Mega Edition: Ghislaine Maxwell And Juror # 50 (3/27/26)

0:00My name's Mackenzie, and I started to go fund me for the adoptive mother of a nonverbal, autistic child. The mother had lost her job because she wasn't able to find adequate care for this autistic child. So she really needed some help with living expenses, paying some back bills. So I launched a GoFundMe to help support them during this crisis. And we raised about $10,000 within just a couple of months. I think that the surprising thing was by telling a clear story and just like really being very clear about what we needed, we have some really generous donations from people who are really moved by the situation that this family was struggling with. GoFundMe is the world's number one fundraising platform trusted by over 200 million people. Start your GoFundMe today at GoFundMe.com. That's GoFundMe.com. GoFundMe.com. This podcast is supported by GoFundMe.

1:00Here in Key West, we were out before it was in. In this open and inclusive paradise, you can be yourself, make new friends, and savor our live and let live vibe. With LGBTQ plus friendly accommodations, our legendary nightlife, and year-round activities and events, it's always a good time to come as you are. Key West, close to perfect, far from normal. What's up everyone and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. Tonight we're gonna continue talking about the Golan Maxwell verdict and specifically about the interview given by one of the jurors. And now all of the fallout surrounding that interview. Now this all stems from his account of how he gave his personal story inside of the jurors room to the other jurors

2:01as they were deliberating Golan Maxwell's fate, trying to draw a picture for some of the other jurors, I guess, about how memories of the real core issues when it comes to trauma never change. And he tried to paint a picture of that for the other jurors using his own past experiences. And now the question is, was he forthcoming during juror selection when asked questions about sexual abuse? That's really the main question here, right? There's a lot of other things going on and a lot of other background noise, but the main question is, was this gentleman truthful when he was being selected to be put upon this jury? So now the federal government, well, they've decided that they're gonna do an inquiry into this. They have petitioned the court and I'm gonna read to you the letter that the United States attorney

3:02of the Southern District of New York sent to Judge Nathan. Dear Judge Nathan, the government has become aware that a juror has given several interviews to press outlets regarding his jury service in this case. While the court instructed jurors that they were free to discuss their jury service with any one of their choosing, some of the statements as related in the media merit attention by the court. In particular, the juror has described being a victim of sexual abuse. Assuming the accuracy of the reporting, the juror asserted that he flew through the prospective juror questionnaire and does not recall being asked whether he had been a victim of sexual abuse but stated that he would have answered honestly. So right off the jump, I mean, you gotta say to yourself here, what the hell? Now a lot of this testimony was given under seal, right? The juror testimony, the, I mean, the questioning to get onto the panel. So we really don't know what's going on

4:02and what's under seal, but the government does. So the government calling an inquiry here is a bit concerning in my opinion. And look, I've said it from the beginning, folks. I have no faith when it comes to the federal government prosecuting cases like this. When it comes to them prosecuting me or you, hell yeah, they're gonna send us up the river without a paddle as the saying goes, but people like this forget it. So we'll have to see what comes of it, but man, oh man. Based on the foregoing, the government believes the court should conduct an inquiry. The government proposes that the court's scheduling hearing in approximately one month, along with an appropriate schedule for pre-hearing briefing regarding the applicable law and the scope of the hearing. The government respectfully submits that any juror investigation should be conducted exclusively under the supervision of the court. If the court decides to schedule a hearing, the government respectfully suggests

5:03that the court staff promptly contact the juror to notify him of the hearing and inquire whether he would like counsel to be appointed in connection with it. Yo, and this is why I say all the time, there's no need to run out and speak to the media and get yourself in all kinds of trouble. You ever find yourself in a situation like this? Best bet, don't speak to the media. The legacy media, they are not your friends. They don't have your best interest that heart. You know, they're not your local independent content creator that you talk to on the internet all the time. These people are looking to break that story. They want them clicks, whatever drives the news. And now, you know, I don't really blame them, right? That's their job and that's the culture that we're in. But the reality of it is if you're ever somebody who, you know, is in a situation like this, I would suggest not to speak to the media at all because find yourself in a very difficult situation.

6:04Sometimes the government reached out to defense counsel last night regarding the jurors statements, but defense counsel have not yet responded and thus the government is not aware of the defense position of on this issue. So that was the letter sent by Damian Williams, who is the US attorney for the Southern District of New York. That means he's Maureen Comey, Alison Moe, Laura Pomerance, Andrew Roarback, all of their boss. So it's a pretty serious situation, obviously, right? And the government here, again, remember, they're the ones who know what's under seal, we don't. So them calling for this investigation certainly is a bit concerning if you're asking me from the peanut gallery. Again, remember, I am not a lawyer or a prosecutor, I've never even been in a court of law for something like this. So I couldn't, you know, tell you the likelihood of mistrial or anything like that.

