Epstein. So Gill and Maxwell found women who were financially vulnerable. Michael Jackson found children from poor families.

Harvey Weinstein found women who were wanting a role in a movie script. They all entice them and offer something big, like for a 13 or 14-year-old, $200 or $300 for a massage. I mean, that's everything. You could go buy a purse. You could go buy a pair of shoes. Michael Jackson built like a whole a whole theme park to lure children. Weinstein offered them these huge movie roles. You can see the pattern

is the same from perpetrator to perpetrator. They always find victims that are at the fringe of society and they think won't tell on them. Everybody's surprised that a woman like Gillian Maxwell would procure these girls and then want to marry Jeffrey Epstein, but it is not uncommon for No, everybody's surprised that a woman like Gillian Maxwell would procure these girls and then want to marry Jeffrey Epstein, but it is not uncommon for women to commit crimes against children in concert with the man they love. Look at children who are molested by stepfathers and the mothers stand by and do nothing. Or they go and they find rape victims for their husbands or their partners.

Women do act in concert with men all the time. In this case, it's just more dramatic because there is so much money. I do practice in Beverly Hills where there's a lot of money and where there's a lot of money, there's a lot of coverups. The woman who made it possible for him to locate and recruit little girls to rape and molest and pay off and keep silent. Her name is Ghislaine Maxwell. Take a listen now to Jeffrey Epstein speaking on the Netflix special Filthy Rich, emphasis on filthy.

Let's talk about Jane Doe 102 Virginia Roberts. Do you know Virginia Roberts? So she's again who Virginia Roberts? Can you spell it? Common spelling Virginia like the state. Can you spell it for me please? Roberts. How's the, what's the last name?

How's it spelled? R-O-B-E-R-T-S, I believe. Isn't it true that you and Glenn Maxwell celebrated her 16th birthday with her and had sex with her on that day? Form compound, confusing argumentative harassment. I'd like to answer that question, but today I'm gonna have to assert my sixth amendment

rights, my fifth amendment rights. Is it true that you forced Virginia Roberts to have sex with numerous friends of yours? What? Are you kidding? An a-hole. Can you spell Virginia? No, spell it. No, spell it, he says to opposing counsel.

And the last name, Roberts. Spell it. What a jackass. Well, he invoked the wrong amendment. He used six, but he meant fifth. He corrected himself. But he's making co-counsel, opposing council, spell the name of one of his alleged victims.

I want you to listen to what this girl, Virginia Roberts, says. Listen. I first met Prince Andrew March 10th, 2001, in London at Gillen's townhouse. He knocked on the door, he came inside Gillen's townhouse and we're sitting there having tea. Gillen has this favorite guessing game that she does.

She goes to Prince Andrew, how old do you think Virginia is? And he said 17. And she's like, oh, you're right. And you know, they like made a little joke about it. He's like, oh, my daughters aren't far from your age. You know, my daughter's a little bit younger than you. We went out for the night, Club Tramp in London.

And he dances and he's profusely sweating over me and it was disgusting. She's talking about Prince Andrew, hooked up with Prince Andrew who she says had sex with her. Here she is, a minor. Andrew denies it, sweats buckets on TV, but then says she had to be lying about their encounter. I call it child rape because at that time he had an ailment where he couldn't sweat. That was actually his defense. I want to go to you to Ashley Wilcott, judge and trial lawyer, court TV anchor, Ashley, when you hear a statement that is so rich in

detail, it gives credence to it. And the fact that she says Gillen Maxwell introduces her to Prince Andrew at this location, then they go to Club Tramp where he came on to her. Andrew sweated profusely and there turns up to be, although Andrew denies knowing her, a picture of her with Andrew with his arm around her after Andrew says, I've never met her. The details that she described Ashley that Prince Andrew said, Hey, you're about the age of my two daughters. That detail to me has the ring of truth. Absolutely. So first of

