FFS “software vulnerabilities” was trending -Blue QANON attempted to tie that to Maxwell’s Guilty Verdict
What.In.The.Freshest.Of.All.Hell.IS. This? How on earth people still believe his tweets is lost on me. This isn’t comical it is down right dangerous and he’s a constant purveyor of DISINFORMATION
I genuinely can not in good faith let this crazy-conspiracy-prone theorist do this, yet again. And it’s refreshing to see in almost real time, several blue check journalist calling out his dangerous disinformation, in almost real time. Between Gorilla Channel, Judge Salas, Miami Condo tower collapse and the insane “we can bomb the shit out of any city in China —it’s call proportionate use of force” and most gulling how he & his ardent enablers attacked nearly all the women who publicly spoke out about his Twitter behavior, nearly a year later.
But that tweet/thread bootstrapping Ghislaine Maxwell’s Guilty verdict as to Count 1, 3, 4, 5 to her father’s short lived involvement in PROMIS is the most bizarre public beclownment to date. Said person tried to convince me that papa Maxwell had “fully debriefed his daughter” —the thing is that conspiracy theory (at the time) was only circulating on ultra conservative “news” websites. Horseshoes need both sides -something -something.
As someone who spent a significant amount of time following the heinous Ghislaine Maxwell trial (archived here and here) and conducted a series of deeper research dive into the LLCs (found here and here and here) all until my unceremonious suspension from Twitter. Not once was there ever an inference or insinuation by Maxwell or the Government that she was “fully debriefed” on Papa Maxwell short lived PROMIS bucket of unholy madness. See 1994 DOJ Report re Robert Maxwell, NSA, CIA, FBI. Also see the 1993 Special Counsel Nicholas Bua Report to then Attorney General Reno….
“software vulnerabilities in the US Government”
What pray tell is he speed tweeting about? Setting aside the fact that a jury of Ms Maxwell’s peer found her guilty on five of the six counts — which if my math is correct —Ms Maxwell faces at least 65 years in prison, for the heinous crimes she committed against numerous children.
See July 2, 2020 DOJ-OPA Press Release announcing the indictment
See July 8, 2020 SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT FILED as to Ghislaine Maxwell (SDNY-ECF)
If you go back and reread the docket (See SDNY-ECF) of this case then you’d know following entries shouldn’t be overlooked. And yes this is me stating;
...it might be a good idea for a credentialed reporter or news organization to file a motion to have the following sealed documents…
and yes -there really are physical vaults in most federal district courts. And that is important because some of these documents are likely witness statements, affidavits, declarations, discovery
But if you read the full 60+ page docket you start to see a pattern of events. For example:
Document #50, Aug 20, 2020. SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault
Documents # 54-56 Sep 10, 2020 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault.
Documents # 80-82 Dec 3, 2020 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault.
Documents #110 & 111 Jan 11, 2021 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault.
Documents #150 - 154 Feb 5, 2021 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault.
Documents #174 -179 Mar 24, 2021 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault.
Document #238 Apr 23, 2021 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault.
Document #251 Apr 27, 2021 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault
Document #349 Oct 15, 2021 SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault
One can deduce that some of those sealed filings correspond to the first and second superseding indictments. But the content of these sealed documents remains shrouded behind a seal. Unless of course a credentialed reporter or news organization files suit asking the Court to unseal these documents.
However (this hit the docket on the 28th of Dec) LETTER by Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Christian R. Everdell dated December 27, 2021 re: Supplemental Instructions (see SDNY-ECF) -this letter is going to be important…
The single Count the jury acquitted her was “enticing a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts.” On one hand you could argue she wasn’t found guilty on that count -so no harm no foul. On the other hand this motion will likely be used in Defendant Maxwell’s appeal. But first we need to wait for the Final Judgement (this occurs during the sentencing phase of a criminal case) Any competent defense attorney almost always files a Motion of Acquittal (See Rule 29) but absent a strong showing of prosecutorial misconduct and it has to be egregious misconduct… Defendant motions are rarely granted.(In no way am I saying SDNY Prosecutors engaged in this “type” of conduct. I trust them and I trust the newly confirmed US Attorney) See the December 29, 2021 statement by US Attorney Williams…
..the women – who stepped out of the shadows and into the courtroom. Their courage and willingness to face their abuser made this case, and today’s result, possible. I also want to thank the career prosecutors of the Southern District of New York, who embraced the victims’ quest for justice and have worked tirelessly, day in and day out, to ensure that Maxwell was held accountable for her crimes.