7:04But the good news is, the article that we're going to use today and talk about today from a law and crime and Adam Klassfeld, they're gonna get into that a little bit more. So whenever we have one of these sorts of issues as far as real legal ease going on, I always like to use law and crime and somebody like Adam Klassfeld because, you know, it's kind of what they do for a living. Always a good idea to, you know, if you wanna get ice cream to go to the ice cream shop, right? All right, so that said, let's take a look at this article and let's see what we have going on here. Headline, court inquiry requested after Galein Maxwell Jerr goes public as survivor of sexual abuse. Like I said, this is from law and crime and the author is Adam Klassfeld. The day after three interviews ran with a Galein Maxwell Jerr, coming out as a survivor of sexual abuse, federal prosecutors requested a court inquiry into how those accounts square with the man's answers

8:06to a jury questionnaire before trial. So if, for instance, okay, let's just speculate here and that's all I'm doing. If he answered that he had never been sexually assaulted on that questionnaire, this is gonna spell big trouble for the prosecution and this will probably end up in a place of a mistrial at that point. So really, like we said this morning, it comes down to what he said during that questionnaire and was he truthful, was he honest, was he not. That's really what the real question is here. And for me, you would think that some of that has to fall on the defense, though, right? Isn't it their job to vet these jurors and make sure that there's nobody that might be, I don't know, somebody that harbors ill-willed towards their client. Isn't that what the whole process is about? Even though they answer the questionnaire, each juror has to be asked questions as well

9:06by the prosecution and the defense as they're going through the selection process. So you would think something like this would have come up and so that makes me believe for at least a little anyway that there might be much to do about nothing going on here. And again, speculation. Whatever he answered on that questionnaire is going to tell the tale here, folks. And them calling for this inquiry, that's what they're going to be trying to get down to the bottom of. Did he lie, right? Did he answer, no, I have never been a victim of sexual abuse and then come out in the jury room and have a whole different thing to say. And if that's the case, as much of a monster as I think Elaine Maxwell is, that certainly would seem to me to be grounds for a mistrial. There has to be a certain standard that's followed, right? And you can't, as a juror, you can't be lying and shit like that and sitting in a juror's box

10:11and deciding the fate of one of your peers. So we're going to have to see what this inquiry comes up with. And I will say that it certainly is concerning, but I'm not going to jump off of the deep end just yet until we have all of the facts, right? Shortly after the government's request, Maxwell's attorney, Christian Everdel, claimed that the revelation regarding the juror presents incontrovertible grounds for a new trial. Well, you know he'd love that, right? Glenn Maxwell's lawyers, not only the fact that, obviously, that people don't like to lose, lawyers included, but they know the meter is running. A whole new trial, back up the brinks truck, we're going to need new experts, we're going to need Elizabeth Loftus 2.0. You know how it goes? They're going to do everything they possibly can to get a new, get this called a mistrial and have things, you know, crack off once again. And if you leave any leeway for these people, any sort of loophole or technicality, you better believe these lawyers are going to grab onto it

11:13like a pit bull and not let go. And it's up to the prosecution to make sure that that doesn't happen by the way. Again, like I've said from Jump Street folks, the SDNY is not what it used to be. And a separate letter is co-counsel, Jeffrey Pagluchia argued that further investigation was unwarranted and the court can and should order a new trial without any evidentiary hearing. Now that's a pretty bold statement there, Mr. Jeffrey P. Another one, he's like, yo, the meter is running. We had a great year last year at the end of the year as far as our financials go. Considering how long this trial was drawn out, let's get another trial locked in so I can secure another bag here. All right, all right, I'm being a wise guy with that. But, you know, these lawyers are making a ton of money. And again, they don't like to lose. So if any sort of technicality or loophole presents itself, they're gonna dive in. And to be frank, if it was me whose life was on the line,

12:16I would be demanding a mistrial here too, probably. Now, is it going to work? I don't know, but I would be demanding it as well. I'll tell you that much because we know the evidence isn't there to get you out if you're going to land Maxwell. It's going to be a loophole or a technicality if you ever walk as a free woman again. So you better hope that it's something like this because short of that, the party is over for her. The Supreme Court has held that to be entitled to a new trial. A party must first demonstrate that a juror failed to answer honestly a material question. And then further show that a correct response would have provided valid basis for a challenge for cause. Paglucci is letter states. The standard applies even if the juror's conduct was merely inadvertent and not intentional. And again, down to the legalese part of it, right? I don't know how that, what the precedent says of that. I haven't dug into case study or anything like that,

13:16but you would think that they have a valid argument here. And it pains me to say that, but again, like I always say, you got to follow the evidence, right? Even if it leads you to a place that's uncomfortable or that you don't want to be. But from what we see here, it certainly looks like that the very least have an argument for this. And it's going to come down to what Judge Nathan thinks. Before the end of the day on Wednesday, US District Judge Alison Nathan said a briefing schedule on Maxwell's request for a new trial. The defense motion is due on January 19th. The government must reply by February 2nd and Maxwell will have every opportunity to respond a week later. The Judge reserved decision on whether a formal court inquiry will be necessary. So we're in a holding pattern here, folks. We don't know, right? What's going to happen one way or the other? You'll have some people that are going to talk about the skies falling and this is the end of it all and she's going to get out.

14:16And who knows, maybe that is the case. I'm not willing to hop off of that bridge yet, though. There's a lot more to see here. And really, it's going to come down to the particulars inside of that sealed conversation, that sealed questionnaire. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah, it's even better with Chumba by my side. Race to ChumbaCasino.com. Let's Chumba. No purchase necessary, VTW Group, voidware prohibited by law, CTNCs, 21 Plus, sponsored by Chumba Casino. Every day the world gets a little weirder and a lot more awesome. Cool stuff daily takes a look at everything from mining in space to the latest in the fight against cancer to how AI is basically changing everything. It's all the cool stuff you didn't know you needed to know. Join us for cool stuff daily as we take a quick look at science, tech, and the wait. What stories that make you sound way smarter at dinner?