all, I always believe a juvenile, a child, this is a child. Absolutely. Second of all, you're right. All of the specific details. When people lie, they don't make up all of those little specific details. How are they going to come up with something to say, oh, he's sweating profusely? Long story short, according to the source, Oxenberg, Gillan Maxwell brags to Prince Andrew's cousin. She recruited girls from trailer parks in Palm Beach to bring them to Jeffrey Epstein. Oxenberg says Maxwell told her, I look for what I know is Epstein's type and I bring them home. That she, Gillen Maxwell,

was quote, proud to be a recruiter for the pedophile during a meeting with Oxenberg, who was an author and a socialite, who was brought in, I guess, to write Gillen Maxwell's memoir. Oxenberg claims that Maxwell was not dating Epstein, although she wanted to marry Epstein. Crime stories with Nancy Grace.

In the last days days Epstein accomplice, Jelaine Maxwell appeals her conviction all the way to the US Supreme Court. What do we know about the evidence against Maxwell? Operation GGO, Get Gelaen Out, was started by family friend Brian Bashram. He claims that Maxwell's human rights are being violated, that she is forced to wear paper clothing with no bra due to the risk of suicide. He also claims that since her incarceration Maxwell, a vegan, has dropped 25 pounds due to improper diet. Bashram claims that when Maxwell complained about losing so much weight

prison officials removed her scales to stop her from weighing yourself. He says that prison guards have stopped talking to Maxwell while she spends her days isolated in a nine foot by seven foot cell. Basham says that isolation is being extended to her mail as well. He claims that family letters are being vindictively not given to her. Brian Basham says he finds it appalling that Maxwell was still in custody when other sex offenders like Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby were granted bail.

Maxwell has denied all six counts relating to child sex trafficking, procurement, and perjury. Here we're hearing our friend Dave Mack from CrimeOnline.com. Maybe it has something to do with Weinstein's victims being adults as opposed to Epstein and Gillan-Maxwell's alleged victims being children.

At the time, they were sex trafficked. Again, I'm Nancy Grayson. I want to thank you for being with us. This as Operation GGO get Gillan-Maxwell out of jail is underway. Will it happen? Joining me in all star panel to break it down and put it back together again, first of all, high profile lawyer out of Seattle. Joining me, trial lawyer Anne Bremner, former prosecutor. Also with me, renowned New York psychologist. Joining me from Manhattan,

Karen Stark at karenstark.com. That's Karen with a C, former special agent with the FBI screenwriter on Criminal Minds, Bobby Chacon. Also with me, Melissa Cronin, investigative journalist and author. Melissa is so great to have you with us. Melissa also the author of a brand new book about Epstein and an upcoming Epstein book called Epstein, Inc. Melissa Cronin, what do you make of the news that there is a movement underfoot to have Gillan Maxwell sprung from jail? So this man Brian Basham said that he finds it

appalling how she's being treated in prison and anyone who knows anything about this case finds it appalling that someone would think there was any chance this woman should be released. It's just another example of how delusional she is. I mean, Epstein himself was not released on bond with all of the claims made against him. She's part and parcel of all those claims. I think part of it has to do with that sweetheart, Dill. He got down in Palm Beach when he basically had house arrest for part of the day and could go in and out of the jail

at his will. There was a parade of young girls going in and out of his office when he was on day passes from the jail. So I'm sure that they're concerned Gill and Maxwell will either take off or end up dead if she is released. What do you make of her claims that she is being, let me just say, singled out for bad treatment?

Like I said before, I think she's totally delusional because she just has to realize that she might have gotten away with it for years so far, but now the hand of justice has come down on her and she's not getting away with it. years so far, but now the hand of justice has come down on her and she's not getting away with it. She's not going to get special treatment. She's not going to get her couture and her vegan diet. She just has to wake up to the reality that her time has come and she's going to have to pay for what she did. What do you, who is Brian Basham? I only know that he is a family friend of Gillian Maxwell, who is the one reporting from behind jailhouse walls that she has lost so much weight that her scales were taken away.

