Epstein, Maxwell et al: exposed in child sex trafficking

Do we have a Jefferey Epstein thread?

Jeffrey Epstein Confidante Ghislaine Maxwell Arrested on Sex Abuse Charges

Ghislaine Maxwell, the British socialite and heiress who became a confidante of disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein and was later implicated in his alleged sexual crimes, has been arrested by the FBI. She was arrested in Bradford, New Hampshire, around 8:30 a.m. Thursday on charges she conspired...

www.nbcnewyork.com

 

[Tresir]

Annie (and her Mom) were under the guise that Ghislaine would be there which is why she agreed to go. So, she played a big role is Annie accepting the invitation.

When did Annie and her mum meet Ghislaine though? I thought Annie only met Epstein in NY when she was staying with her sister Maria. Epstein paid for the flight. Ghislaine met Annie for the first time in New Mexico. So where does the conspiracy to transport a minor arise with Annie. I don't see that being proved with either Annie, "Kate" or Carolyn so far. That only leaves "Jane". Espinosa testified today she looked 18 and that "Jane's" mother stated Epstein was "Jane's" godfather. The Border witness that testified today about the records will be key. He states the records have DOB. Hopefully we will know more tomorrow.

Having just re-read the indictment again, it only mentions 3 victims, who appear to be "Jane", "Kate" and Annie based on description. Carolyn is not in the indictment at all by the look of it.

 

[GrandmaBear]

I disagree that the NM incident with Annie Farmer will be relevant. The judge already made that clear to the jury that the age of consent was 16 in that jurisdiction. The present witness is providing border crossing evidence with dates of birth presumably to prove the victims' ages at times of border crossings. Also, wasn't both Farmers incidents reported to police and media (Vanity Fair) many years ago and it was not deemed to be a crime or even worthy of reporting. Whether mistakes were made about that all that time ago, I don't know.

In my opinion it all ties to patterns, the way things were done, the suggestions Maxwell gave the girls or instructions, etc. Whether she was a minor or not of course her testimony is relevant to the patterns whether adults or minors. As they said in the article about Lisa Bloom, it is genius to put her up last and tie up all of the testimony with her corroboration (paraphrasing). Not sure I understand why you think her testimony is not relevant. The charges are for one count here, one count there, not for four counts of each charge on behalf of each of four victims. These witnesses and/or victims are not the ones charging Maxwell, the US Government is for the counts which they believe apply. In fact, witnesses do not have to be victims at all obviously as the pilot wasn't and nor was the house manager.

 

[GrandmaBear]

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article256644737.html

Court opened Thursday with the judge weighing in on whether several defense witnesses could testify using pseudonyms — an unusual request given that they weren’t claiming to be victims or under any threat or danger. They were instead citing “unwanted attention.”



The judge disagreed with the premise, denying the request on Thursday. U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan wrote that the request was “unprecedented” and rejected several arguments Maxwell’s team had made to justify the anonymity.

“It is notable that the defense does not cite in support of its motion a single case in which a court granted the use of pseudonyms to defense witnesses,” Nathan wrote in denying the request.

BBM

I suspected they did not have much basis or reason for requesting anonymity. The judge did the right thing if that is the case. If the judge set such a precedent, every witness and their lawyer would be requesting anonymity forever after and all trials and testimony would be mostly secret from the public. In any nationally known case, there is going to be unwanted attention. I actually smh at such a basis or attempt, No one I know would want more secrecy in legal proceedings than already has to be at times on what are truly legitimate bases. This was not a legitimate basis then to even request such.

The judge would be under fire for granting such a thing and basically changing the public nature and openness we have of courtroom proceedings and I don't know anyone who would agree with that. There is no basis for appeal there either imo because she backs it up with fact and the law on the matter.

In fact what is with this defense? They are trying to break and change the rules? And requesting attorneys break client attorney privilege? I think Americans would go up in arms. Isn't that what most of us nonlegal people think is a sacrosanct protection and one that cannot be broken ethically?

Imo such attempts make the defense look weak or worried.

There is nothing questionable about the judge in these decisions if this is all true. The judge decided correctly.

 

[GrandmaBear]

This is from the DOJ. I did not add the bolding, it was already present.

This statute makes it a federal offense to knowingly recruit, entice, harbor, transport, provide, obtain, or maintain a minor (defined as someone under 18 years of age) knowing or in reckless disregard of the fact that the victim is a minor and would be caused to engage in a commercial sex act. May 28, 2020

Federal law says under 18 is a minor.

 

[Tresir]

In my opinion it all ties to patterns, the way things were done, the suggestions Maxwell gave the girls or instructions, etc. Whether she was a minor or not of course her testimony is relevant to the patterns whether adults or minors. As they said in the article about Lisa Bloom, it is genius to put her up last and tie up all of the testimony with her corroboration (paraphrasing). Not sure I understand why you think her testimony is not relevant. The charges are for one count here, one count there, not for four counts of each charge on behalf of each of four victims. These witnesses and/or victims are not the ones charging Maxwell, the US Government is for the counts which they believe apply. In fact, witnesses do not have to be victims at all obviously as the pilot wasn't and nor was the house manager.

What do you think the judge's comment about the age of consent in NM in the trial meant? She said that Annie Farmer was not a minor in New Mexico. As the charges relate to transporting a minor, and Epstein paid for her commercial flight, I don't think they have proved the transporting charges for Maxwell in Annie's case.