15:16Subscribe to cool stuff daily now because the future's happening fast and it's way too fun to miss. I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it. Asking where this is all going, they come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon, and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, and meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to big technology podcasts or ever you get your podcasts. In interviews with three news outlets on Tuesday, a juror interviewed under his first and middle name, Scotty David, described how his personal experiences with sexual abuse. This verdict is for all the victims David told the independent, for those who testified, for those who came forward,

16:17and for those who haven't come forward. I'm glad that Maxwell has been held accountable. And while I share your sentiments, probably not the right thing to say to the media, right? Probably a good idea just to keep your lips shut and keep it moving. But this is human nature these days. Everybody wants to be the hero of the story, right? And you know, Mr. Scotty David had a few things that he wanted to get off of his chest, obviously. And oh boy, I might have sunk the whole entire operation. David declared to the Daily Mail, Glaine was a predator as guilty as Epstein. Can't disagree with that. Can't disagree with that at all. I agree 100%. But again, when you're a juror for a case like this, I don't know, it's probably a good idea just to tell your story walking afterwards. You know, save the conversation for around the campfire or when the family comes over for a monopoly game or something.

17:19I know, personally, I certainly wouldn't be talking to the media. I'd be pissed already that I had to serve on a jury for all this time. Never mind wanting to go and speak to the media and extend the misery because this is some harsh, heavy shit, right? I know if I was a juror here, I'd want to put it behind me and just keep it moving. But you know, again, I don't know what Scotty David said on that questionnaire. So I'm not willing to say that this guy lied or anything like that yet, because we don't know, those are the facts. We're speculating here and we're talking about the what ifs. But certainly there's enough smoke that there might be fire. And when the prosecutors call for an inquiry like this, you know that there's something going on there. After all I've learned, she's just as guilty as Epstein. David told the UK paper, I don't want to call her a monster, but a predator is the right word. Some jurors doubted the accounts of two of Maxwell's accusers

18:23David told Reuters, all three disclosures raised eyebrows among legal experts who noted that jurors were made to fill out a questionnaire asking them directly. Have you or a friend or a family member ever been the victim of sexual harassment, sexual abuse, or sexual assault? The query was followed by three separate boxes for yes, yes, friend or family member, or no. It's unclear how David answered, as the jury was anonymous and their sensitive personal information was placed under seal. Both the government and the defense characterizations of David's statements appear to be redacted. So again, we just don't know. I know that's not the answer people want to hear right now, but I'd prefer to go that route, then sit here and blow smoke up your ass or pump your tires and tell you, oh yeah, this is this and that is that, when really we don't know. And I'd prefer for us to be correct and for us to be right,

19:24as opposed to us just to fire off and say be first or whatever it might be, but when it comes to something like this, we have to get all of the information in because the crucial part is the stuff that is redacted, the stuff that we don't have access to. So we'll see what the inquiry finds, but you would think that if he, now look, if he answered truthfully on this questionnaire and said yes, and he was still able to be part of the jury, then that's on the defense. It's their job to vet these dudes. It's their job to make sure that they have the right jurors, they're to hear the case. So they have to be responsible for that, right? Now, if he lied, well, that's a whole different ballgame. And as they said earlier in that letter, talking about him getting counsel, yeah, that's the kind of shit that'll scare anybody. When you get a letter like that from a federal prosecutor's office or from the court, asking if you have counsel, you know, you better gear up, it's time to go. Better call Saul, whatever it may be,

20:25but that's, you know, you're in a predicament there. So there certainly are some tea leaves that you can read into a little bit, but I don't think you can go much further than that. According to Reuters, David said that he flew through the initial questionnaire and did not recall being asked about those personal experiences with sexual abuse on the form, but he added that he would have answered honestly. So I'm trying not to go too hard on this dude, but what do you mean you flew through the initial questionnaire? There's not something to fly through. This isn't the terms of service of your Pandora subscription. Talking about trying one of your peers here. This is a very important and serious matter. So I don't like hearing that whole life flew through anything. Based on the foregoing, the government believes the court should conduct an inquiry, prosecutors wrote in a three-page letter. The government proposes that the court schedule

21:26a hearing in approximately one month, along with an appropriate schedule for pre-hearing briefing regarding the applicable law and the scope of the hearing. Government respectfully submits that any juror investigation should be conducted exclusively under the supervision of the court. Well, who else would it be done under? Brings security company? Who's gonna have discretion over that? Maybe you guys can go dig George Mitchell back out of the old background and have him oversee things because, you know, why not at this point? I don't even know that means, under the supervision of the court. All jury questionnaires were submitted anonymously under penalty of perjury and the government recommended advising the juror of his right to an attorney for any hearing addressing the matter. Judge Nathan granted that request. So again, this dude, Scotty David, by speaking to the media, really put himself in a position and put the case in jeopardy if we're being honest, as far as we know now anyway,