I've got news for everybody. I don't think inmates have scales in their jail cell. That's a load of BS. That's a technical legal term. But I don't think that to you, Anne Bremner, you're the high-profile lawyer out of Seattle. I have never once in all the jails I've ever been in seen an inmate with a set of scales. Great. Mine is single-ag, Nancy. That's the first thing I thought. It's like I've never heard of an inmate having scales in their cell and then having them taken away because they're losing weight. I mean that just does not ring true. And if it's true, it's a first.

What a big fat lie. Now, isn't it true, Ann Bremner, a former prosecutor, but now civil and defense lawyer, isn't it true, Ann, that at the close of every felony case, the jury is instructed by the judge that when a person, a witness, be it a defendant, a cop, doesn't matter, is caught lying under oath, even if it's about something small, the jury will then have the decision, the opportunity, if they wish, to discount all that witness's testimony in toto, in total, if that witness is caught lying. Would you agree or disagree that that is the state of the law? I agree completely. It's false in one, false in all. The Latin term, I think, is falsus in unum, falsus in pluriam.

Oh, you're up in the game throwing your Latin phrases at me. So, let me break it down. If this is being reported by the so-called family friend that her scale has been taken out of her jail cell, there is no way in H-E-L-L an inmate and a high security CI correctional institute is going to have a scale. It'll take about a New York minute for one of those inmates to pick that up and bash a warden, a trustee or another inmate right in the skull and kill them right there with the scales. Okay. So that's BS. And if he's lying about that or someone is lying about that, then why should I believe any of this BS? No, I completely agree. I'm not going to use the Latin again, but you can't believe anything they say. I mean, that is so preposterous.

I mean, and she can't wear a bra, but she can have a scale. You know, I don't get it. So we're also hearing, oh, here comes Bobby Chacon. I knew that wouldn't take long. Go ahead, Bobby. I mean, this so-called,

I mean, this so-called friend, then we friend as he's being described. I mean, I think he's also been described as a PR professional. So I think that he might be one of these crisis management guys that brought in to start this campaign. They're calling it a campaign as if it's a grassroots movement of people that want her out. When in all probability she is paying for this service, she is paying probably for this family friend PR professional to kind of start this whole movement,

if you will. And I don't think there's a whole bunch of people behind this movement. She is saying that she is being singled out because of vindictive treatment is being heaped upon her. Back to Melissa Cronin, investigative journalist who has already written one book, Jeffrey Epstein, Dead Man Tell No Tales. And she has an upcoming book, Epstein, Inc., coming out,

I believe, in November. Melissa, what is at the crux of the movement to get this alleged child sex trafficker out from behind bars? It's very important for everyone to understand that, as Dave said, this is not a family friend. This is a PR professional that has been working for Delain for more than 10 years. He was actually brought in as a third party on the Jufray versus Maxwell lawsuit years ago because the attorneys found emails between Delain and the PR company on which he was CC'd. Now the PR company is called Acuity Reputation and they have offices in London, also in Moscow. The founder is on the advisory board

of the Moscow International Finance Committee. So that's a whole other thread that people might wanna pull on in the coming weeks. But I think it's just a distraction technique. The fact is that day after day, week after week, more victims come forward to tell their stories and she's not going to be able to keep justice this time. Guys, take a listen to our friend Mola Lengi at CBS News. Listen.

She had his money. He had her contacts. They made a great group that way. But Yilin was much more snideiving and smart than Epstein ever was. At one point during the deposition, Joufray's attorney Sigrid McCauley appeared to ask Maxwell about the now infamous picture of Joufray and the UK's Prince Andrew. Joufray says she had sex with the prince at Maxwell's London home that night. The prince has repeatedly denied you phrase allegations and Maxwell called you phrase account of the incident and obvious lie in the deposition. Maxwell said you fray characterized things took place in my bathroom and the

bathtub itself. The tub is too small for any type of activity whatsoever. Okay, let me understand this. Um is claiming that Virginia Roberts' statements are false because her, Gillian Maxwell's tub is not big enough to have sex in. Really? Because I'm pretty sure if people can have sex in the bathroom on a plane, they can do it in a bathtub. I don't care how big the bathtub or how small the bathtub is. I mean, I'm not an engineer from Georgia Tech or MIT, but I can figure that much out. You know,

it's very interesting. Bobby Chacon joining me, former special agent FBI, screenwriter, Criminal Minds. What my longtime friend Ricky Kleeman over at CBS is saying, Maxwell can't just say Virginia Jeffries is lying, lying. She's lying. You got to come up with more than that and the size of your bathtub. Because there are multiple young girls, not just Virginia Jeffries, that's saying the same thing. Maxwell recruited them sometimes from near the playground at the middle school to give Epstein massages, which turned sexual. It's more than just Virginia Jeffries, Bobby Chacon. That's right, Nancy.

