JUDY WOODRUFF: As we reported earlier, the jury began deliberations today
in the federal sex trafficking and conspiracy trial of Ghislaine Maxwell,
the former girlfriend of the late disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein.
John Yang brings us up to date on the trial.
JOHN YANG: Judy, Maxwell faces six counts that allege she facilitated
Epstein's abuse and trafficking of underage teens.
Epstein died in federal jail in 2019, before he himself could stand trial. This case involves
four of the dozens of girls Epstein was accused of trafficking and abusing more.
Moira Penza is a former assistant U.S. attorney
who led the prosecution that resulted in the 2019 sex trafficking conviction of
NXIVM cult leader Keith Raniere. She's now a partner at the firm Wilkinson Stekloff.
Moira, thanks so thanks so much for being with us.
This trial gave the four survivors who are involved in this case the opportunity that
was taken away from them when Epstein died. You have worked -- that is to have a day in court.
Now, you worked on similar cases, high-profile cases.
What does it mean for these survivors, these women to be able to go into court and tell their story?
MOIRA PENZA, Partner, Wilkinson Stekloff: You
know, John, I think it is really important that people get to see
victims of sexual violence have the ability to seek justice through our criminal justice system.
It is very different than some of the other means of speaking out that we have seen in the past with
the hashtag MeToo movement. We have seen a lot on social media. And there are benefits to that.
But there is something about seeing individuals brought to justice within the criminal justice
system, where they are able to actually say to the people who did victimize them, actually be able to
testify, withstand cross-examination that brings a lot of credibility to their testimony
and, when done properly, hopefully will be a way of really preventing this sort
of sexual abuse in the future and deterring the type of behavior in a very meaningful way.
JOHN YANG: The prosecution spent a little less time than had been
anticipated. They called fewer witnesses than they -- than had been expected.
Tell us what the prosecution case was. And,
also, talk to us about that, what -- an apparent decision to streamline a case.
MOIRA PENZA: As a trial attorney, it is really important to streamline
your case. And that is something that takes a lot of discipline.
It is really important to make sure as the prosecutor that you are sticking to the
actual charges against Maxwell and where she was most directly involved. And so
I really think that was a conscience decision on behalf of the prosecution
to really highlight those areas where Maxwell had the most involvement with these victims.
So, we saw that they're -- that they really had their theme of Maxwell as this enabler in chief,
this partner in crime, who was really recruiting and grooming these young girls for Epstein. And we
see that they really were consistent throughout their examination in maintaining that theme
and really presenting Maxwell at the top of this sex abuse pyramid, as they described it.
JOHN YANG: And what about the defense? They were trying to push
that she was the scapegoat since Epstein was no longer available.
What else did the defense argue?
MOIRA PENZA: The primary defense is really that this isn't about Maxwell,
that Maxwell was separated from a lot of these crimes, that she may have essentially had
a bad boyfriend, but that she didn't necessarily know what was going on behind closed doors.
And that is why we see that the prosecution really focused on, where was Maxwell, the times when she
was actually in the room, when she was actually a participant, when she is actually getting payments
toward the end of Jeffrey Epstein's life to really connect those dots.
So we definitely saw the defense trying to separate her from that. We also saw what
had to come had become quite common in these sexual abuse
of attacking the victim. And we saw that throughout the cross-examinations.
And what we have seen time and time again is that that often backfires,
and that juries often react very negatively to that sort of cross-examination. So,
here, we did see that there were various attacks of varying kinds. So, whether there
was an incentive, a financial incentive, that is how many of the victims were cross-examined.
But then we also saw cross-examination about issues of memory. Was there some
sort of conspiracy to -- once Epstein was dead, to implicate Maxwell instead?
JOHN YANG: And Maxwell did not take the stand in her own defense, which she is
not required to do. And the judge instructs the jury not to read anything into that.
But we have had a couple of high-profile cases recently
where high-profile defendants have taken the stand. Is that, do you think -- even
though they are told not to think about it, does that have any effect on a juror?
MOIRA PENZA: I do believe that jurors follow the instructions as given to them.
Do I think, as human beings, there can always be a subconscious effect?
Of course. But I do think the Maxwell case is very different than some of the most recent
high-profile cases we have seen, where defendants made the unusual decision to take the stand,
because, far more often than not, it is what we see with Maxwell, where the defendant
does not take the stand and exercises their right not to incriminate themselves, right?
Once you take the stand, then you have essentially waived that right, and you can be
cross-examined about everything that has already been presented during the trial, as well as
additional bad acts that could go to your credibility.
We're not talking about a fraud-based -- a securities-fraud-based crime like
we have in the Holmes trial. We're not talking about Kyle Rittenhouse,
where you essentially need to take the stand in order to show self-defense.
This is a case where Maxwell has already testified under oath
previously. She would have to contend with the testimony that she had given before.
And so I don't think it was -- I thought that she likely would not take the stand and that this was
much more consistent with what we typically would see her being advised by her attorneys to do.
JOHN YANG: Former federal prosecutor Moira Penza, thank you very much.
MOIRA PENZA: Thank you very much for having me.