NY - Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein confidante, arrested on Sex Abuse charges, Jul 2020 #5

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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Attachments

  • BA7940A4-5A20-4939-89E1-B4208EBCCF9B.jpeg
    BA7940A4-5A20-4939-89E1-B4208EBCCF9B.jpeg
    132.8 KB · Views: 11
Last edited:
Do I understand correctly that, in 2016, Maxwell was questioned in relation to Giuffre and she answered "I don't remember" repeatedly, even though there is ample flight and photographic evidence to prove that she should have known?

I'm trying to understand - Did Maxwell lie during that deposition, or did she state that she did not remember? If she stated that she did not remember, is that perjury? Can it be assumed that the only reason she could say "I don't remember" is because she is lying?

Or is there more to this and she made statements that are easily proven untrue (beyond memory issues).

Curious about the perjury charge that will be dropped if she does not appeal, or does not have a successful appeal ... ???
 
otto said:
Do I understand correctly that, in 2016, Maxwell was questioned in relation to Giuffre and she answered "I don't remember" repeatedly, even though there is ample flight and photographic evidence to prove that she should have known?

I'm trying to understand - Did Maxwell lie during that deposition, or did she state that she did not remember? If she stated that she did not remember, is that perjury? Can it be assumed that the only reason she could say "I don't remember" is because she is lying?

Or is there more to this and she made statements that are easily proven untrue (beyond memory issues).

Curious about the perjury charge that will be dropped if she does not appeal, or does not have a successful appeal ... ???
Click to expand...
She lied


31. On or about July 22, 2016, in the Southern District of New York, GHISLAINE MAXWELL, the defendant, having taken an oath to testify truthfully in a deposition in connection with a case then pending before the United States
D istrict Court for the Southern D istrict of New York under docket number 15 Civ. 7433 , knowingly made false m aterial declarations, to wit, MAXWELL gave the following underlined false testimony:
Q: Were you aware of the presence of sex toys or devices used in sexual activities in Mr. Epstein ' s Palm Beach house?
A: No, not that I recall.
Q. Do you know whether Mr. Epstein possessed sex toys or devices used in sexual activities?
A. No .
Q. Other than yourself and the blond and brunette

that you have identified as having been involved in three-way sexual activities, with whom did Mr. Epstein have sexual activities?
I wasn' t aware that he was having sexual activities with anyone when I was with him other than myself.
I want to be sure that I'm clear. Is it your testimony that in the 1990s and 2000s, you were not aware that Mr. Epstein was having sexual activities with anyone other than yourself and the blond and brunette on those few occasions when they were involved with you?
That is my testimony , that is correct .
Is it your testimony that you've never given anybody a massage?
I have not given anyone a massage.
You never gave Mr . Epstein a massage , is that
your testimony?
That is my testimony.
You never gave [Minor Victim-2) a massage is your testimony?
I never gave [Minor Victim- 2) a massage .
https://storage.courtlistener.com/r...d.539612/gov.uscourts.nysd.539612.187.0_4.pdf
 
This was all I could find to explaining perjury charges. Interesting that both Maxwell and Prince Andrew cannot remember being in London with Giuffre even though there is a photo of the 17 year old with the prince at Maxwell's house in London.

"Those charges, filed in 2020, are related to a now-settled defamation lawsuit brought forward by Giuffre. Her lawyers later released a trove of documents they claimed prove Maxwell lied to investigators during the deposition.

The legal team has said it can disprove everything Maxwell, 60, said with flight manifests and photographs.
...

Maxwell claimed under oath to have only visited Epstein's Palm Beach Home 'once' in 2005, but flight logs showed she flew there at least 11 times, Giuffre's lawyers said.

Maxwell told lawyers that she never remembered being on Epstein's private plane with Giuffre, but a flight manifest shows the pair flew together at least 23 times when Virginia was underage, according to Giuffre's legal team.

