Ghislaine Maxwell trial

Recommended Posts

Adam Klasfeld of Law and Crime has one of those trial 'live-tweeting' threads. Some eye-opening quotes found therein. Mostly the more lurid and damning prosecution statements  ...

As lurid, but updated, from the BBC posted one hour ago:



Closing arguments are set to conclude later on Monday, setting the stage for jury deliberations. Jurors may decide her fate by her 60th birthday on Christmas Day.

Judge Alison Nathan said over the weekend that jurors would be instructed that they may choose to convict Ms Maxwell if they conclude she either ignored or "consciously avoided" knowledge of Epstein's underage sexual encounters.

Defence attorneys maintain that she is the government's scapegoat for crimes committed by Epstein, her former boyfriend and business associate.

Her lawyers criticised the judge's move as a "backup option" in case the jury does not find Ms Maxwell was an active participant.


Happy holidays, Ms Maxwell. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kind of like Night of January 16th, you be the jury.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jury signals verdict NOT near at Ghislaine Maxwell trial

"NEW YORK (AP) — The jury deliberating the fate of Ghislaine Maxwell at her sex trafficking trial requested a white board and different colored sticky notes Monday as it signaled that it had plenty of work to do after a long holiday weekend.

"Jurors in Manhattan federal court also requested the transcripts of some trial testimony and the definition of “enticement.” Judge Alison J. Nathan referred them to her legal instructions that she read to them just before they began deliberations a week ago."


"The jury, which deliberated two full days last week, already has asked to review the testimony of the four women, along with former Epstein housekeeper Juan Patricio Alessi. They have given little hint of their overall progress on six charges, including a sex trafficking count that carries a potential penalty of up to 40 years in prison."


NEW YORK (AP) — The jury deliberating the fate of Ghislaine Maxwell at her sex trafficking trial requested a white board and different colored...


Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/20/2021 at 2:45 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Verdict in Ghislaine Maxwell Trial “Highly Likely” by Wednesday – Source: Maxwell Threatening to Start “Naming Names”

Guilty on five of six charges -- except for "enticing a minor to travel across state lines to engage in an illegal sexual act."


  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's add these two.

DEVELOPING: Ghislaine Maxwell Found Guilty in Epstein Sex Trafficking Case – Details Sealed by the Judge


Ghislaine Maxwell was found guilty on Wednesday of 5 of 6 counts. Important details about the case were sealed by the judge. Maxwell worked as Jeffrey Epstein’s pimp for years and the DOJ knew they...

Now why would a judge seal the details, I wonder, I wonder?...


Maybe this?


Ghislaine Maxwell's paradox: Name names or spend the rest of life behind bars


Ghislaine Maxwell was everywhere — Buckingham Palace, Mar-a-Lago, Chelsea Clinton's wedding — until she was nowhere. The socialite "ex-girlfriend" of serial sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein, once a regular tabloid...

Given the vast network Maxwell and Epstein maintained to silence their victims and protect their powerful co-conspirators, this trial may prove the only chance to litigate the entire matter in criminal court, so prosecutors will surely plan to throw the book at Maxwell during sentencing. Maxwell, who remained utterly mum during the trial, now has a decision to make: Does she continue to protect her famous friends with her silence, or will she finally spill all of her secrets in the hopes of brokering a shorter sentence?

. . .

By all available reports, Maxwell is not acting like someone who has any intentions of dying behind bars, either by her own hand as Epstein elected or by old age.

. . .

Maxwell is such a monster that the very notion of her walking the Earth a free woman repulses the rest of us, but to the state, Maxwell could prove very useful. Would prosecutors consider it a worthy deal to trade one Epstein associate's freedom in exchange for locking up a dozen? It's fully possible.

Of course, the maximum 60-year sentence, a de facto life sentence in Maxwell's case, may not be the only way she dies behind bars, as Epstein's questionable death proves. It's up to the feds to keep Maxwell alive in the hopes that the tip of the iceberg finally reveals the whole criminal operation at last.

At the very minimum, I see a movie in the works.

But if they manage to keep her alive and she sings, I'm pretty sure it will be impossible for the predator class to keep the dam plugged like they have up to now. And if the dam busts wide open, it will be a glorious flood. Imagine this spectacle: of a swarm of ruling class cockroaches scrambling for cover. That alone will be worth the price of admission.



Link to comment
Share on other sites


At Law and Crime: Ghislaine Maxwell’s Verdict Won’t Close the Jeffrey Epstein Saga. Here’s What to Watch Out for in the Courts.