But if you’re asking me why does the December 27, 2021 letter matter? Here’s why that letter matters, what Defendant Maxwell’s defense team did hear was to lay down a marker/issue which they intend to bring up on Appeal. So for now I’d watch the 2ndCCOAS calendar.
I know that Twitter is rife with speculation, disinformation, conspiracy theories and others generally asking “can Maxwell still cooperate and get a reduced sentence” -while that is a very simple question, the answer is far more complicated and nuance. So allow me to explain this in non-legalese.
Plea Agreements…
these are almost always executed before the start of a criminal trial. Not all plea agreements have a cooperation clause. But yes the colloquialism that “he who cuts the first deal, gets the best deal” is fairly accurate. Meaning throughout the Maxwell trial the government did a decent job steering clear of potential co-conspirators (excluding Epstein who I genuinely hope is burning in hell for perpetuity)… Conversely Defendant Maxwell attempted the “it wasn’t me…your memory isn’t fresh…it was someone else” —that’s a direct play for the Defense’s goal of establishing “reasonable doubt”. One thing you should know — when it comes to contemporaneous notes/diaries those tend to hold more weight with a jury than a witness’ decades “old” memory.
What is 5K1 Letter/Motion
The other reason I’m pointing out “he who cuts the first deal” as it relates to Maxwell and potential coconspirators. I do not think the Government ever had a plea agreement offer on the table. And certainly with such a high profile criminal case, if there was any whiff of such plea agreement then certainly it would have been reported. It wasn’t.
You often hear about a 5K1 letter/motion and in some plea agreements. In non-legalese a 5K1 letter is merely a document which the U.S. Attorney’s Office files with the federal district court judge assigned to the case. 5K1 letters often seek leniency on behalf of the Defendant (this is where the plea agreement’s cooperation clause comes into play) and the kicker is This document typically hits the docket at the sentencing hearing or a few days before the hearing. In short a vast majority of the time the terms and conditions of the 5K1 Letter/Motion are usually proffered in the plea agreement. Not to belabor the point, nothing in the docket suggests that the Government ever had a plea agreement on the table for Convicted-Child-Sex-Trafficking-Felon Maxwell.
See USSC 2021 Sentencing Manual https://guidelines.ussc.gov/gl/§5K1.1 -only the prosecuting US Attorney office can file a 5K1 and even so, they are required to proffer how the defendant’s cooperation was “substantial assistance” and while most of the time this bad news for those coconspirators —you’ll note the specific language used in the first sentence. It’s highly nuanced but I’ll tell you the subtext; cooperating with the “Government’s investigation or prosecution of another person…” this means a defendant’s cooperation often leads to more indictments. And they could be completely unrelated to the original Complaint or Indictment…
Upon motion of the government stating that the defendant has provided substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person who has committed an offense, the court may depart from the guidelines…
(a) The appropriate reduction shall be determined by the court for reasons stated that may include, but are not limited to, consideration of the following:
(1) the court’s evaluation of the significance and usefulness of the defendant’s assistance, taking into consideration the government’s evaluation of the assistance rendered;
(2) the truthfulness, completeness, and reliability of any information or testimony provided by the defendant;
(3) the nature and extent of the defendant’s assistance;
(4) any injury suffered, or any danger or risk of injury to the defendant or his family resulting from his assistance;
(5) the timeliness of the defendant’s assistance.
And if I failed to properly spell out the why, and, the when does the 5K1s come in to play. Generally speaking this occurs before the Defendant either pleads guilty or a jury convicts. To be fair in some cases this is why some plea agreements remain sealed. But again this occurs before a conviction. And that’s important
Fed. R. Crim. P. 35 versus 5K1
I am sure you are wondering what is Rule35 in the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure and why does this matter? The one key differentiator is Rule-35 occurs post conviction. And that delineation actually matters.