She also claimed she didn't remember Giuffre being in London with her, despite a photograph that shows the together with Prince Andrew in Maxwell's home during a 2001 trip."
​
Ghislaine Maxwell is set to be put on trial for perjury after 'lying under oath' in 2016 deposition | Daily Mail Online
 
sds71 said:
She lied


31. On or about July 22, 2016, in the Southern District of New York, GHISLAINE MAXWELL, the defendant, having taken an oath to testify truthfully in a deposition in connection with a case then pending before the United States
D istrict Court for the Southern D istrict of New York under docket number 15 Civ. 7433 , knowingly made false m aterial declarations, to wit, MAXWELL gave the following underlined false testimony:
Q: Were you aware of the presence of sex toys or devices used in sexual activities in Mr. Epstein ' s Palm Beach house?
A: No, not that I recall.
Q. Do you know whether Mr. Epstein possessed sex toys or devices used in sexual activities?
A. No .
Q. Other than yourself and the blond and brunette

that you have identified as having been involved in three-way sexual activities, with whom did Mr. Epstein have sexual activities?
I wasn' t aware that he was having sexual activities with anyone when I was with him other than myself.
I want to be sure that I'm clear. Is it your testimony that in the 1990s and 2000s, you were not aware that Mr. Epstein was having sexual activities with anyone other than yourself and the blond and brunette on those few occasions when they were involved with you?
That is my testimony , that is correct .
Is it your testimony that you've never given anybody a massage?
I have not given anyone a massage.
You never gave Mr . Epstein a massage , is that
your testimony?
That is my testimony.
You never gave [Minor Victim-2) a massage is your testimony?
I never gave [Minor Victim- 2) a massage .
https://storage.courtlistener.com/r...d.539612/gov.uscourts.nysd.539612.187.0_4.pdf
Click to expand...

I don't see perjury yet. I understood perjury to be giving a false statement without admitting that memory may be faulty. Faulty memory is an explanation for false testimony.

Does a foot on a breast on a plane qualify as massage? We have all seen the photo where Epstein has his foot on Maxwell's chest and she has his foot in hand. We have all seen photos of Epstein resting his arm on Maxwell like she's a hat rack.

Did she specifically make a false statement, or did she state that she does not remember after giving an incorrect answer?
 
sds71 said:
Sarah Kellen, a former assistant to Epstein, scheduled some of her “massage” appointments at his Palm Beach lair, sent for cars to pick her up and once took nude photographs of her for the pedophile, Carolyn said. “[Kellen] called and said she was calling in regards to Mr. Epstein,” she testified, “and that I would get paid $500 to $600 if she could take pictures of me.
Kellen “knew what was going on,” Carolyn later added. “She was older than me, so she was an adult. She knew what was happening.

Indeed, Kellen was part of Epstein’s inner circle for more than a decade and named among four “potential co-conspirators” in the financier’s lenient plea deal in Florida in 2008

“The way that I see it is: Sarah has been given dozens if not hundreds of chances to potentially reposition herself in this narrative,” Edwards told The Daily Beast. “You’re either on the side of the victims or the other side, which is the side of the bad guys.”

Kellen and her representatives declined to comment for this story.

Next Target for Epstein Prosecutors Could Be His Assistant Sarah Kellen
Click to expand...

Interesting IMO thoughts from lawyer Brian Edwards there.

'You're either on the side of the victims or the other side, which is the side of the bag guys.'

IMO that is too black and white for a mess like this.

I wonder how he feels about VRG?

Why should someone need to 'reposition herself in this narative'?
Shouldn't criminal charges or lawsuits be based upon evidence of commiting crimes?!

I wonder: Have other people involved 'repositioned themselves in the narrative'? Have they done this based on legal advice?
 
Last edited:
investikater said:
Interesting IMO thoughts from lawyer Brian Edwards there.

'You're either on the side of the victims or the other side, which is the side of the bag guys.'

IMO that is too black and white for a mess like this.

I wonder how he feels about VRG?

Why should someone need to 'reposition herself in this narative'?
Shouldn't criminal charges or lawsuits be based upon evidence of commiting crimes?!

I wonder: Have other people involved 'repositioned themselves in the narrative'? Have they done this based on legal advice?
Click to expand...

VRG founded her charity Victims Refuse Silence with one of her lawyers Brittany Henderson. Brittany is listed as Principal Officer for most of the organisation's life.

https://apps.irs.gov/app/eos/detailsPage?ein=472627774&name=Victims Refuse Silence Inc.&city=Fort Lauderdale&state=FL&countryAbbr=US&dba=&type=CHARITIES, DETERMINATIONLETTERS, EPOSTCARD&orgTags=CHARITIES&orgTags=DETERMINATIONLETTERS&orgTags=EPOSTCARD
 
Last edited:
otto said:
I don't see perjury yet. I understood perjury to be giving a false statement without admitting that memory may be faulty. Faulty memory is an explanation for false testimony.

