Defense Closing Arguments - Ghislaine Maxwell Trial

“Jeffrey Epstein died and then everybody lawyered up.”

“Ghislaine Maxwell is an innocent woman wrongfully accused of crimes she didn’t commit,” said Laura Menninger yesterday. She was making the closing arguments for the defense after the prosecution finished their own.

The government, said Menninger, had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Maxwell was guilty.

“They certainly proved to you Jeffrey Epstein abused his money and power,” said Menninger. “We are not here to defend Jeffrey Epstein…he is not our client.”

The government seized at least 38,000 photographs, Menninger said, but only showed about 40 of them to the jury, photographs that were “undated,” of Epstein and Maxwell in a relationship. Where are the other 37,960 photographs? Menninger asked.

Menninger said there were two concepts equally as important in the case - the evidence, and the lack of evidence.

“Decades later,” Menninger claimed of the accusers who testified against Maxwell for the prosecution, “they inserted Ghislaine Maxwell into their memories.”

“Jeffrey Epstein died and then everybody lawyered up,” said Menninger, referring to the lawyers for the accusers as ‘personal injury lawyers’ on multiple occasions.

Menninger claimed that these accusers had changed their stories, and the government was uninterested in knowing why.

“The tough questions weren’t asked by the government so they were left to be asked by us,” she said.

“It’s not easy to ask someone why [their story changed].”

Menninger made the case that the women had only “inserted Ghislaine Maxwell into their memories” to make money. She adduced the fact that they had brought lawyers to their meetings with the FBI as evidence of that.

“You don’t need a lawyer to talk to the FBI unless you want money,” she said.

“They each took millions - now they are stuck with the stories they told,” Menninger claimed…Why would you go decades without mentioning Ghislaine Maxwell?”

Menninger said this was because of ‘post-event suggestion.’  “That’s what happened in the case…memories have been manipulated in the aid of money.”

Menninger accused the prosecution of trying to paint Maxwell as Cruella DeVille and “the lady wears Prada.”  

But their evidence, according to Menninger, was thin.  They promised witnesses that never materialized. And they left out evidence which they said they would present in their opening arguments.

“These are broken promises from the government in their opening,” Menninger said. She asked why Jane’s mother, or any other family members, had never showed up to corroborate her claim that she’d went to Epstein’s home hundreds of times.

“Annie’s mom,” said Menninger, “came and said she only spoke to Epstein,” not Maxwell.

The government also promised employees of Epstein as witnesses to testify to a ‘culture of silence.’

“They bombed on this promise too…there was no culture of silence, there was the sound of silence,” said Maxwell.

Menninger said the government also promised to show massage rooms with photos of naked women.

“You didn’t see a single massage room with photos of naked women - I didn’t,” Menninger said.

Instead, according to Menninger, “you saw some artistic drawings around a rich man’s house.”

Menninger also advanced the argument that Maxwell had been manipulated by Epstein.

“It was clear Epstein was a manipulator of everyone around him,” she said.

The government had made the case that Maxwell needed Epstein to maintain her lifestyle.  

But “maybe it was Jeffery who needed Maxwell and her contacts,” instead Menninger proposed.

Menninger also tried to poke more holes in the accusers’ stories.

Of Jane: “Jane’s story is wrong, wrong, wrong on many points.”  She had “deliberately attempted to move the timeline back.”  

“She got $5 million,” Menninger said, and “nobody corroborates her story.”

Of Annie:  In New York, “[Maxwell] wasn’t even there as Annie’s diary confirms.”  Menninger also claimed that “there is no weekend of April of 1996 when Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were in New Mexico.”  

“Maybe she just got it wrong by a year,” Menninger said.

Of Kate: “If it happened at all, it happened three years after the government said it happened,” Menninger said.  She claimed that Kate had changed her timeline so she’d be 17 when the abuse happened because the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund requires its claimants to be under 17 (it’s not clear if this is true).

“I still don’t know what Kate’s story brings to this prosecution,” Menninger said.

Of Carolyn: “12 years ago she didn’t say anything about Ghislaine Maxwell.”  Menninger again claimed that Carolyn had cooperated with the government to help her claim against Jeffrey Epstein’s estate.  Menninger also tried to further undermine her credibility.

“Is that the kind of evidence you would rely upon in a matter of importance concerning yourself?” Menninger asked the jury.

She also called the government’s expert witness Dr. Lisa Rocchio “the ultimate victim apologist.”  

“She’s not trained to question anyone’s account,” Menninger charged.

Menninger hammered home the point to the jury about reasonable doubt, calling into question the testimony and credibility of Juan Alessi, Epstein’s onetime house manager in Palm Beach.

“You cannot trust this man’s word, certainly not beyond reasonable doubt, of anything,” Menninger said.  “You should not rely on him in reaching a verdict.”

Menninger also echoed Dr. Loftus’ testimony about memory: “Contrary to what most people think, memory doesn’t work like a recording device.”  And “how vivid a memory seems doesn’t make it more accurate.”

“You’re going to have the opportunity to acquit [Maxwell] on all counts, Menninger said.  “There are many reasons to hesitate and many reasons to doubt.”

“They all changed their stories when the Epstein Victims Compensation Fund opened up - that should make you hesitate,” Menninger said.

Maxwell, concluded Menninger, is “being tried here for being with Jeffrey Epstein…maybe that was the worst mistake of her life, but it’s not a crime.”

The defense’s lead private investigator, who sat in the second to last row of the courtroom throughout the closing arguments, said that he was happy with how the closing argument went for Menninger.  

“I think it went great,” he said.

Rebuttal

“The defense’s theories just don’t add up,” Maurene Comey said in the prosecution’s rebuttal. “The defense is desperate for you not to believe these women.”

She asked the jury to “use you common sense,” which tells them that “the sexual abuse of children does not leave a paper trail.”

Instead, “the victims are the evidence.”

She accused Maxwell of taking “we molested kids together money” from Epstein.

“Three different victims…remember Ghislaine Maxwell touching their breasts,” Comey said.

“These four witnesses gave you the most damning evidence, which the jury should find credible.”

Comey challenged the idea that Loftus’ claims about memory were relevant to this case.

“Some things you never forget, because they’re seared into your mind forever. You remember key moments, because they change your life forever.”

There was nothing peripheral about Ghislaine Maxwell’s role in the abuse, Comey said.

“She was the core memory” for the accusers, said Comey. “She was essential to the scheme.”

In response to the idea that some of the accusers’ testimonies had inconsistencies, Comey said the core elements were coherent.

“Which would stand out more,” Comey asked. “Mike Wallace’s birthday, or how old you were when a middle aged man molested you?”