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

 

[kdg411]

The question about whether she knew Epstein had sex with other women - maybe she thought Epstein only got them to "massage" him and not have full on intercourse. I know that is a stretch but it was only the Carolyn charges she was found guilty of and that was Guiffre that had sex with Epstein while Carolyn was with them. If they are the only two questions where they believe she perjured herself, they have to prove it.

I do not believe the perjury questions were addressed in this trial because they are separate charges per the DOJ.

Ghislaine Maxwell Charged In Manhattan Federal Court For Conspiring With Jeffrey Epstein To Sexually Abuse Minors

www.justice.gov

Additionally Charged With Perjury in Connection With 2016 Depositions

 

[kdg411]

Long-Secret Jeffrey Epstein Settlement at Issue in Lawsuit Against Prince Andrew Made Public for First Time

A once-confidential 2009 settlement agreement signed by Jeffrey Epstein that has figured prominently in the lawsuit against Prince Andrew became public on Monday.

lawandcrime.com

The word “royalty” does not appear in the specific document released on Monday, and it is unclear whether a separate document spells out the descriptions of the “other potential defendants” the release would encompass.

 

[Tresir]

I'm not a lawyer, however I do not understand how this document protects Dershowitz or Andrew.

I think they are the "Second Parties".
The NPR comment above appears to explain it like this.

"Some terms of the deal also apply to "second parties" and "other potential defendants," categories that could apply to many of Epstein's alleged co-conspirators. For instance, the agreement states that upon taking effect, it will "remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge" anyone who could be a potential defendant from state or federal lawsuits filed by Giuffre."

 

[kdg411]

I think they are the "Second Parties".
The NPR comment above appears to explain it like this.

"Some terms of the deal also apply to "second parties" and "other potential defendants," categories that could apply to many of Epstein's alleged co-conspirators. For instance, the agreement states that upon taking effect, it will "remise, release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge" anyone who could be a potential defendant from state or federal lawsuits filed by Giuffre."

If that second party statement was legal & valid wouldn't it have covered the civil case Virginia Giuffre had against Ghislaine Maxwell?

 

[Tresir]

If that second party statement was legal & valid wouldn't it have covered the civil case Virginia Giuffre had against Ghislaine Maxwell?

I don't think Maxwell was still with Epstein in 2009. This settlement agreement came after the plea deal, also she was sued by Guiffre for defamation, whereas Dershowitz and Andrew were accused by Guiffre of sexual offences facilitated by Epstein, which is why I think this covers them. Also, we don't know the reason Maxwell settled the suit with Guiffre - perhaps Maxwell claimed that this agreement did cover her so they agreed a settlement. Has that deal been released? I cannot remember.

 

[kdg411]

I don't think Maxwell was still with Epstein in 2009. This settlement agreement came after the plea deal, also she was sued by Guiffre for defamation, whereas Dershowitz and Andrew were accused by Guiffre of sexual offences facilitated by Epstein, which is why I think this covers them. Also, we don't know the reason Maxwell settled the suit with Guiffre - perhaps Maxwell claimed that this agreement did cover her so they agreed a settlement. Has that deal been released? I cannot remember.

That makes sense. The settlement with Maxwell hasn't been disclosed publically.

 

[Tresir]

I do not believe the perjury questions were addressed in this trial because they are separate charges per the DOJ.

Ghislaine Maxwell Charged In Manhattan Federal Court For Conspiring With Jeffrey Epstein To Sexually Abuse Minors

www.justice.gov

Additionally Charged With Perjury in Connection With 2016 Depositions

If Maxwell had given evidence in her defence, the prosecution would have no doubt asked her about these subjects. But they were not able to do that, now the onus is on the prosecution to prove the perjury charges in court.

 

[Guess Who]

If Maxwell had given evidence in her defence, the prosecution would have no doubt asked her about these subjects. But they were not able to do that, now the onus is on the prosecution to prove the perjury charges in court.

The onus is always on the prosecution to prove the charges.

 

[kdg411]

If Maxwell had given evidence in her defence, the prosecution would have no doubt asked her about these subjects. But they were not able to do that, now the onus is on the prosecution to prove the perjury charges in court.

Have you had the opportunity to read Ghislaine's testimony in the 2016 deposition? I have but still don't know what specifically she lied about that would warrant Federal perjury charges.

 

[Tresir]

Have you had the opportunity to read Ghislaine's testimony in the 2016 deposition? I have but still don't know what specifically she lied about that would warrant Federal perjury charges.

I have only seen two questions she was asked. One about the sex toys and one about Epstein having sex with other woman. I don't see how they know she was lying.

Regarding Prince Andrew, here are some UK front pages tomorrow.




Maybe Guiffre will accept half a million from the Prince to withdraw her accusations? What do you all think?

This is BBC's view which explains where the reference to "royalty" came from.

Prince Andrew accuser’s 2009 deal with Jeffrey Epstein made public

It shows Virginia Giuffre agreed not to sue anyone who could be described as a "potential defendant".

www.bbc.co.uk

"Although the settlement does not mention the prince by name, his lawyers say this 2009 deal means she cannot sue him - because she agreed to end all legal action against anyone connected to the offender who could be described as a "potential defendant".

A source in Prince Andrew's legal team said "Giuffre referred to 'royalty' in her 2009 claim [against Jeffrey Epstein] and that means Prince Andrew was covered by the deal".

Epstein died in prison in 2019, while Maxwell was last week convicted of recruiting and trafficking young girls to be abused by the late financier.
But Ms Giuffre's legal team say the terms of the Florida settlement are irrelevant to her case against the Prince - which alleges sexual abuse by the royal in New York, London and the US Virgin Islands.