22:27at least in enough jeopardy where they're forming an inquiry here. So you better lawyer up. You know my advice on this podcast, I don't care if you're getting busted for a J-walking ticket. If you have to deal with law enforcement, the answer is I wanna speak to an attorney. Subject to the juror's right to decline court appointed counsel. The court will appoint the on-duty CJA counsel to represent the juror, Nathan wrote, if counsel for the juror wishes to be heard on the issue of the appropriateness of an inquiry, briefing by the juror's counsel may be filed by January 26th, 2022. So this is gonna be, unfortunately folks, a thing. It's gonna be drawn out and we're gonna have to be here every day discussing it. But guess what? We're gonna be here cataloging this because it's very important. And it's important to make sure that we stay on top of it every single day because there is so much that goes on each and every day

23:30that if you even miss one day, you're behind the schedule, right? You're behind the April. So this is gonna go on for a while and it's going to be very interesting to see what comes of this. If the court were to conduct such a hearing, Maxwell's lawyer said all of the deliberating jurors should be examined about David's conduct. Should the defense prevail on this motion and we believe the law and the facts are clearly on our side, it would render all other post trial motions moot Everdele wrote in a heavily redacted letter. Miss Maxwell should not have to expend precious time and resources, briefing other motions when this motion can and should be disposition. So, excuse me, this is positive. Basically, what he's saying here is that Maxwell shouldn't have to fight and spend money and time and resources on this stuff if this guy was BS and around and she should be focused on more important matters.

24:32Maxwell's was convicted on five out of six federal crimes charged against her, including conspiring to entice minors for Jeffrey Epstein's abuse and trafficking. Former federal prosecutor, Mitchell Eppner, who led intake on sex trafficking cases in the District of New Jersey between 2003 and 2004, set up the development, this is huge. Well, no offense, Mr. Eppner, but that was a different time. We're in a whole new era when it comes to sexual assault, survivors and abuse and how people look upon these people. So while in 2003 and 2004, this might have been a gigantic deal and something that would really signal getting sewn off, things are a little bit different nowadays than the landscape has changed a little bit. The question was asked and the government knows the answers that were given, said Eppner, who is now of counsel for Rottenberg, Lippman Rich PC. I assume that he did not reveal past sexual abuse

25:32or else there would be nothing to investigate. This could easily result in a new trial. That is disconcerning. Got somebody like Mr. Mitchell Eppner here, who has obviously been a lawyer for a long time, worked on both sides of the argument, the defense and the prosecution. Got like this thinks that this could easily result in a new trial. I guess all we could say is stay tuned, right? X federal prosecutor, Moira Penza, who helped convict nexium cult member, cult leader and sex trafficker and human trafficker and insert other scumbaggery here. Keith Rainiery wrote on Twitter that Maxwell's legal team would have to prove substantial prejudice to disturb and otherwise sacrosanct jury verdict. And that is pretty important, because it's true. Once the jury levels of verdict, it's kind of hard to get that bad boy overturned and changed. So even though we have old Scotty Boy's statements here,

26:33it's gonna be an uphill battle for Maxwell to get this overturn, to get a new trial and to get all of that motion for herself. Now they're gonna do a look though. They're definitely gonna take a look at what went on here. If it progresses any further than that, is what we'll have to see. Given jurors' admission, prosecutors are right to ask for an inquiry. But if he says it was a mistake and is credited by Judge Nathan, that's probably the end of it, tweeted Penza, who is now a partner at Wilkinson Stackloff. Maxwell's attorney, Bobby Sternham, did not respond to an email requesting comment. So that's an interesting statement. Given the jurors' admission, prosecutors are right to ask for an inquiry, agreed. But if he says it was a mistake and is credited by Judge Nathan, that's probably the end of it. So I guess that means it would be a judgment call on Nathan's part. If she decides to credit him and say it's a mistake, then that's the end of that. I mean, I guess that's how it works and something like this. Obviously, what this really does, no matter what,

27:36is it gives Maxwell a grounds for appeal at the very least. And I've been kind of looking forward to, you know, not forward as in excited about it, but looking forward in time to that possibility. And I think that's what they're really gearing up for. I think they're really gearing up for that appeal. I don't know if this is gonna work for them, as far as get her a mistrile or whatever, but I think they're gearing up for the appeal here, folks. And that's just a gut feeling I have, and nothing set in stone, or I didn't have a little bird fly over here and tell me that. It's just my gut feeling. And when you look at the way Maxwell's team has conducted themselves throughout this whole thing, there was no chance that they weren't gonna latch onto this. And you got the juror out here, given a bunch of interviews, and this is the result. This is what Maxwell's team is going to do. This is what they're paid to do. Looking for excitement? Chamba Casino is here. Play any time, play anywhere. Play on the train, play at the store, play at home, play when you're bored. Play today for your chance to win,

28:37and get daily bonuses when you log in. So what are you waiting for, don't delay? Chamba Casino is free to play. Experience social gameplay like never before. Go to Chamba Casino right now to play hundreds of games, including online slots, bingo, slingo, and more. Live the Chamba Life at chambacasino.com. No purchase necessary VGW group void for prohibited by law, 21 plus terms and conditions apply. Hi, this is Alex Cantrowitz. I'm the host of Big Technology podcast, a long time reporter and an on-air contributor to CNBC. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology, I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it. Asking where this is all going, they come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon, and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, and meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology podcast wherever you get your podcasts. This is Mike Folo of Lexicon Valley. And I'm Bob Garfield.

