Bobbi C. Sternheim

Bobbi C. Sternheim delivered the defense opening statement, arguing that Maxwell should be assessed separately from Jeffrey Epstein and that the government still bore the burden of proving the charged conduct. She previewed challenges involving memory, manipulation, and monetary motivations rather than treating Epstein's conduct as proof against Maxwell.

Her examinations of government witnesses focused on distinct foundations and credibility-related subjects. Besselsen addressed limits in Interlochen's older records; Kate faced questions about memory, discussions with other accusers, later communications involving Epstein, immigration, and compensation, with the court limiting some personal-history and email questioning and sustaining several recross objections. Sternheim also challenged employment-record evidence before eliciting that Gill Velez lacked firsthand knowledge of the 2000 document and pre-2007 practices, and she questioned Mulligan about long-ago recollections, contact with Annie Farmer, and media exposure.

During the defense case, Sternheim conducted direct and redirect examination of Elizabeth Loftus. Her questions developed the difference between open-ended and leading interviews and addressed suggestion, post-event information, confidence, the passage of time, and ethical limits on memory experiments. Judge Nathan permitted general blind-expert opinions while restricting application to the particular witnesses.

Sternheim also contested the scope of anticipated prior-consistent-statement testimony from Matt, which the court limited. During deliberations, Sternheim asked the court to clarify that Count Four required a violation of New York law after the jury referred to New Mexico; Judge Nathan instead referred the jury to the full written instruction.