Skip to content
Ghislaine Maxwell- Case Archive
Federal Criminal Trialtrial-daytrial-dayAlison MoeLara PomerantzChristian R. EverdellLaura A. MenningerBobbi C. SternheimElizabeth LoftusMichael William AznaranCimberly EspinosaDominique HyppoliteRaghu SuddirectcrossredirectrecrossDay 11 - December 16, 2021Judge Nathan resolved defense evidence disputes as the defense presented memory-science, employment, travel-record, and school-record testimony.
← Day 10Federal Criminal TrialDay 12 →

Day 11 - December 16, 2021

Defense Evidence Rulings and Memory, Travel, and Records Testimony

Judge Alison J. Nathan
19Proceedings
6Pages
5Witnesses
2,845Lines
3Sidebars
Day 11 of 19
Appearing:
Alison Moe Lara Pomerantz Christian R. Everdell Laura A. Menninger Bobbi C. Sternheim Elizabeth Loftus Michael William Aznaran Cimberly Espinosa Dominique Hyppolite Raghu Sud

Judge Nathan resolved defense evidence disputes as the defense presented memory-science, employment, travel-record, and school-record testimony.

Full day summary

Judge Alison J. Nathan ruled on several defense evidence issues before the jury entered, precluding proposed testimony from two attorneys, allowing a narrow question to Robert Glassman, and setting limits on Elizabeth Loftus's general memory-science testimony. The defense then called former Maxwell executive assistant Cimberly Espinosa, who described Maxwell's property-management role and her office observations; travel-agency vice president Raghu Sud; and Loftus, who testified about factors that can affect memory and recall. A Customs and Border Protection task-force officer authenticated sealed, redacted travel records and testified about their fields and limitations, including that pre-9/11 airline-manifest reporting was voluntary. Palm Beach School District records custodian Dominique Hyppolite began testimony about requested student files before the court recessed for the evening.

1. Attorney-Witness, Kinnerton Street, Loftus, and Remote-Testimony Rulings

Before the jury entered, Judge Nathan ruled on defense witness and expert-testimony requests, considered a Kinnerton Street stipulation, and anticipated remote testimony from Alexander Hamilton after a reported positive COVID-19 test.

→
Procedural
Defense Attorney-Witness Ruling
15 lines

Judge Nathan barred most proposed defense attorney-witness testimony but allowed one narrow question to Robert Glassman concerning Jane's possible motive to testify.

Procedural
Kinnerton Street Evidence Hearing
82 lines

Judge Nathan proposed a stipulation on Kinnerton Street ownership timing and Ms. Maxwell's deposition testimony after arguments over its impeachment value.

Procedural
Dr. Loftus Expert Testimony Ruling
3 lines

Judge Nathan allowed Dr. Loftus's proposed testimony on suggestive activities, while restricting her to general blind-expert opinions.

Procedural
Remote Alexander Hamilton Testimony Hearing
20 lines

Judge Nathan found the defense proffer established Alexander Hamilton's unavailability and anticipated allowing his WebEx testimony.

Highlights

Defense Attorney-Witness RulingrulingJudge Nathan denied the defense request to call attorneys Jack Scarola and Brad Edwards and otherwise limited the proposed attorney testimony, finding most of the proffer irrelevant, duplicative, or outweighed by prejudice.Dr. Loftus Expert Testimony RulingrulingJudge Nathan denied the government's motion to preclude two proposed areas of Dr. Loftus's expert testimony, while limiting her to general blind-expert opinions rather than case-specific applications.

2. Cimberly Espinosa — Evidence Rulings and Direct/Cross

Former Maxwell assistant Cimberly Espinosa testified for the defense about Maxwell's office and property work, Jane's visits, and materials Jane later sent her; after limited cross-examination, she was excused.

→
Procedural
Cimberly Espinosa Evidence Rulings
82 lines

Judge Nathan allowed photographs Jane sent Ms. Espinosa and an envelope after the parties disputed their relevance to Jane's continuing relationships.

Direct
Cimberly Espinosa — Direct Cimberly Espinosa Christian R. Everdell
881 lines

Former Maxwell assistant Cimberly Espinosa described workplace roles, Jane-related exhibits, and said she never observed the alleged inappropriate conduct.

1 sidebar inside this proceeding
  1. Goddaughter Reference and Office ReactionThe parties discussed admitting testimony about a goddaughter reference for its effect on office staff rather than for its truth, with no limiting instruction requested.
Cross
Cimberly Espinosa — Cross Cimberly Espinosa Lara Pomerantz
19 lines

Espinosa confirmed work at Epstein's Manhattan office, no work at his homes and no Palm Beach visit; her earlier testimony included occasional work at Maxwell's residence.

3. Raghu Sud — Direct/Cross

Raghu Sud identified a defense travel-agency report covering Epstein office invoice information from roughly 1999 through 2006; the court admitted it temporarily under seal pending possible narrowed redactions.