29:38Are you one of those people who sometimes uses words? Do you communicate or acquire information with, you know, language? Hey, us too. So join us on Lexicon Valley to true over the history, culture, and many mysteries of English, plus some life cracks. Find us on one of those apps where people listen to podcasts. So really, as lame as the media are for being the culture of cultures that they are, basically begging these jurors for interviews, it really comes down to the juror himself. And the question that we asked at the very beginning, did he lie or didn't he lie on that questionnaire? Once that is answered, we will know much, much more. Until then, though, we'll be here trying to put the context together, put a little more meat on that bone, and try and get to the clarity, right? As we all swim through this murk and muck together,

30:38the idea is to get to the clear water. All right, folks, that's gonna do it for tonight. I will be back tomorrow morning as usual. Couple of context episodes coming your way. Another, that's wild episode coming your way, and we'll keep it rolling, and we'll keep our eye on what's going on here, especially. If you'd like to contact me, you can do that at bobbycapucciatprotonmail.com. That's B-O-B-B-Y-C-A-P-U-C-C-I at protonmail.com. You can also find me on Twitter at B-O-B-B-Y underscore C-A-P-U-C-C-I. The link that we discussed plus the letter sent by the prosecutors to the judge can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone? And welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. Today, we're gonna continue talking about juror number 50, Scotty David, and the revelations that came during his interview

31:42with the media. Now, when we were talking last night, we were discussing the filing made by the prosecutors about an inquiry into what went on here. If Scotty David lied, if he didn't answer truthfully during the question and answer session or on the questionnaire. And while that is a bit concerning in itself, them asking or basically suggesting that he gets legal counsel is very troubling. And now, we're finding out that he has retained his own legal counsel. And the person that he has retained was the same lawyer who was Anna Sorokin's lawyer. Now, Anna Sorokin was the lady who was committing fraud on people in larceny. And she was like a fake air is saying that she was from a foreign country, blah, blah, blah.

32:43Anyway, the lawyer, Todd Spodeck, who represented her, is now also representing juror number 50, Scotty David. Now, Todd Spodeck filed notice in Maxwell's Manhattan, federal case late Wednesday, confirming that he would now appear in this case as counsel for juror number 50. That's Scotty David, and he gave the interviews and he admitted saying that he swayed the deliberations by recounting his own trauma from childhood sexual abuse. Now, I'm sure that there's going to be a real look at what went on here. The other jurors I'm guessing are going to have to be talked to, were they swayed by this? And basically, folks, what we have here now is a gigantic shit sandwich that's even bigger than before and stankier than before. And everybody's forced to take a bite.

33:46This guy, Scotty David, has really thrown a wrench into the situation here. And frankly, if this dude lied during the question and answer process and all the other stuff, then Maxwell's team is well within their rights to not only ask for a mistrial, but to demand one, and that pains me to even say. But at the end of the day, you can't have jurors lying and bullshitting and acting the fool. We already have hardly any faith in how the process works or how the system works. We can't be worried about this kind of nonsense as well. So the silver lining for me is, say this does become a mistrial. Does that give the federal government more time to maybe add some superseded charges? Maybe hit her with a rico charge on top of it? I mean, we all know that should have been done from Jump Street and it hasn't been.

34:46So again, I'm just spitballing. I don't really know the process once something like this occurs. If it is declared a mistrial, we'll have to go from there. Again, I'm not a legal expert. But I would think that if you're the government, you'd want to come back even harder the next time. So I'm very interested to see what occurs if, in fact, that is the case, but it certainly seems to be the way we're trending, folks. This is all bad, you know, usually with an inquiry and, you know, a juror, a dereliction of duty or saying something out of line, they don't need to retain legal counsel. But it looks like this, dude, is in jeopardy of perjury charges, something like that. So he's retained outside counsel, not using the counsel that was going to be provided to him by the court and a way we go, as they say. So Maxwell's team has obviously applied for the appeal

35:53and they're definitely gonna look for the mist trial here as well. And to be honest with you, they finally have something to sink their teeth in. They've been waiting for a technicality. They've been waiting for a loophole because we all know the evidence is not something that they're interested in diving into. But you provide them with a loophole or a technicality and they're gonna dive through that, that son of a gun and there's no doubt about it. And that's what we're seeing a play out right here before our eyes now. All because this Scotty David character, it looks like anyway, was BS and around. The more I dove into this last night after we had our chat here, the more it looks to me like this guy's playing games, like this guy was BS and or was looking for some spotlight or something. This is not the correct way to conduct yourself. Now, look at all the repercussions that'll come in the wake of this,

36:53say it does go to a mist trial. All of these survivors have to relive this again, all of the money that has to be spent to re-prosecute it. It's just a gigantic, gigantic issue. And after all of these years of justice being denied to the survivors and then for them to finally have a little taste of at least a little justice and for this to occur. I mean, really? The evidence wasn't strong enough to convict her, you know, this guy had to get up there and do his whole entire song and dance. So it's gonna be dicey moving forward here. And again, I'm not some sort of legal, legal or somebody that follows these kinds of cases very closely, but you would have to think with this coming to light and with how the spotlight in general has been shying down upon this case that there's going to be some movement here.

