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

[Auburnlucky7]

I only read the testimony against Maxwell, which did not include anyone making threats.

Do you have a link?

It’s in the book, Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story, by Julie K. Brown.

 

[nao]

How many girls came to court aka were involved in this? Did they all get $ or just some?

 

[LinasK]

Moo.. with respect to the girls...they were not that young, violence was not involved. Some parents seemed to of pushed their girls into hanging out with money. Weird case. Wish he had kept a client list. But why don't the girls know who the clients were??... Moo

13 is young enough! That's the age I was molested at, and apparently violence WAS involved in these assaults. I listened to Maria Farmer's account. 13 year olds CANNOT give consent. Really no girl who is under 18 can.

 

[LinasK]

They were as young as 15. They were not of legal age to consent. They were threatened and emotionally manipulated. They were terrified. IMO, most of his alleged victims would have no reason to know who the clients were.

13 even.

 

[Auburnlucky7]

Just a comment: after Ghislaine Maxwell's father's death, it came out that he was a fraudster and sometime Israeli agent. He'd emptied millions from pension funds, and the pensioners never got all the money back.

IMO, Epstein is still quite mysterious re how he got his millions (not billions), and could similarly have been involved in dodgy financial scemes. He's been accused of being involved in a big Ponzi scheme (Towers Financial Corp).

IMO, he moved in big money circles, he had other ways to make big money than operate the equivalent of a cheap SE Asian massage parlour.

JMO

It’s discussed in the book I referenced previously.

 

[Cedars]

How many girls came to court aka were involved in this? Did they all get $ or just some?

For GM specifically, IIRC there were three minors who testified against her, concerning the period 1994-1997 (when they were minors).

Another woman who testified was not a minor when she became involved.

The prosecution argued these 4 women were just examples, and there were over 100 or so more.

Here are the charges Ghislaine Maxwell faces.

The case against Ms. Maxwell is based on the accounts of four women whom prosecutors say she enticed to engage in sex acts with Jeffrey Epstein when they were underage.

www.nytimes.com

Settlements? There were many civil lawsuits that are undisclosed.

The main victim fund from Epstein's estate paid $121 million to 135 victims.

Headlines reveal they also won $290 million from JP Morgan Chase (Epstein Banker).

 

[nao]

Moo..it is a sad case, They were financially compensated. Hope they do good with the money

 

[Dotta]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1950129874288496734

 

[tarabull]

No doubt!!!

 

[scapa]

Article on the seeming attempt(s) to rehabilitate GM, from The Guardian:

Ghislaine Maxwell is not a victim. And if she is pardoned, it won’t be for the sake of justice | Arwa Mahdawi

The Epstein files may never be released, but it’s increasingly likely that Epstein’s right-hand woman could be. The groundwork is already being done, says Arwa Mahdawi

www.theguardian.com

 

[sds71]

An Oversight Committee spokeswoman on Tuesday rejected the idea of giving Maxwell immunity. “The Oversight Committee will respond to Ms. Maxwell’s attorney soon, but it will not consider granting congressional immunity for her testimony,” the spokeswoman said.

“I don’t think there are many Republicans that want to give immunity to someone that may have been sex trafficking children,” Comer told CNN last week.

Maxwell’s conditions as laid out by her attorneys include:

• A grant of formal immunity.
• The interview can’t happen at the correctional facility where she’s serving her sentence.
• “To prepare adequately for any congressional deposition—and to ensure accuracy and fairness—we would require the Committee’s questions in advance….Surprise questioning would be both inappropriate and unproductive.”
• The interview would be scheduled “only after the resolution of her Supreme Court petition and her forthcoming habeas petition.”

It’s likely the Supreme Court will not act on Maxwell’s petition until October, when the justices are scheduled to return from a summer break.

https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/29/politics/maxwell-conditions-congressional-testimony?Date=20250729&Profile=CNNPolitics&utm_content=1753810493&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

 

[Inthedetails]

"You didn't suffer that much." Or, "other people have been through far worse than you" are some of the reasons victims of many types of crimes, but especially SA and DV don't come forward. A crime is a crime - and yes, some situations are worse and fairness is not equal (not by a long shot) - but crimes are still illegal.

jmopinion

 

[Cedars]

"You didn't suffer that much." Or, "other people have been through far worse than you" are some of the reasons victims of many types of crimes, but especially SA and DV don't come forward. A crime is a crime - and yes, some situations are worse and fairness is not equal (not by a long shot) - but crimes are still illegal.

jmopinion

Actually, in this case I think it also has a lot to do with what is normalized in the victims's specific environment, and with the culture at large. I remember Brooke Shields, 14 year old sex symbol, etc. (I personally questioned it, but was considered a prude). IMO there has definitely been an evolving set of social attitudes about girls with men: Would anyone dare even write or publish Lolita today (she was 12)? I'm all for the new rights of children, but it's a messy business, criminalizing something that was not necessarily viewed as a serious crime in earlier times, and, IMO, some thought might be given for that. If indeed, anyone want to think.