With respect to the ongoing speculation that “Maxwell knows the software security vulnerabilities with in the US Government“ (see archived that hawt mess express thread) if this is referring to PROMIS & Inslaw (Institute for Law and Social Research) which was operated by William and Nancy Hamilton. Moreover the FBI Vault released some eight volumes concerning Robert Maxwell, Inslaw PROMIS, CIA & NSA: https://vault.fbi.gov/robert-maxwell
I can’t wrap my head around the conclusory leaps and bounds made by Blue QANONs. More specifically, various narratives such as; “she’s going to give up all the names”…”she knows a few spookie-spies”… “tens of thousands of sealed indictments” all of which presents as a gateway to the land of double Ds: deluded & delusional landia. All while simultaneously circling the drain of real deep stupid.
Whereas, Correcting or Reducing a Federal Sentence: Rule 35 - which reads in part:
(a) Correcting Clear Error. Within 7 days after sentencing, the court may correct a sentence that resulted from arithmetical, technical, or other clear error.
(b) Reducing a Sentence for Substantial Assistance.
(1) In General. Upon the government's motion made within one year of sentencing, the court may reduce a sentence if:
(A) the defendant, after sentencing, provided substantial assistance in investigating or prosecuting another person; and
(B) reducing the sentence accords with the Sentencing Commission's guidelines and policy statements.
(2) Later Motion. Upon the government's motion made more than one year after sentencing, the court may reduce a sentence if the defendant's substantial assistance involved:
(A) information not known to the defendant until one year or more after sentencing;
(B) information provided by the defendant to the government within one year of sentencing, but which did not become useful to the government until more than one year after sentencing; or
(C) information the usefulness of which could not reasonably have been anticipated by the defendant until more than one year after sentencing and which was promptly provided to the government after its usefulness was reasonably apparent to the defendant.
(3) Evaluating Substantial Assistance. In evaluating whether the defendant has provided substantial assistance, the court may consider the defendant's presentence assistance.
(4) Below Statutory Minimum. When acting under Rule 35(b), the court may reduce the sentence to a level below the minimum sentence established by statute.
According to a late 2016 United States Sentencing Commission (USSC) Report for fiscal years 2009 -2014. Yes on occasion (albeit extremely rare) a Defendant can be the recipient of both a 5K1 & Rule35. However as the (2016) report highlights there’s a pretty big disparity in 5K1 & Rule35, a near five fold delta.
From fiscal years 2009 through 2014, the Commission received information on 10,811 Rule 35(b) reductions
By contrast, 57,485 §5K1.1 substantial assistance departures over the same time period.
Eighteen percent (1,947) of offenders who eventually received a Rule 35(b) reduction also received a §5K1.1 substantial assistance departure at the time of the original sentence.
The Point…
I’m not here to judge you —if you are choosing to blindly trust various various Blue-QANON prognosticators. That’s certainly your prerogative. What I am saying is people who use their platform to intentionally spread disinformation are incredibly dangerous. Furthermore social media companies have both a moral and ethical duty to scrub their platform from individual users who use their platform to “publish” bizarre threads, multiple grifts, straight up conspiracy theories, doxes, threatening to release revenge porn, doctored/forged DMs and text messages.
That’s not a Republican or Democrat thing., it’s called being a decent human being. And if social media companies are unwilling to police notorious disinformation agents of chaos, that’s when the Federal Court system (both civil and criminal) becomes the proper venue. True Story: during Michael Cohen criminal matter, I spent too much time trying to explain the differences between 5K1 & Rule35. Prior to that said person had no idea what either were or that there really are actual vaults…
Again the choice is yours in terms of who you think are credible “journalist” and/or news organizations, researchers —all of whom present the facts and underlying documents in an agonist manner. Thus allowing their readers to make their informed conclusions. And lastly here’s your daily dose of salt water therapy:
-Filey
Thank you, File-y! I saw his crazy yesterday and was astonished even he could go there. We appreciate you and your work giving us docs, insight and clarification. You are a gem!
May you have peace in your decisions and 2022 give you all of your desires...
I always feel smarter after reading your meticulously documented presentation of case specifics. Thank you ma’am. Again.