37:53And it's even more damning, if you will, when the inquiry is suggesting that you get legal counsel. That says to me that they know something that we don't. And the question is, what do they know? Was this Scotty David character dishonest during the question air session? And if he was and he said that he was not sexually assaulted when he really was and then went into that jurors room and got on his soapbox, it's gonna be a gigantic issue and almost for sure a mistrial. So with that said, we have an article this morning from the insider and the author of this article is Kelsey Vlamis. Headline, Glade Maxwell's guilty verdict will very likely get tossed and our case retired after juror comments on sexual abuse experts say. So that's pretty daunting right off the bat, huh?

38:55Not the greatest news to start your morning with. The kind of news that makes your coffee taste a little crappier. Makes your eggs go cold a bit quicker and just generally makes you feel like crap. That's the kind of news that is because how used to it are we? These people getting off, even if they get convicted, even when they get busted, somehow they find a way to wiggle themselves off the hook. I dare you to try that. Go ahead and get in trouble and then try and wiggle yourself off the hook on a technicality or a loophole, see how far that gets you. But when it comes to Maxwell and her friends, somehow, some way, they always find a way to wiggle off the hook, don't they? A week after Glade Maxwell was found guilty of sex trafficking, two jurors in the case told media outlets that they may have swayed the jury by sharing their own experiences of sexual abuse during deliberations, revelations that could jeopardize the entire trial. You know, everybody has to have the center stage, right?

39:59Everybody has to tell their story. Tell you what, I'm ever a juror in a trial like this, the last thing I'm gonna do is speak with the media. A, they're not your friend and B, they're not your friend. They have no interest in, you know, your well-being or do you think they care the people that this Scotty David dude gave the interviews to? You think they care that now we have to retain legal counsel? Are they showing up? Hat in hand with a couple of bucks for the legal fund? Hell no, they're not. Go ahead and sink, pal, you're on your own. Thanks for the interview, we got our clicks. That's what it's all about for the legacy media. Get them clicks, get them clicks. What drives the news? What makes people mad at each other? How can we use this as a wedge issue? And the band played on, didn't it? Maxwell, a British socialite, a British socialite, no, a convicted sex offender author of this article, and longtime associate of the convicted sex offender,

41:01Jeffrey Epstein, was convicted on five of the six counts against her on December 29th after five days of deliberation. So again, still calling her a socialite. It's absurd to me. It's like calling, you know, John Wayne Gacy. The once clown, the retired clown, I mean, really? No, the child killer, the child molester, serial killer, whatever else you wanna call him. He's all of it, so let's call him all of it. A juror, Scotty David, identified only by his first and middle names, told the independent and Reuters that he used his personal experience of abuse to assuge doubts other jurors had about some of the accusers' testimonies. A second juror told the New York Times, they also shared a personal experience of sexual abuse that appeared to help shape the Jerry's discussions. So you mean to tell me that you had two jurors who lied? If that's the case, this has been bungled from the beginning. Or did the defense not even bother to ask these questions

42:02and follow up, that's the flip side of this, right? And if that's the case and the juror didn't lie on the questionnaire, then this falls directly in the lap of the defense and it's on them. And there won't be any grounds for a mistrial as far as I understand it, if that's the case, it all hinges on what this dude said on the questionnaire. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing, another checkered flag for the books. Time to celebrate with Chamba. Jump in at chambacasino.com. Let's Chamba. Don't purchase necessary, BGW Group. Boy, we're prohibited by law. CCNC, 21 plus, sponsored by Chamba Casino. Hi, this is Alex Cantrowitz. I'm the host of Big Technology podcast, a long time reporter and an on-air contributor to CMBC. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology, I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it, asking where this is all going. They come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft,

43:02Amazon, and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, and meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology podcast wherever you get your podcasts. The sun shining, birds are singing and all feels right in the world. Until the season changes. And suddenly you lose your motivation to get out of bed. In fact, one in five people experience some form of depression no matter the season or time of year. At the American Psychiatric Association Foundation, our vision is to build a mentally healthy nation for all because we want you to live your best life and be your best you all year round. Please visit mentallyhealthination.org to learn more. And for me, with the federal government advising that oh boy, get some self some counsel, they probably know some stuff that we don't. And they're probably going to charge him with something. Again, that's just my guess. I don't have access to the court records or in the mind of what the prosecutors are thinking,

44:03but that would seem to be the path that we're on. Prosecutors filed a letter Wednesday requesting an inquiry into the remarks insiders Michelle Mark reported. Shortly after Maxwell's attorneys filed two letters requesting a new trial. And again, that had to be expected. You know that Galen Maxwell who's fighting for her life, who's paying all this money for these lawyers is going to exhaust every single avenue, especially a big fat juicy one such as this. This is a gift. This is like losing your wallet, having 10 bucks left walking into the casino and hitting a jackpot. That's what this is like for Maxwell. And while I don't think a second trial is going to do or any better, it just draws out the process. I mean, the survivors really need to go through this again.