JMO

 

[Moon at Sea]

criminalizing something that was not necessarily viewed as a serious crime in earlier times, and, IMO, some thought might be given for that

I've given thought to it. It wasn't criminal because women and girls were viewed as property of males and given inferior, even subhuman, status.

If that's the kind of world you want to go back to, then I hope you let all the women and girls in your life know of your beliefs so they can choose accordingly.

 

[Inthedetails]

I've given thought to it. It wasn't criminal because women and children were viewed as property of males and given inferior status. If that's the kind of world you want to go back to, then I hope you let all the women and girls in your life know of your beliefs so they can choose accordingly.

Many things used to be culturally acceptable that we no longer accept. Slavery comes to mind quickly.

We can feel comfortable with changing and evolving norms. It's okay to progress. imo

jmopinion

 

[Cedars]

I've given thought to it. It wasn't criminal because women and children were viewed as property of males and given inferior status. If that's the kind of world you want to go back to, then I hope you let all the women and girls in your life know of your beliefs so they can choose accordingly.

My dear - I am female and a feminist since I was 13 (a very long time ago). Perhaps that is why I am accustomed to thinking for myself, and quite used to how it is never acceptable to others.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Just a comment: after Ghislaine Maxwell's father's death, it came out that he was a fraudster and sometime Israeli agent. He'd emptied millions from pension funds, and the pensioners never got all the money back.

IMO, Epstein is still quite mysterious re how he got his millions (not billions), and could similarly have been involved in dodgy financial scemes. He's been accused of being involved in a big Ponzi scheme (Towers Financial Corp).

IMO, he moved in big money circles, he had other ways to make big money than operate the equivalent of a cheap SE Asian massage parlour.

JMO

It's doubtful he was engaged in a business of selling to others the girls and women he trafficked. They were foremost for him, with occasional offers to other men. Only a handful of other men have been named by survivors. moo

Edwards below is an attorney for several survivors.

What we know and don't know about Jeffrey Epstein, according to key victims' attorney

"Jeffrey Epstein was the pimp and the john. He was his own No. 1 client," Edwards told ABC News. "Nearly all of the exploitation and abuse of all of the women was intended to benefit only Jeffrey Epstein and Jeffrey Epstein's sexual desires."

Edwards describes the enigmatic Epstein as living, essentially, two separate lives: one in which he was sexually abusing women and girls "on a daily basis," and another in which he associated with politicians, royalty, and titans of business, academia, and science.

"For the most part, those two worlds did not overlap. And where they overlapped, in the instances they overlapped, it seems to be a very small percentage," Edwards said. "There were occasions where a select few of these men engaged in sexual acts with a select few of the girls that Jeffrey Epstein was exploiting or abusing -- primarily girls who were over the age of 18."

"That conduct was coercive, it was exploitative, and it was bad. But it's a small fraction of the men he was associated with," Edwards said. "And he was abusing hundreds of women, if not a thousand. And it's a very small fraction of those women that he was sending to men. That conduct was secondary to his abusive conduct. [Epstein] abused all of these women."

Edwards said he is bound by attorney-client privilege and cannot ethically reveal the names of any of Epstein's alleged associates without permission from his clients. But he said he has seen no indication that Epstein kept a list of those men, or that he made it a practice to use those instances to blackmail or extort the men, even though those men may have been legitimately concerned that Epstein had compromising information that he could use against them.

 

[Moon at Sea]

My dear - I am female and a feminist since I was 13 (a very long time ago). Perhaps that is why I am accustomed to thinking for myself, and quite used to how it is never acceptable to others.

That's good. My point is that I don't really have any sympathy for attitudes that raping 13 year olds is somehow excusable or understandable because it was considered ok in the past. It was considered ok in the past (and plenty of people want to make it legal again), precisely because females were viewed as subhuman. The same justification for slavery. I have zero sympathy for these monsters or their apologists. There is no excuse for violating anyone.

I can't believe someone else in this thread is saying "13 is not that young." wtf. I bet if it were a 13 year old male being forcibly sodomized, this tune would change. But somehow if it's a girl, it's not that big of a deal. Rapists and rape apologists are everywhere.

Parents, keep your daughters safe.

 

[CuriousCricket]

The fact that GM, a spoiled society girl, rates interviews with the Federal DOJ (do I understand that correctly?) is infurating and screams about the inequities of the "justice system". Her money can hire attorneys to take her case to the Supreme Court in the country.

Unless the DOJ is prepared to interview every person convicted of the same crime, I am deeply opposed to her receiving preferential treatment because of the money and power -- and headlines -- associated with this case.

 

[LinasK]

"You didn't suffer that much." Or, "other people have been through far worse than you" are some of the reasons victims of many types of crimes, but especially SA and DV don't come forward. A crime is a crime - and yes, some situations are worse and fairness is not equal (not by a long shot) - but crimes are still illegal.

jmopinion

Thank you for saying that!