And actually I did attend Georgia Tech. So I haven't one of those people you referred to, but you know, you're right. When they can't attack, you know, the basic facts of the case, when you have so many victims coming forth telling very similar stories about the recruitment and about the behavior that they were suggested to, you have to start nitpicking at different things. That's why they want the names of the victims now, so they can harass them.

This is a very hostile, very aggressive defense team that Maxwell has. You can see it as far back as this deposition that she gave how hostile she is and you can see through their motions now how hostile they're being towards the victims. They have to go after the victims because it's the only thing they have because they can't attack the facts. But it's still gonna be a very difficult task. Maybe one victim can be impeached but when you've got multiple victims separated in time and space, all saying the same thing, it's going to be much more difficult to discredit them.

Although it happened in the Michael Jackson case, Ann Bremner, all the boy victims were all discredited, and they were generally saying the same thing, Ann Bremner. That's exactly what happened, Nancy, and I saw it, front row seat in that trial. You and I covered that every day, and that's exactly what happened. There were multiple victims. They said the same thing. There was definitely a pattern, and it came in with, I don't remember how many boys now, but quite a few, and they were not believed, apparently.

Guys, will all the victims be attacked at trial? Will there be a trial? Because right now, Gillan Maxwell supporters are starting a movement to get Gillan Maxwell out of jail. The G-O-O movement. If she gets out to you, Melissa Cronin, investigative journalist, Gillian Maxwell has three passports that I know of. She, I think, has remarried. All that's being kept under wraps.

She has money, power, and privilege at her fingertips, and is more than capable of getting a private plane out of here and never coming back. It's true. She's not just capable of finding a private plane. She's capable of flying it herself. She was actually a helicopter pilot for Jeffrey Epstein and buried the victims back and forth from the island. But it's true. She is one of the biggest flight risks that I've ever seen or heard of

in my entire journalistic career, because she doesn't just have money and connections herself. her entire family does. She has seven living siblings and two of them, her sisters, Isabelle and Christine, were actually one of the early founders of the, um, one of the first search engines. So they have tons of money. They're millionaires in themselves. She has a French passport. She was born in France and basically the options are endless for her

if she actually gets out of prison. So I think everyone involved in this case knows that that can't happen. ["The Daily Show Theme"] Crime stories with Nancy Grace. ["The Daily Show Theme"] Jelaine Maxwell, may she rot in hell. Already four people connected to the Epstein case with Nancy Grace. Jelaine Maxwell, may she rot in hell. Already four people connected to the Epstein case have committed suicide.

Thanks, Maxwell. And now she's on her way for her lawyers to argue to the US Supreme Court. It never ends. The pimp for billionaire Jeffrey Epstein, literally trolling the schoolyard to hook little girls and bring them in for Epstein to molest. All done and said, right?

Case closed, guilty, not so fast. Take a listen to our friend, Tom Winter, NBC. Tonight, in a trial that centered on sexual abuse, two jurors reveal they too have experienced abuse, their own personal experiences, now pushing Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys to ask for a new case. At issue, legal experts say whether or not the two were adequately forthcoming about their experiences before trial. A man identifying himself as Scotty David was one of the jurors. He spoke to several media outlets, including the Daily Mail dot com. I don't want to call her a monster.