45:05It's going to be the same outcome. She's going to get convicted, but it's just another situation in this long sorted tale that makes you want to bang your head off of the wall. It has been the most frustrating thing I have ever done covering this case for the past three years. Every single time we get to a point where we think we're getting some answers, only more questions arise. And it happens over and over and over again. I've never seen anything like it, honestly. Attorney's told Insider that the jurors remarks to the media were devastating for the prosecution and could likely mean the case would need to be retried. And it certainly looks like that, right? It doesn't look good. I'm not going to sit here and you know, give you a ra ra speech that this looks good and everything's fine here, we're all fine here because I don't think that's the case. And the more that comes out on this and the more experts we hear from, the more I feel like this whole entire proceedings

46:06in jeopardy now. And it makes me mad as hell. This is the absolute last thing that you want to get, that you want when you get a guilty verdict. Nima Romani, the president of West Coast trial lawyers and a former federal prosecutor told Insider, you don't want the jurors talking to the media, you don't want them saying something that will result in a mistrial. It's an absolute disaster, he said. This entire conviction may get tossed and we may have to retry the case. I mean, come on, really? Talk about a long, long road that I have no desire to travel upon. And if you think we have no desire to travel upon it, how do you think the survivors feel? Being forced to relive this over and over and over again when all they want to do is put a stamp on it and move on. It's just crazy to me, again, I've never seen anything like it.

47:07And the way it just consistently is dragging out and unfurling like this huge dragon, it's just insane. Romani explained that the jurors' comments pose two potential issues, perjury or lying under oath and prejudice, or a preconceived opinion that may have improperly swayed the jury. Now, that's one I don't, it's kind of a stretch for me. That's saying that the jury, the rest of the jurors are a bunch of knuckleheads and they're easily swayed. Now, we don't know what went on in that jurors' room. And I'd like to hear from some of these other jurors, I don't know if we will, but I'm going to say that the prosecution during this inquiry is going to question the other people that were in that room as to what was said, if they were swayed and all of that other stuff. So it's going to be a meticulous look at what went on here. If the defense knew about it, they would have dismissed him. Well, that's what you would think, right? But they're human, maybe they made a mistake, maybe they missed it.

48:09Now, I'm not saying they did. I don't know, but it's possible. Court documents show jurors were asked during selection process if they or anyone in their families were victims of sexual abuse. David told Reuters he flew through the questionnaire and did not remember if he was asked about personal experiences, excuse me, personal experiences of sexual abuse, but said he would have answered honestly. What do you mean you don't remember and you flew through it? I know we talked about this a little bit last night, but come on. You don't fly through something like this. You take your time. You meticulously go through it. And if you have questions, you get some answers. You don't fly through something like this. You're talking about a serious matter. Somebody's life's on the line as far as going to trial for heinous crimes. And then you have the survivors who are looking for justice. And you're out here playing games, flying through the questionnaire like you got someplace to be.

49:12If you had answered affirmatively, however, it's doubtful the defense would have permitted him as a juror. If the defense knew about it, they would have dismissed him, Matthew Barhoma, a criminal appeals lawyer and Los Angeles told Insider, he agreed it appeared very likely the case would be retried. So all I could say is buckle up folks and get ready. All right, more than likely this is going to have to be retried. We're going to have a case of deja vu, do it all over again. And it's going to be the same kind of strategy from Maxwell's team. But in all likelihood, if the juror was lying, which it kind of seems like he was, if I'm being honest with you, then this is going to be a mistrial. And they're going to have to retry this whole entire thing. Now the question becomes with Judge Nathan looking at that appointment to the appeals bench. I wonder as far as judges who will get this case instead, or how that will even work.

50:12During jury selection, attorneys go to great lengths to avoid selecting someone who will be biased, especially in cases as notorious as Maxwell's. Barhoma said he did not want to accuse the juror of lying, but said there are two reasons a person may lie during jury selection. Look, I don't want to call the due to liar either, right? I wasn't in the room. I don't know what was said. I don't know what happened, but it doesn't look good for him. When you have the inquiry started, that's one thing. But when they're saying that you better call Saul, you're in some jeopardy, folks. Jurors will lie to get on a jury for two reasons. If the case is notorious, and if they have been victims of the same allegations, and they want to convict, he said, and that's certainly what her lawyers can argue, right? Look, this guy is a victim of sexual assault. He has an extra grind, and he used his personal experiences and the pain he suffered to put Maxwell behind bars as a proxy for his own abuse.

51:13That's going to be the kind of argument that they're going to use. You and I both know what's bullshit, but that's what they're going to say. And as far as the legal ease of it, they have every right to do that, unfortunately. Romani also said it also appeared to him that David may have lied during jury selection, citing the fact that the defense attorneys wouldn't have approved of him, as well as how the prosecutors reacted to his comments to the media. Again, I feel like that's the biggest red flag. The biggest issue here is how the prosecutors have reacted, and how forcefully they have reacted. It signals to me that there was misconduct by this juror. Again, I don't have any evidence of that. Just my guess. Prosecutors requested an inquiry because they have an ethical duty to flag to the court. Concerns of possible prejudice, Romani said. However, they also took the unusual step of requesting David be appointed an attorney.