→
Direct
Raghu Sud — Direct Raghu Sud Christian R. Everdell
145 lines

Raghu Sud authenticated Shoppers Travel's invoice report for the Epstein file, and Judge Nathan admitted it temporarily under seal.

Cross
Raghu Sud — Cross Raghu Sud Alison Moe
25 lines

Ms. Moe established that Sud's available travel-agency records began in 1999, and he said he had no earlier records.

4. Elizabeth Loftus — Direct/Cross/Redirect and Evidentiary Hearing

Defense memory-science expert Elizabeth Loftus explained factors that can affect recall before the government cross-examined her about her work and research; the court also addressed several prior-statement issues outside the jury's presence.

→
Direct
Elizabeth Loftus — Direct Elizabeth Loftus Bobbi C. Sternheim
255 lines

Elizabeth Loftus was accepted as a memory-science expert and testified that suggestion, time, and later information can affect the accuracy of recalled memories.

Procedural
Prior Inconsistent Statements Hearing
138 lines

Judge Nathan limited proposed impeachment involving Carolyn and allowed narrowly tailored Hamilton testimony about Kate.

Direct
Elizabeth Loftus — Direct (Resumed) Elizabeth Loftus Bobbi C. Sternheim
57 lines

Elizabeth Loftus continued explaining how confidence, suggestion, and later information can affect memory; her CV was admitted, and the court sustained one objection.

Cross
Elizabeth Loftus — Cross Elizabeth Loftus Lara Pomerantz
361 lines

The government challenged Elizabeth Loftus's potential bias and tested the limits of her false-memory research; Judge Nathan restricted questions linking her to particular high-profile defendants.

2 sidebars inside this proceeding
  1. Limits on Prior Case QuestionsAt sidebar, the parties disputed whether questioning about the witness's prior high-profile testimony was relevant to her incentive and credibility.
  2. Loftus Study QuestioningThe parties disputed whether questioning about one of Dr. Loftus's studies was within the scope of her expert testimony.
Redirect
Elizabeth Loftus — Redirect Elizabeth Loftus Bobbi C. Sternheim
68 lines

Elizabeth Loftus explained ethical limits on memory experiments and said her testimony would not have differed if called by the government.

Highlights

Elizabeth Loftus — Direct“One of the things we know about memory is it doesn't work like a recording device. You don't just record the event and play it back later.”— Elizabeth LoftusStates the central premise of the defense memory-science testimony.Elizabeth Loftus — Directtestimony highlightLoftus testified that post-event suggestion can contaminate, alter, distort, or supplement memory, particularly as time passes after an event.

5. Michael William Aznaran — Testimony and Travel-Records Hearing

Michael William Aznaran authenticated CBP travel reports for Jane, Kate, and Annie Farmer, and testimony addressed the records' scope and limits, particularly before 9/11.

→
Direct
Michael William Aznaran — Direct Michael William Aznaran Christian R. Everdell
405 lines

CBP officer Michael William Aznaran authenticated sealed, redacted TECS travel reports for Jane, Kate, and Annie Farmer and explained how the records were created.

Cross
Michael William Aznaran — Cross Michael William Aznaran Lara Pomerantz
58 lines

Aznaran said pre-9/11 CBP travel records may be incomplete and could not establish complete international travel histories for the people listed in MA-1.

Redirect
Michael William Aznaran — Redirect Michael William Aznaran Christian R. Everdell
51 lines

Aznaran said specific MA-1 entries for Annie Farmer reflected immigration-site border crossings rather than airline manifest data.

Recross
Michael William Aznaran — Recross Michael William Aznaran Lara Pomerantz
42 lines

Aznaran confirmed that 1990s CBP records were paper records but could not say whether they were logged into the system before 9/11.

Highlights

Michael William Aznaran — DirectrulingJudge Nathan admitted Defendant's Exhibit MA1 under seal with redactions to protect identifying information of witnesses who testified under pseudonyms.Michael William Aznaran — Crosstestimony highlightAznaran said MA-1 could not be treated as a complete record of the listed individuals' international travel before 9/11.Michael William Aznaran — Cross“I can't really say whether these records truly reflect exactly any passenger's complete travel history.”— Michael William AznaranDirectly limits what can be concluded from the defense travel-record exhibit.

6. Dominique Hyppolite — Direct

Dominique Hyppolite, a Palm Beach School District records custodian, explained how student records are retained and searched, and confirmed retrieving requested files for the case. His testimony paused for the evening.

→
Direct
Dominique Hyppolite — Direct Dominique Hyppolite Laura A. Menninger
138 lines

Palm Beach School District records custodian Dominique Hyppolite described retrieving student files for the case before the court recessed his testimony and addressed defense-case scheduling.

← Day 10Federal Criminal TrialDay 12 →