A predator is the right word. David, known as juror number 50, says other jurors voiced out about some of the accusers. Some people were like, how could they keep going back? Why would their moms allow them to do that? And I was like, we can't judge them based on what they did or didn't do. They're 14. They don't really have the wherewithal to know really what's right and wrong. A second juror who requested anonymity told the New York Times they were sexually abused

as a child and that they had also discussed the experience during deliberations. Is the Elaine Maxwell guilty verdict doomed? I say no for legal reasons. Will there have to be a new trial with me? Dr. Theresa Gill, professor of psychology, has spent years working with child abuse and trauma victims. Joseph Scott Gill, professor of psychology, has spent years working with child abuse and trauma victims. Joseph Scott Morgan, professor of forensics, Jacksonville State University, author of Blood Beneath My Feet on Amazon and host of Body Bags with Joe Scott Morgan on iHeart. Special guest joining us, Charlie Langston, editor at Daily Mail with Female, and Wendy Patrick, California prosecutor, author of

Red Flags at wendepatchettphd.com and host of Today with Dr. Wendy on KCBQ. First to you, Charlie Langston. Before I get into the legalities of whether this requires a whole new trial for Ghislaine Maxwell, who no doubt did it over and over and over, even molesting some of the little girls herself. Tell me what's happening. This does, you know, Charlie, I find this really hard to believe because I never tried a case ever without asking the entire panel, do any of you know anyone, even if it's yourself,

a neighbor, a family member that have been a victim of a crime? Have any of you been a victim of a crime? And the converse to that is, do you know anybody that's been convicted? Anybody, hint, hint, have you been convicted? So I find it really hard to believe that these high profile lawyers and veteran prosecutors did not ask that question. Well, I think it's worth pointing out that we don't actually know for sure right now that that question was not asked. What we do know is that jurors have said that they were not asked specifically whether they were victims of sexual abuse.

So the question is whether they interpreted the question of have you ever committed a crime? Have you ever been the victim of a crime? It may be that they did not interpret that question correctly and did not feel that their experiences with sexual abuse were the correct answer to that. If they were the victims of sexual abuse and their abusers were never convicted, they may not have felt that it was a crime that was committed, if that makes sense. Yes, I see what you're saying. They could have been molested or abused and not realize that that was a crime if it were never prosecuted, I think.

Long story short, do you know that song, Wendy Patchett, California prosecutor? I feel a bad moon coming. Is it, I feel that I'm rising? I feel a bad moon coming. I feel a bad moon rising. You know, there's trouble on the way. Charlie Langston with us, DailyMail.com, how many jurors do we think we have right now that are coming out? We believe that there are at least three. However however there is a fourth juror whose sources tell us is also under question and may have also been the victim of sexual abuse. So as we heard the first juror who said that they were the victim of sexual

abuse was Scotty David. He spoke to us about his experiences. A second juror who is remaining anonymous has spoken to the New York Times and we reported over the weekend that a third juror has been found by Ghislaine's legal team to have experienced sexual abuse. And the really big issue here is that both Scottie David and the second anonymous juror have admitted that they spoke about their own experiences with sexual abuse during deliberations and both of those jurors have said that they believe that their stories helped to influence the way that the other jurors went about their deliberations.

Okay, hold on just a moment. I want you to hear juror Scotty David speaking to DailyMail.com, hourcut C. hear juror Scotty David speaking to DailyMail.com. Our cut, see. You decided to share your story. Presumably that's something that you'd say yes to in the questionnaire. It was something that people were aware of when you were selected as a juror. No, they don't ask your sexual abuse history.

They didn't ask it in the questionnaire. I thought in the questionnaire, there was a question that asked if you were a victim or if you were a friend or a relative of a victim. Are you sure it was number 48? I don't remember. Somebody sent me the questionnaire today and there was a question. Interesting. I mean, I guess, when did you fill in that questionnaire?