Regarding the other three - Carolyn did not travel, Kate was not a minor in the UK and no evidence came out of her travelling as a minor and Jane's travel to NY has not exactly been pinned down as to what year it happened. This is why the transportation records showing DOB are going to be important. I don't think the defence would call this transportation witness if it was detrimental to their case.

 

[Tresir]

This is from a Sky article and lays out the charges and which victims they relate to. I have put the trial names against which victim number I think they are . It may be helpful.

Victim 1 "Jane"
Victim 2 Annie Farmer
Victim 3 "Kate"
Victim 4 Carolyn

1) Conspiracy to Entice Minors to Travel to Engage in Illegal Sex Acts - The first of the three conspiracy charges concerns all four alleged victims and focuses on the defendant allegedly encouraging them to travel so they could be abused. To prove 'conspiracy', prosecutors need to convince the jury that Maxwell and Epstein had an agreement to commit the crimes.

The government says Maxwell took part in group sex with Alleged Victim 1 and Epstein in New York and Florida, and encouraged her to travel between the two so she could be abused by Epstein.

They argue Maxwell gave Alleged Victim 2 an unsolicited massage, and encouraged Alleged Victim 3 to massage Epstein knowing she would be sexually abused.

Prosecutors argue Maxwell encouraged Alleged Victim 4 to travel outside of Florida with Epstein.

2) Enticement of a Minor to Travel to Engage in Illegal Sex Acts - Travel is again important here. The government says that Maxwell did "persuade, induce, entice, and coerce" Alleged Victim 1 to travel from Florida to New York so that the young woman could have sex with Epstein.

3) Conspiracy to Transport Minors with Intent to Engage in Criminal Sexual Activity- The second conspiracy charge also involves all four alleged victims, and touches on similar allegations to the first conspiracy charge.

Prosecutors claim Maxwell took part in group sex with Alleged Victim 1 and Epstein in New York and Florida on multiple occasions. They say that Maxwell "enticed" her to travel from Florida to New York so this abuse could take place.

Maxwell is also accused of giving Alleged Victim 2 an unsolicited massage in New Mexico when the young woman was topless.

Prosecutors say Maxwell encouraged Alleged Victim 3 to give Epstein massages knowing she would be abused.

They also claim the defendant encouraged Alleged Victim 4 to travel outside of Florida with Epstein.

4) Transportation of a Minor with Intent to Engage in Criminal Sexual Activity - This charge mainly focuses on Alleged Victim 1. Maxwell is accused of arranging for her to travel from Florida to New York multiple times so Epstein could sexually abuse her.

5) Sex Trafficking Conspiracy - This charge largely concerns Alleged Victim 4. Maxwell is accused of recruiting her, encouraging her to recruit others, enticing her to engage in sexual acts with Epstein, scheduling her massages, sending her gifts and paying her hundreds of dollars in cash.

6) Sex Trafficking of a Minor - Alleged Victim 4 is partly the focus here. Prosecutors say the defendant "recruited, enticed, harboured, transported, provided, and obtained individuals who were less than 18 years old" to have sex with Epstein.

Ghislaine Maxwell trial: Who are the alleged victims and what are the charges?

The charges Ghislaine Maxwell faces involves four alleged underage victims and multiple locations over a 10-year period between 1994 and 2004.

news.sky.com

 

[Tresir]

As far as I can make out, victim 1 "Jane" and her mother actually moved to New York. I think that maybe the school records are going to be brought into evidence.

This is an excerpt from one of the many biographies of "Jane". I have xxx out her real name.

"When she was a junior in high school, the ××××× moved to New York City where ××××× then attended the Professional Children's School. There she studied alongside other famous actors and actresses, such as Julia Stiles, Gaby Hoffman, and the Culkin kids."

 

[Tresir]

Not sure what is happening with the defence witnesses. With the 3 witnesses disallowed anonymity and the 3 lawyers also disallowed, the defence have only an 81 year old witness from UK who cannot be here till Monday. Not sure where all their 35 witnesses have gone. Only 4 appeared yesterday so with the 6 disallowed and the 81 yo that only makes 11 witnesses. They also said one had Covid and was going to testify remotely so that is 12. What happened to the others ?

 

[kdg411]

 

[kdg411]

 

[kdg411]

 

[Tresir]

I thought he was going to testify via video they said.

Also, this is hardly the fault of the defence because the prosecution case ended two weeks early. What a b*lls up.

 

[Tresir]

Well they have found some witnesses and I have found a link reporting the testimony. This link then upwards from there.

 

[Tresir]

So we have had two agents testify, plus
Eva Dubin and Michelle Healy so far today. Eva was girlfriend of Epstein before Maxwell. I think I have identified the 81 yo who will testify.



I could be wrong about the 81 year old though.

 

[kdg411]

 

[Tresir]

I thought I would check the sales history of Maxwell's Belgravia townhouse as she is having the local pub owner testify on her behalf. Now Kate said she visited her in her townhouse in '94. Well Maxwell did not buy it till '97. Here is the sales history. Only changed hands twice in 24 years.


44, Kinnerton Street, London, Greater London SW1X 8ES
Flat

£1,750,000	19 Apr 2021
£290,000	22 Jan 1997

No other historical records

 

[Tresir]

It could be early onset dementia which only affects short term memory. My husband suffers from this. He can remember things from years ago better than me but cannot remember last week. They don't need the witness to remember items from a month ago so this should be fine. It is Kate that must be having the memory problems if she thinks she visited Maxwell's town house in '94.

 

[Tresir]

So that's Kate's testimony out the window and Jane's too if she and her mum moved to NY when she was in junior high.

 

[kdg411]

Defense rests

 

[kdg411]