Law&Crime breaks down what's next now that Ghislaine Maxwell has been convicted of sex trafficking and other crimes. Here's what to look for at sentencing, appeal and other litigation.





Some experts have explored the possibility that Maxwell could cooperate with prosecutors following her convictions, but Krell believed that this option may be of limited appeal to her prosecutors.

“It’s pretty uncommon, at this stage of the game after a full jury trial, for someone to cooperate in a way that’s really meaningful to the outcome of their sentencing,” Krell said. “In other words, that ship has kind of sailed for her.”

Typically, cooperators are valuable in going after someone higher in a criminal conspiracy.

“Here, the way the evidence was painted, the only one above her is the person who’s dead now, Mr. Epstein himself,” Krell said.

In addition, defense attorneys would likely attack Maxwell’s credibility if she turned cooperator, given the exposure that she faces.

“Having a person who is now a cooperator, who has a life sentence hanging over their head and also has to perjury accounts isn’t really a great look as a valuable witness against someone else,” Krell added.

“[Epstein’s] Criminality Traveled the World”

A little less than an hour before the jury reached a verdict, two federal judges in the same courthouse ordered the unsealing of a 2009 settlement deal between Giuffre and Epstein. The document will become public on Jan. 3, one day before the next court match-up between Giuffre and the U.K.’s Prince Andrew. The timing is significant: Andrew’s attorneys have argued that the agreement shields their client from litigation.




Link to comment
Share on other sites


Just so there is nothing misleading for the reader, I'm going to quote from the article in your post.

But first, for those not in these weeds, the agreement that will be unsealed concerns one of Epstein's accusers of sexual abuse while a minor, Virginia Giuffre. In the fallout, she also accused Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz, which prompted court cases of their own. Also, Dershowitz is suing her and her lawyer over this.

So now here's the kicker:


Senior U.S. District Judge Loretta Preska, who is presiding over Dershowitz’s case, and Lewis Kaplan, who is presiding over the prince’s, ordered the release of the 2009 civil deal on Wednesday, scheduling the document’s public release for Jan. 3, 2022. 

Neither of these judges were presiding over the Maxwell trial.

In other words, Judge Alison Nathan--the one who did is presiding over the Maxwell trial and who sealed the Epstein documents this time around--is NOT the one who is unsealing the 2009 civil settlement. From where I sit, Judges Preska and Kaplan are working against the spirit of Judge Nathan's ruling, which I interpret to be an attempt to protect the predator class. This makes me wonder about how severe Maxwell's sentence will be. I suspect not severe at all.


Also, I want to correct an error I made.

16 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

... the judge is James Comey's daughter...

No she isn't. Maurene Comey was one of the three prosecutors against Ghislaine Maxwell, not the judge.

The quip I made about a higher loyalty (referencing her famous dada's book) could be an unwarranted slur by me. I did not follow Maurene Comey's performance in the trial. Since I didn't read anybody bitch about it, I suspect she just did her job. If that is the case, my apology to her. 

I should look it up, I suppose, but I'm just not that interested in defending a quip.



  • Smile 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

An unpublished-till-today "off the record" interview between Ghislaine Maxwell and Vicky Ward, recorded in 2002:



The Full Transcript from My 2002 Interview with Ghislaine Maxwell

A quote from Ward's editorial addition at the end of the recap:



“Use your common sense,” AUSA Maurene Comey had told the jury during her closing arguments. “Your common sense tells you that you don't give someone $30 million unless they're giving you exactly what you want,” Comey said of the huge sum of money Epstein had paid into accounts bearing Maxwell’s name. She continued, “Your common sense tells you the witnesses are not lying and they just cannot be all misremembering the same thing.”

“You are the finders of the fact. You're the judges of the truth,” Comey had told the jury. “Ladies and gentlemen, look at the big picture and use your common sense.”

Apparently, they did.


Edited by william.scherk
Link to Vicky Ward's Substack "About" page
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if this is somehow related.

JUST IN: Federal Prosecutors Drop Case Against Epstein Jail Guards


Jeffrey Epstein Federal prosecutors dropped their case against the two prison guards accused of falsifying records and sleeping on the job as Jeffrey Epstein “committed suicide” in his jail cell. The feds dropped...


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
6 hours ago, Marc said:

She did not commit suicide.

She doesn't strike me as a person who can't do her time and take her blame for abetting sexual predators. I think she will legally fight and perhaps get off with a slap on the wrist. But will she still be in with the rich, IN crowd if she names some of them? Will she need to get a day job to survive? Who gives a crap? I want those names published so they may receive some scorn and legal actions.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now