I definitely, on the first day of jury selection, I would have definitely marked yes, but I honestly don't remember that question. Because you're not the son. No, no. I know my face is red because I can feel the blood. But I honestly that's why I answered it that way. I don't remember it being there. But I did answer. I definitely remember a family or

relative or something, but being sexually abused. I was honest on all my questions. Okay, so he sounds a little unclear on what he remembers. Okay, back to you, Wendy Patchett, California prosecutor. Jurors always talk about their own experiences in jury deliberations. That's not uncommon. We expect that to happen. So tell me what you see as the big issue here, Wendy, Patrick. I think the big issue is how these jurors were interpreting sexual abuse. You know,

I know that if we don't break down that term, as we often do in deliberations, if it's actually part of what's charged, if we simply ask them in voir dire and let it hang out there, I know that if we don't break down that term, as we often do in deliberations if it's actually part of what's charged, if we simply ask them in voir dire and let it hang out there, I can tell you many jurors think it means forced intercourse. They don't think about it as being touching, masturbation, some of the, you hate to say lesser forms of abuse, but we have to put them on a spectrum somewhere because if jurors are honestly envisioning the rape scenarios when they hear a word like sexual abuse, that kind of a term, they're not going to disclose some other types of abuse until they get in the deliberation room. So this may be legally significant because it wouldn't necessarily indicate dishonesty during the blood year process. Okay, what I'm trying to get at is, is there going to be a

brand new trial for Madame Herve, Ghislaine Maxwell, or will the state take a cheap plea rather than retry the case if it rises to that? Now, the fact that jurors during jury deliberations talk about their own personal experiences, there's nothing wrong with that. Now, the fact that jurors during jury deliberations talk about their own personal experiences, there's nothing wrong with that. That always happens. You expect that to happen. You want people to draw on their past experiences as they reach a verdict. That's not going to be a problem. I want you to listen to our cut B, our friends at CBS News. Before the trial, potential jurors were asked to fill out this questionnaire, including this question. Have you ever been the victim of sexual assault? One juror, using only his first and middle names, Scotty David, told Reuters he can't remember if he disclosed his own claims of sex abuse, saying he flew through the initial questionnaire.

He told Reuters he would have answered the questions honestly. Prosecutors told the judge overseeing the trial, the statements merit attention by the court. Maxwell's lawyers then told the judge she can and should order a new trial. A separate juror told the New York Times they spoke of their own sexual abuse during deliberations, which the paper says appeared to help shape the jury's discussions. This woman, according to a jury, according to multiple child victims, went out even on school playgrounds, trolling for little girls around 14 that we know of, to bring back to her boyfriend,

Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire that hangs out with Clinton and Trump and all sorts of millionaires and very wealthy influential people. For him to molest over and over and over until they aged out and he wanted somebody even younger. Yes, this is her. She just gets convicted finally after a massive federal trial. And now, only now now did the jurors decide they're gonna come forward and say oh yeah I was molested. Well what about that juror questionnaire? Did anybody hear what I just heard? The question number 48

specifically asked have you ever been the victim of sex assault, according to CBS News? Now, here's the reality when you're talking about a jury trial. Back to you, Wendy Patrick, a lot of people may have been a crime victim. But the issue is, can you listen to the facts and evidence brought in at trial, not what you may have read in the paper, and render a verdict that speaks the truth? That's the question. Does it matter if you've been a victim, not a victim, if you're black, if you're white, if you're a man, if you're a woman, if you're a Christian, if you're an atheist?

It doesn't matter. It's can you render a verdict that speaks the truth? Yes, no, Wendy Patrick. Yeah, absolutely. The answer is yes. And so the jurors that are talking out afterwards are basically saying what they said influenced the other jurors' ability to be fair

and try to case on the facts they heard from the witness stand. No, no, no, no, no, no. That's not what they said. They said it, Charlie Langston, aren't they saying that them recounting their experiences affected the jury deliberations, not that it made them unfair or impartial?

They didn't say that it made them unfair, what they said, I mean, what the second juror said specifically was that their experiences of sexual assault had helped to shape the jury's discussions. So effectively what the two jurors who have spoken out have said is that in them sharing their recollections of sexual abuse, it made the other jurors understand more how victims of sexual abuse may continue to recall their experiences.

