VERDICT WATCH NY - Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein confidante, arrested on Sex Abuse charges, Jul 2020 #3

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Is this the main/official Maxwell thread?

I was wondering if any one here knew anything about Maxwell in terms of any suspected murder? Have any of the women who've accused her also said anything about her killing or threatening to kill anyone or making them disappear?

Does anyone know about what her personal interests were aside from environmental causes? Like when she wasn't being a sex trafficking socialite what did she be do in her free time? Hobbies, passing interests? Does she speak Italian? Does she have an above average IQ/nerdy/moderately extensive technical knowledge on any subject?

I will tell you why I ask but I'd like to know if anyone has any info on this first? Also wondering if anyone has heard anything her father's possible influence in any sort of crimes she might have committed? Thanks.
 
'Everybody's Absolutely Horrified': High Society Is Bracing Itself for Ghislaine Maxwell's Trial

Hardly any of the people who went to drinks at her house or to dinners for Prince Andrew — many of them members of the British upper classes or American plutocracy — wanted to talk about Maxwell on the record. Many of them professed that they were horrified, disgusted at the allegations she is charged with.

*****

That gets to the main criticism I’ve heard about the trial, which is: Why is Maxwell alone facing charges for a scheme that was a socio-economic pyramid involving many others? Even David Boies, the attorney who represents several Epstein victims (though only one, Annie Farmer, is involved in Maxwell’s trial), told me earlier this year he knows that Epstein’s schemes involved far more people – both men and women – than just Maxwell. “I think it would be a miscarriage of justice if the other co-conspirators were not called to account,” he told me, saying he expected more indictments. Yet, so far, that has not happened.


Interesting article.
 
From the indictment, this is related to Victim 3, who I assume the above article is referring to. The newspaper sting was 4/5 years after her encounters with Maxwell as an under 18. I'm not sure the prosecution will drop the counts v Victim 3.

[PDF page 9]

c . MAXWELL groomed and befriended Minor Victim- 3 in London, England between approximately 1994 and 1995, including during a period of time in which MAXWELL knew that Minor Victim- 3 was under the age of 18. Among other things, MAXWELL discussed Minor Victim- 3 ' s life and family with Minor Victim- 3 . MAXWELL introduced Minor Victim- 3 to Epstein and arranged for multiple interactions between Minor Victim- 3 and Epstein. During those interactions, MAXWELL encouraged Minor Victim- 3 to massage Epstein, knowing that Epstein would engage in sex acts with Minor Victim- 3 during those massages. Minor Victim- 3 provided Epstein with the requested massages, and during those massages, Epstein sexually abused Minor Victim- 3 . MAXWELL was aware that Epstein engaged in sexual activity with Minor Victim-3 on multiple occasions, including at times when Minor Victim- 3 was under the age of 18, including in the context of a sexualized massage.

[PDF page 13]

d . Between in or about 1994 and in or about 1995, when Minor Victim- 3 was under the age of 18, MAXWELL encouraged Minor Victim- 3 to provide massages to Epstein in London, England, knowing that Epstein intended to sexually abuse Minor Victim-3 during those massages.​

Indictment – #187 in United States v. Maxwell (S.D.N.Y., 1:20-cr-00330) – CourtListener.com
 
All of these victims had troubled childhood and youth.
None of them is "crystal clear".

I bet GM team is busy searching and x-raying their past.

Well, 1 is neutralised, so 3 left to go - I dont think it is right.
 
Last edited:
All of these victims had troubled childhood and youth.
None of them is "crystal clear".

I bet GM team is busy searching and x-raying their past.

Well, 1 is neutralised, so 3 left to go.

How is this victim neutralized? One has nothing to do with the other. It's just another blatant attempt to discount and slur the victims. These victims were children, and that is crystal clear.

MOO
 
How is this victim neutralized? One has nothing to do with the other. It's just another blatant attempt to discount and slur the victims. These victims were children, and that is crystal clear.

MOO
This is what I think too.
I wrote it is not right, RIGHT?????
Please read carefully.

But the talk is that she is not appearing in the trial now.
 
Last edited:
How is this victim neutralized? One has nothing to do with the other. It's just another blatant attempt to discount and slur the victims. These victims were children, and that is crystal clear.

MOO

MOO: Her alleged involvement with the tabloid's sting on TPB will overshadow whatever happened to her as a minor and thus influence the jury.
 
MOO: Her alleged involvement with the tabloid's sting on TPB will overshadow whatever happened to her as a minor and thus influence the jury.
I'll have to respectfully disagree with you there. I don't see how it has much of a bearing on whether the alleged victim suffered abuse facilitated by Maxwell 5 years previously. We don't even know if this will be presented to the jury.

I think this is more about unsettling alleged victims rather than influencing potential jurors.

From the same Mail article* -

The Telegraph also adds that another witness, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has previously been arrested for possession of cocaine and use of drug paraphernalia.
- does this overshadow their evidence too? Where do we draw the line on the credibility of child victims of sexual abuse based on their subsequent life events?

* Ghislaine Maxwell's accuser 'was paid to set up Tom Parker Bowles in 1999 cocaine sting' | Daily Mail Online

 
I'll have to respectfully disagree with you there. I don't see how it has much of a bearing on whether the alleged victim suffered abuse facilitated by Maxwell 5 years previously. We don't even know if this will be presented to the jury.

I think this is more about unsettling alleged victims rather than influencing potential jurors.

From the same Mail article* -

The Telegraph also adds that another witness, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has previously been arrested for possession of cocaine and use of drug paraphernalia.
- does this overshadow their evidence too? Where do we draw the line on the credibility of child victims of sexual abuse based on their subsequent life events?

* Ghislaine Maxwell's accuser 'was paid to set up Tom Parker Bowles in 1999 cocaine sting' | Daily Mail Online


It's not a stretch to think that if the victim was sex trafficked and repeatedly sexually assaulted, that just may have something to do with turning to drugs, imo.

It's such blatant victim blaming and what aboutitsm by the defense. The trial is about Ghislaine Maxwell facilitating sex trafficking. Not what the victims were doing five years later.

MOO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
128
Guests online
1,999
Total visitors
2,127

Forum statistics

Threads
605,310
Messages
18,185,544
Members
233,312
Latest member
emmab
Back
Top