that happened in 1994 to 2004, and there has been a long awaited reckoning and an emphatic verdict. as you said, five of six counts guilty, including on the top count, sex trafficking a minor, which standing alone could have a maximum sentence of a0 years imprisonment, effectively a life sentence if sentenced on the maximum penalty, so it is something that people who have been covering this court have been closely monitoring. as in matter of fact, the civil suit that was a real catalyst behind it, the civil suit of virginia giuffre against ghislaine maxwell unfolded in the same court, the southern district of new york. and it was from that case it was mentioned a little bit earlier that there is a pending perjury count. that is two perjury counts from deposition testimony that ghislaine maxwell gave in that case,
trial on a separate perjury count. i m joined by melissa murray, what does this verdict mean? we all recognize this was as much about jeffrey epstein as it was about ghislaine maxwell. a lot of the energy was being channeled into this trial for ghislaine maxwell. for many of the victims and for those who have watched this case with great interest, this is a real vindication and accountability for what was alleged to have happen, and what the jury believed did happen. what do you see in the way that the government approached this case? because there were many problems in the handling of jeffrey epstein, as someone who had many public allegations against him for many years. at the same time, there seems to be an effort by some prosecutors, however late in the game, to go after this stuff and
answered he submitted written there. you know, willie, mika and i answers rather than sitting for an interview with bob mueller, were talking about another case well, another decision and his lawyers were very careful to couch his answers. by the supreme court yesterday when he was asked whether he had that s going to have far reaching implications. had conversations about that was actually the united wikileaks, not that i recall with roger stone, right? states supreme court s decision to let stand the connecticut so maybe it s technically not a perjury count, but this lays bare what was going on, and it i supreme court s 4-3 ruling that the families of sandy hook think is a good reminder as we walk into these impeachment victims could sue remington for hearings that this is a white making the ar-15 and the you house that doesn t come here for the first time, that this is a white house that knew full well that political interaction with know, washington has tried for foreign coun
the perjury charge, i think he s like throw have his day in court. arthel: chris, what is the next move for the navy seal s legal team to make sure the charges stick for the medic and to exonerate the navy seal? well, i think the next step for the navy seal is clearly what they re going to toys talk about how this creates doubt in the mind of the jurors that it wasn t gallagher that committed any murder, it was scott. or in any case, it certainly wasn t gallagher. that s going to be his argument. i think it s going to be hard even on the perjury count. according to mr. scott, he said that he s never told anybody in the government that he didn t that he didn t kill the prisoner. so if that s the case, they re going to have a very hard time proving perjury and as far as the overall case, this has been a very difficult case for the navy from the beginning to try to demonstrate that there was
well, why won t mr. whitaker speak fully? they were easy questions to answer. rather, he chose throughout to equivocate and go off on a side road throughout the proceedings. so he was not very credible. jennifer, he refused to answer a lot of the questions that he was asked today by the democrats, including whether he thought the mueller investigation was a witch hunt. yeah. that was very strange. that was an easy one for him to answer. i mean people who have managed to remain on the president s good side or at least decent side, like bill barr managed to say that. so it s unclear why he did that. look, the question asked for an opinion. it s not something that s ever going to be the subject of a perjury count or anything like that, which makes it all the more puzzling as to why he couldn t just give that one up and at least try to rake back a tiny bit of this credibility that we ve been talking about him losing throughout the course of the hearing. carrie, whitaker acknowledged