And I think in doing so, the jury was maybe able to realize a little bit more clearly just how well the trauma of abuse sticks with you throughout the years. So Maxwell's legal team, one of their big arguments, was to try and say that these women were coming forward because they wanted money, that they couldn't really remember what had gone on. And these jurors who spoke of their own experiences of sexual abuse were effectively helping the other jurors to realize that no, these recollections do really stick with you. And you know, you are still able to recall a lot of details in very kind of specific ways. However, other, you know, facts might be a little bit more blurry as time goes on. NANCY RI reveal, did not, I didn't want to talk about it to other people, that my fiancé had been murdered just before our wedding, and that changed the course of my life and my career.

That's why I became a prosecutor. It was nobody's business. I didn't want to talk about it, but I remember it very well. And then I finally am publicly telling my story at request of Larry King. And do you know, he asked me, when did this happen? And I said, August 6th. And I screwed up the year. I don't remember what year I said, but I screwed up the year. Keith was murdered.

Why did I do that? I don't know. Now, I remember so many things vividly. And then of course I was attacked like crazy about just everything because I screwed up the year on national TV. Now one thing, correct me if I'm wrong, and then everybody jump in.

Charlie, this guy, Scotty David, explained to the jurors, some aspects of his abuse had been easier to recall than others. Quote, I remember the color of the carpet, the walls. Some of it can be replayed like a video. I do that too. But I can't remember all the details. There are some things that run together. And in his talking to the jury, according to him, Charlie, he says that the jurors were going, wow, why didn't the parents let this happen?

Didn't they notice their children weren't home at the right time? And because of what he had gone through, he told the jurors, wait a minute, you can't judge the victims like that of their parents. They were just 14 years old for Pete's sake. So do I have that right, Charlie Lanks? Yes. Effectively, he was helping the jury to understand as a victim himself why some of these women might be able to recall certain details as you said in a very specific way but not be able to remember other things as you said like dates or times or you know even the location of where the abuse happened because that you know I'm not unfortunately an expert but

that's the way the human brain works. You, when you go through an incredibly traumatic experience, sometimes you do try and block out the more painful aspects. Okay. I heard everybody jumping in and I heard, I know I heard Joe Scott Morgan, Professor of Forensic at Jackson State University hit me. Yeah, listen, I got to tell you, you know, um, I'm hearing the words molestation and sexual abuse being thrown around a lot. I got to remind everybody here that she was not charged

or accused of those things officially from a legal perspective. She's charged with enticement of a minor, transportation of a minor, sex trafficking of a minor and three counts of conspiracy. So, you know, if, if abuse or molestation is an element of that crime, which, you know, for those that don't understand elements, it's a, it's a building block of the crime, maybe that's the case. But, you know, to, to the other point here, were, were these, you know, during this, this questionnaire where they actually ask, well, do you have any experience with trafficking? Do you have any experience with enticement? Do you have any experience with the transportation of a minor? You know, you know, tit for tat, you

know, is that the case? Because right now, all I'm hearing is molestation and abuse. And she wasn't charged with those things. Nancy. To Dr. Theresa Gill joining us, body goes into fight-flight, adrenaline and cortisol are released and all of a sudden the hippocampus is switched off and it goes into the amygdala. And the amygdala is not good for memory recall formation or retrieval. And that's why a lot of the people who were on trial and his victims don't have can't remember particular facts and facts. And that's actually what Elizabeth Loftus was bringing out in the trial, was why there is false memories. And that's what the juror said that he tried

to clarify to the jury when they were in deliberation, because many of them said that they were confused why in 2018, 19, and, they gave one story, the victims gave one story to the federal government and now they're giving another story. I don't think that they, the victims gave different stories. I think that under the appropriate questioning, more facts came out on the stand. Because when you ask somebody, okay, what happened? And then they tell you, well, then you may want to ask, well, do you remember what time of year it was? Do you remember what the perp was wearing? Do you remember what you were wearing? Do you remember who let you into the home? Do you remember if

there were any maids there? Anybody else at Epstein's home? I mean, there are a million questions that you can ask where the victim would add to the story, not necessarily change the story, Charlie. No, and I don't think, I mean, you know, from my experience of kind of reading through everything that went on with the trial, I don't think that any of the victims were particularly doubtful in any of their testimonies. I think that all of the victims spoke very clearly about what they had been through and Ghislaine's part in that, which as we've pointed out, we aren't looking here at a charge for