52:15Chorus say and do all sorts of things that are inappropriate or improper, but they don't get appointed an attorney, and for me, that's the biggest stick in the old wheel here. The fact that he was appointed an attorney or told to get outside counsel really signals to me that there's some jeopardy here and all boys gonna find himself in a pickle. The fact that prosecutors think David needs an attorney suggests they believe he may have acted criminally by committing perjury. And again, that's exactly what it looks like to me as well. The jurors said their experiences persuaded others to convict. Another critical factor that could help Maxwell was that both jurors said they believed their comments helped convince the jury to deliver a guilty verdict. If he lied and if what he told the media was accurate that he used his own experience to convict, convinced the jury to convict, you have perjury and prejudice from Monty said, again, why would you run to the media

53:16who are not your friends and run your big fat trap? Here's an idea, go home, enjoy the new year and be happy that Maxwell is convicted. But that's not what he did, right? He had to go get his time in the sun, had to go and give an interview and talk about what went on and talk about how he was the hero in his own story because he helped convince the rest of the jury. David told Reuters and the independent that several jurors had doubts about some of Maxwell's accuser's stories. He said he discussed his own experiences to show that memories of sexual abuse can be clear in some aspects and hazy in others. Now, if he had been honest about his own sexual abuse and then he told his story to the jurors, no big deal. They rely on their own personal experiences for convictions all the time, but you have to be honest during the jury selection process for that to be valid. I know what happened when I was sexually abused.

54:17I remember the color of the carpet, the walls, some of it can be replayed like a video David told the independent, but I can't remember all the details. There are some things that run together. After sharing that, he added some jurors were able to come around on the memory aspect of the sexual abuse. I don't, I mean, is this dude telling the truth? Is he the one who swayed these jurors behind the scenes? I don't know. We'll have to see what they have to say as far as if we hear from the other jurors or what this inquiry finds, but it seems like this guy is, uh, really trying to elevate himself to the uttered stark of the story here, folks. Jared's often drawn their personal experiences during deliberations according to Romani and are free to discuss their past when doing so. It would only be an issue if David failed to disclose the sexual abuse on the selection questionnaire. And again, that is the issue, right? All of this other talk, this is just adding some context, a little more meat to the bone,

55:17to try and help us understand what the hell is going on here. But the real question and the only question that matters at this point in my opinion is did he lie on that questionnaire? If the answer is yes, buckle up for a mistrial. If the answer is no, the defense, well, it's on them for being dumbasses. So it's one or the other, and to be honest, I'm kind of leaning towards the fact that oh boy, was not honest. If it wasn't disclosed as Romani believes is likely the case, and David did sway the other jurors to convict, that would mean his comments caused actual harm to Maxwell, which is needed to prove prejudice. And it's usually hard as hell to prove that. But in an instance like this, when, you know, it's such a high-profile situation, and you have this juror coming out, pumping his gums, the court's going to have to look at it and they're going to have to look at it very, very, very stringently.

56:17Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah, it's even better with Chamba by my side. Race to ChambaCasino.com. Let's Chamba. Don't purchase necessary. BTW Group, voidware prohibited by law. CTNC's, 21 plus, sponsored by ChambaCasino. Hi, this is Alex Cantrowitz. I'm the host of Big Technology podcast, a longtime reporter and an on-air contributor to CNBC. And if you're like me, you're trying to figure out how artificial intelligence is changing the business world and our lives. So each week on Big Technology, I bring on key actors from companies building AI tech and outsiders trying to influence it. Asking where this is all going, they come from places like Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon, and plenty more. So if you want to be smart with your wallet, your career choices, and meetings with your colleagues and at dinner parties, listen to Big Technology podcast wherever you get your podcasts. Prosecutors may argue the comments did not impact the verdict, and that the jury would have voted to convict regardless, but that contradicts David's claims.

57:17Barhoma agreed that David's comments about persuading others are especially damning. And that's really for me, too, what it comes down to. If I was one of these other jurors, I'd be pissed as hell. You didn't sway anything, pal. The evidence swayed me not you. I used your story, listen to it, took it into account. But ultimately, it was the evidence that was presented by the survivors that swayed me. That's what I'd be saying as another juror. If I was the defense team, I would be taking these quotes right out of Reuters, he said. It's saved by the media for Maxwell. He added, had he not went off, blabbing his mouth to reporters? We may have never uncovered it. And it's really the truth, right? Now, I can't really blame the legacy media for trying to get the interview. That's what they do. It's their job. But at the end of the day, is this dude for real? Like, bro. You're gonna get up there and pump all kinds of nonsense

58:17and talk about this, that, the other thing, elevate yourself to the Superman of the story. If it wasn't for you, the jurors would have never convicted. Blah, blah, blah, blah. Really? And now, look what the end result is. Look at the fallout. It's glowing. It's like, it's like we just walked into the reactor at Chernobyl at this point. So, we're gonna see folks, right? There's an inquiry scheduled. We got some time to see what's gonna go on here, but you know Maxwell's team is gonna be on the PR push big time. Get ready for it. It's gonna happen. But the good news is, your boy will be here every single day, every single night, to punch holes in their nonsense, and to make sure that their Bullshit Narrative continues to be challenged. If you'd like to contact me, you can do that at bobikapuchi at protonmail.com. That's B-O-B-B-Y-C-A-P-U-C-C-I

59:20at protonmail.com. You can also find me on Twitter at B-O-B-B-Y-U-S-C-I. The link that we've discussed can be found in the description box. All right, folks. Tyler Reddick here from 2311 Racing. Victory Lane? Yeah. It's even better with Chamba by my side. Race to ChambaCasino.com. Let's Chamba. Don't purchase necessary. VTW Group. Boy, we're prohibited by law. CTNCs. 21 Plus. Sponsored by ChambaCasino.