Does a foot on a breast on a plane qualify as massage? We have all seen the photo where Epstein has his foot on Maxwell's chest and she has his foot in hand. We have all seen photos of Epstein resting his arm on Maxwell like she's a hat rack.

Did she specifically make a false statement, or did she state that she does not remember after giving an incorrect answer?
Click to expand...

I agree. Surely there has to be something else to the perjury charge?
If the whole perjury case rests on her saying 'I have not given anyone a massage.' and one photo of her holding a foot...
no wonder they don't mind dropping it!
 
Ghislaine Maxwell case gives flashbacks to lawyers who worked on Vanderbilt rape retrial



Who's Sweating Now? Ghislaine Maxwell Ends Fight to Keep John Doe Names Sealed


In a legal brief filed on Wednesday, Giuffre requested that the judge unseal the names of the John Does currently kept out of the public eye, in part due to their complaints of how disruptive the media attention would be to their lives.

“Upon review of the objections of those Does, it is apparent that their objections essentially mirror objections to unsealing that this Court has already rejected,” Giuffre’s lawyer wrote, as cited by the producer of the Prince and the Pervertpodcast that is chronicling the events of this case.

Maxwell has previously fought the unsealing of the legal names of the John Does revealed in the still-sealed court documents, but a letter from her lawyer dated January 12th notes that Maxwell “does not wish to further address” detailed objections submitted by Non-Party Does 17, 53, 54, 55, 73, 93, and 151.
 
Last edited:
sds71 said:
Ghislaine Maxwell case gives flashbacks to lawyers who worked on Vanderbilt rape retrial



Who's Sweating Now? Ghislaine Maxwell Ends Fight to Keep John Doe Names Sealed


In a legal brief filed on Wednesday, Giuffre requested that the judge unseal the names of the John Does currently kept out of the public eye, in part due to their complaints of how disruptive the media attention would be to their lives.

“Upon review of the objections of those Does, it is apparent that their objections essentially mirror objections to unsealing that this Court has already rejected,” Giuffre’s lawyer wrote, as cited by the producer of the Prince and the Pervertpodcast that is chronicling the events of this case.

Maxwell has previously fought the unsealing of the legal names of the John Does revealed in the still-sealed court documents, but a letter from her lawyer dated January 12th notes that Maxwell “does not wish to further address” detailed objections submitted by Non-Party Does 17, 53, 54, 55, 73, 93, and 151.
Click to expand...
Oh my.
Am I to extrapolate from this that GM has decided NOT to protect these people?
MOO.
 
citygirl said:
Oh my.
Am I to extrapolate from this that GM has decided NOT to protect these people?
MOO.
Click to expand...

I can’t say I’m surprised she’s no longer willing to protect them. I think she’s possible realised it’s each “man” for himself. She didn’t seem to have an abundance of witnesses for her defence, no one seemed to want to support her. Rightfully so obviously but in her situation now why should she go out of her way to protect them any longer? MOO
 
StasiaUK said:
I can’t say I’m surprised she’s no longer willing to protect them. I think she’s possible realised it’s each “man” for himself. She didn’t seem to have an abundance of witnesses for her defence, no one seemed to want to support her. Rightfully so obviously but in her situation now why should she go out of her way to protect them any longer? MOO
Click to expand...
I'm surprised.
By all accounts she has had no desire to give people up.
Nary a one. Until now.
To me, this is big.
I agree . She's now thinking it's every man for himself.
MOO.
 
shotgun09 said:
Personally, I believe that GM's 'decision' to not protect the others may be just a subtle reminder....Her sentencing has yet to happen.
Click to expand...
I agree. She's looking at years of hard time. And, she's been in that awful jail for how long? Almost 2 years ?
I'm thinking she's having a huge awakening.
Why did none of these people come to my defense?
Where are they?
JM left her high and dry along with all those people she satisfied all those many years.
What the heck happened?
MOO.
 
Three possibilities imo
1. As always she is calculating and manipulative, towards some as yet unknown self serving end. e.g.. cooperation before sentencing.
2. Pure spite....they are free living their privileged lives, while she is stuck in a concrete cell.
3. She doesn't care anymore, is totally defeated and possibly pre suicidal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Staff online

Members online

... and 172 more.
Total: 1,179 (members: 173, guests: 1,006)

Online statistics

Members online
173
Guests online
1,006
Total visitors
1,179
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
606,916
Messages
18,212,949
Members
234,002
Latest member
detconan
Back
Top