sexual abuse at the hands of Ghislaine. What we are looking for is these charges of trafficking and enticement. And every single one of the victims was able to give very clear testimony about the part that Ghislaine played in Epstein's trafficking ring effectively. So when it comes to a juror like Scotty David explaining to his other jurors, you know, what it is like to be the victim of sexual abuse and what it is like to kind of try and recall those memories, I don't think that he in any way kind of made jurors completely change their minds about witness testimonies.

I think what he was trying to do was offer what some of the victims weren't able to say, which is sometimes my memory is a little bit blurry, sometimes I can't recall certain facts, but what I can recall and what I know to be true is what I went through. Just because I can't remember whether it happened on a Tuesday or a Wednesday doesn't mean that it didn't happen. Guys, take a look at our cut D. This is Joe Pike with Sky News. This juror says that he, quote, flew through the questionnaire. He doesn't remember answering a question about abuse, but if he did answer it, he answered it.

Honestly, certainly both sets of lawyers on the prosecution and on the defense side recognize there's a problem here. The first law is to in touch with the judge write to them asking for an inquiry and a court hearing in months time was the government lawyers but since then in the last hour or so Gillian Maxwell's team have also been in touch with Judge Nathan saying that the interviews and the fact that Scotty David was a victim of abuse, presents, quotes, incontrovertible grounds for a new trial. He could potentially be in some legal trouble if he has misled the court, although I'm sure he would deny that, Anna.

What we could potentially see, although it is early days, is the judge declaring the first trial a mistrial and starting again from scratch. That's something I'm sure that the government, the prosecutors here in the US would want to avoid. But that is what Gile Maxwell's lawyers are now calling for. The potential of a brand new trial, putting the victims back up again, doing it all over would be devastating to the state. But the reality is to Wendy Patrick, California prosecutor, host of Today

with Dr. Wendy on KCBQ, the reality is that what must be shown is not that a juror or multiple jurors had been molested in the past, not that, but that that information was either not requested by the state, that the state had some type of misconduct. And we see in question number 48, the state did ask that question. So we don't have any prosecutorial misconduct. Did a juror lie?

That would be an issue. And if so, did that lie make the juror impartial? So, did that lie make the juror impartial and would it have changed the outcome of the trial otherwise? That is a very steep burden, Wendy Patrick. No, it is. And I won't say that I haven't had to try cases twice due to jury misconduct because I have, but that doesn't mean that it is a slam dunk as the defense is contending. Not only is it a steep hill to climb, but it also involves something courts really don't want to do, which is really invading the purview

of jury deliberations. I mean, that's why we have the jury system is they're entitled to get together and talk and share and to go beyond that veil and then start what? Polling jurors to see if in fact this did make them unfair when they heard this. That's not something a judge is going to do lightly. So I do think that this judge will take a very thoughtful view as to whether or not what's being raised here actually will cause her to even think about going down that road. And this occurring the potential of a new trial being ordered for Ghislaine Maxwell. If there was prosecutorial misconduct, the whole thing could be over.

The conviction could be thrown out and the case may be barred from retrial. I do not see any prosecutorial misconduct, but will there have to be a new trial? This appeal by Jelaine Maxwell was denied by a court. The appeals court confirmed and upheld Maxwell's convictions describing her sentence as procedurally reasonable. The court wrote the alleged crimes fell within the statute of limitations and the agreement did not cover Maxwell.

This appeal was in a federal appeals court. Now it's on to the Supreme Court. While Jelaine Maxwell appeals her case all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, what happened to the release of all those documents? Thousands and thousands of pages of Epstein documents being kept under seal. Now, we were told by the US attorney that they would be released. What's in those documents? Why are they so secretive, too hot to handle?

Whose names are in those documents? As Jelaine Maxwell appeals her case to the US Supreme Court, we wait as justice unfolds. Nancy Grace signing off. Goodbye, friend.