Ghislaine Maxwell sits in the courtroom to hear a note from the jury in a courtroom sketch in New York City.
Jurors will resume deliberations on Monday.
One juror asked if they were scrutinizing the reliability of Carolyn.
An expert said that there was a clear-cut win for prosecutors in the case.
Everyone was surprised when the twelve jurors decided Ghislaine's fate on Wednesday afternoon.
They hadn't made a decision yet. They wouldn't get one before Christmas.
It wasn't surprising that the jury took more than two days to decide whether or not to indict or acquit. The child of a British media baron is accused of being involved in sexual abuse herself and of being involved in sextrafficking.
Less complicated allegations have taken jurors longer in other trials. The jury was supposed to go home before the court closed on Thursday, but they didn't.
The judge overseeing the case, Alison Nathan, squeezed closing arguments and her charging conference into one marathon day on Monday, giving them a couple of hours to deliberate in the late afternoon before continuing on Tuesday and Wednesday. They said no to keeping the courthouse open when she offered.
The jurors are going to continue deliberations. They've sent a few notes with questions.
The information we have so far is not strong enough to draw conclusions about what jurors are thinking, only that they're taking the testimony from accusers seriously.
The jury still hasn't come to a unanimous conclusion, which may be a bad sign for prosecutors, according to Lisa Bloom, an attorney representing eight accusers.
There is a possibility that there is at least one juror who has a reasonable doubt. Over the weekend, that could grow. I've watched hundreds of juries and high-profile cases. I think it's a good sign for the defense when they take a long holiday weekend and come back.
The FBI requested an interview with Carolyn.
Two of the notes sent by the jurors stood out.
Carolyn, one of the accusers, testified using only her first name. They asked if Annie Farmer's testimony could count towards two of the conspiracy counts.
According to Taylor, the FBI interview was a win for Carolyn.
Huntley Taylor told Insider that the defense felt good because they were focused on challenging the victims' testimony. Carolyn didn't mention Maxwell to the FBI.
In a courtroom sketch in New York City, witness "Carolyn" answers questions from the prosecution during the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell.
Carolyn spoke to the FBI a number of times after she said she had been sexually abused by the man. She testified that she had sex with him at his Palm Beach, Florida, home.
According to the FBI notes from 2007, Carolyn didn't name Maxwell as one of the people who scheduled massages, but just a woman with an "accent." Carolyn's stories were highlighted by the defense attorneys as a way to undermine her testimony.
The jury note indicates that the jurors are taking the arguments seriously.
"It means that the jury is carefully reviewing the evidence and at least one of them thinks that that cross-examination and those FBI statements were significant enough to request them," said Bloom.
The FBI interviews are not recorded or transcribed so they can't be used in a trial. The agents who sit in on those interviews have notes, but not a "deposition" transcript that jurors wanted.
The jury in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, an associate of Jeffrey Epstein who is accused of sex trafficking, is sitting in empty seats.
Nathan refused to give the FBI notes, and instead directed them to the evidence and trial transcripts they already had, which may be frustrating to the jury.
"Juries don't like it when things are kept from them," he said. I don't know who they're going to hold this against. Would they hold it against the prosecution or against the defense? It's not the fault of either. It's the rules of evidence.
The process of "impeaching" a witness was harder than it looked, as pointed out by a former federal prosecutor.
Carolyn's story was not necessarily inconsistent even if she relayed different details over time. The FBI investigation and lawsuit she filed were centered on the man.
"You'll see that even very experienced trial lawyers, trying to say 'this person changed their story' is actually much harder than you would think," Penza said. It isn't very clear cut.
The jury asked for the FBI 302 of Carolyn, which boded well for the rest of the case. The other three accusers, Farmer, "Jane" and "Kate", were grilled by the attorneys for Maxwell. They didn't ask for notes about theirs.
"I don't think that the jury is buying the defense at this point in time," Penza said. There was a conspiracy for all of the victims to lie in order to implicate Ghislaine Maxwell.
The jury question about Annie Farmer seems to be a win for prosecutors.
Nathan was asked by jurors if they could consider Farmer's testimony as a conspiracy to crime in counts one and three, which would allow them to find her guilty of two of the conspiracy counts against her.
The lawyers appeared angry. Nathan was asked to give a qualified answer about the limited Farmer's testimony.
Nathan gave a simple "yes" as an answer, siding with the US Attorney.
Nathan's "clear as a bell" answer was a victory for prosecutors.
She said that a judge giving a "yes" to a question is a win for the prosecution.
The witness Annie Farmer was questioned by the prosecutor during the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, an associate of Jeffrey Epstein, who is accused of sex trafficking.
Penza said that the question may reveal that jurors were focused on the role that Maxwell played in the sexual abuse operation.
Penza said that it's unlikely that the jurors will question the children who were engaging in commercial sex. The real question is what role Maxwell played in this. I think they would focus on what did Maxwell know.
The jurors asked for copies of the transcripts from the four accusers in the trial, as well as specific requests about Carolyn and Annie. They asked for transcripts of testimony from Juan Alessi, the former Palm Beach butler who was one of the prosecution's star witnesses.
It may be harder for the jury to disentangle from each other if they are taking all of the accusers seriously.
It's going to be difficult for the jurors to believe that all of these women were lying about Ghislaine's role.
A courtroom sketch from Ghislaine Maxwell's trial.
According to the defense attorneys, Maxwell didn't know about his sexual proclivities.
The other accusers in the case have a more complicated story to tell. She testified in the trial that she spent a weekend at the New Mexico ranch when she was 16 years old, and that she was given a sexualized massage by Maxwell, who seemed to groom her for sex with Epstein.
The jury can look at the role that Maxwell played in the life of Epstein in a different way because Farmer's limited experience with the two men gave them a different way to look at it.
Penza said that the jury was concentrating on what evidence was there that Maxwell knew what was happening when she wasn't in the room. She was recruiting these girls.
Penza said that the jurors appeared to be zeroing in on exactly what Maxwell knew.
She said that the prosecution doesn't have to prove that she saw what happened. It's the law even if she was just burying her head in the sand. If you bury your head in the sand, you are just as guilty.
The original article is on Insider.