In her 2009 claim against Epstein, lawyers for Ms Giuffre said she was lured into a world of sexual abuse at his Florida home when she was a teenager.

They added: "In addition to being continually exploited to satisfy defendant's [Epstein] every sexual whim, [Ms Giuffre] was also required to be sexually exploited by defendant's adult male peers, including royalty, politicians, academicians, businessmen and or other professional and personal acquaintances."

That case never went to trial because on 17 November 2009 Jeffrey Epstein agreed to pay her $500,000 to stop it in its tracks. That deal was confidential until now - but has been made public because of its potential importance to the Prince Andrew case.

In the document, Ms Giuffre, also referred to by her unmarried name Roberts, agreed to "release, acquit, satisfy, and forever discharge" Epstein and "any other person or entity who could have been included as a potential defendant".

The settlement's wording says she discharges "potential defendants" from any US legal action, including damages claims dating "from the beginning of the world".

The precise meaning of that wording is expected to be the subject of intense legal arguments in New York on Tuesday."

 

[Tresir]

 

[kdg411]

 

[kdg411]

Maybe Guiffre will accept half a million from the Prince to withdraw her accusations? What do you all think?

I don't think Prince Andrew is willing to admit to anything therefore a settlement probably won't be offered. Also, imo, it wouldn't take too much to convince a jury that Virginia Giuffre is telling the truth when she has the photo of him with his hand around her waist.

While we wait for the Judge's decision I will say this, the 2009 agreement included second parties to Epstein however Prince Andrew was introduced to Virginia by Ghislaine so that would make this issue mute as he is a third party to the alledged offense.

 

[Tresir]

Andrew wouldn't need to admit or accept anything. It is just a payment to drop the lawsuit.

Re the pic , apparently Guiffre wanted the pic taken to show her dad. Anyway, she is beaming in the picture and this was before they went to the nightclub , (there are pictures there too with her in the same attire), plus she was over the age of consent in that pic/jurisdiction.

Info on Tramp's nightclub see this link.

Inside the most decadent club in London

Kate Spicer celebrates half a century of London’s most decadent late-night haunt, Tramp

www.standard.co.uk

Also, it was actually Epstein who took the picture with Guiffre's camera, so he introduced them. She then met him two more times after that, in NY and NM. Why would you go back to be abused/raped again and yet again but not report the first one?

Many people have pics taken with famous people they meet, but it is not proof they were sexually abused by them.

Judge apparently giving Prince Andrew's lawyers a hard time right now.

'Not a Dog That’s Going to Hunt': Judge Appears Skeptical of Prince Andrew's Attempt to Dismiss Suit Accusing Him of Sexually Abusing a 17-Year-Old

A federal judge appeared skeptical on Tuesday about arguments from Prince Andrew's legal team to dismiss a lawsuit accusing the royal of sexually assaulting a 17-year-old girl, sharply questioning whether a 2009 settlement agreement with Jeffrey Epstein could shield him from serious allegations.

lawandcrime.com

Yet apparently Cuomo is not going to be charged.

Albany Prosecutor Shuts Down Misdemeanor Sex Crime Case Against Former N.Y. Gov. Andrew Cuomo

The district attorney of Albany County, N.Y., on Tuesday announced that his office was dropping a misdemeanor criminal prosecution of former Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D).

lawandcrime.com

Latest news from Judge Kaplan

Prince Andrew: Decision soon on dismissing case - judge

A US court hears arguments about a deal the prince's accuser Virginia Giuffre agreed with Jeffrey Epstein.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[kdg411]

@Tresir
From your perspective do you see Andrew's image portayed negatively in the media there? If you hadn't posted the media that you're privy to I wouldn't know what those in his country are saying about him. So, thank you for proving a different perspective.

 

[Tresir]

@Tresir
From your perspective do you see Andrew's image portayed negatively in the media there? If you hadn't posted the media that you're privy to I wouldn't know what those in his country are saying about him. So, thank you for proving a different perspective.

There is a lot of it in our media. There is a pic of him at the same venue just a few days later in March 2001, reportedly. I will post it below. He was there with the Duchess that evening. If he was dancing and cavorting at Tramp's with a 17 year old, surely there would be pictures? Everyone knows him. At the bottom of this article there is another link to some Tatler magazine photos, showing him pictured with several women at various functions. He was known as the "Party Prince" at one time. Our MSM would love to get a picture of him that would ruin the Queen's 70 years celebrations on the throne this year so maybe they have photos and are "saving" them. It is a love/hate relationship for the royals and MSM and always has been. For an Aussie/American to bring down a Royal Prince would be MSM gold. For a US judge to do it could be almost as good for some.

Prince Andrew enjoys party at Tramp nightclub

Prince Andrew is alleged to have been in the London nightclub on the actual birthday of racing tycoon Robert Sangster, on March 10, three days before the photo was taken.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[kdg411]

Ghislaine Maxwell juror who is a survivor of sexual abuse says sharing his own story helped other jurors believe Maxwell's victims

Maxwell was convicted of sex-trafficking girls with Jeffrey Epstein and sexually abusing them herself.

www.insider.com

Juror Scotty David told The Independent's Lucia Osborne-Crowley that the experience helped the other 11 jurors believe the four women who testified against Maxwell, leading them to return a guilty verdict against her.

"I know what happened when I was sexually abused. I remember the color of the carpet, the walls. Some of it can be replayed like a video," David, who identified himself using his first and middle name, told The Independent, adding: "But I can't remember all the details, there are some things that run together."

 

[kdg411]

Per the 2009 agreement;

Additionally, as a material consideration in settling, First Parties and Second Parties agree that the terms of this Settlement Agreement are not intended to be used by any other person nor be admissible in any proceeding or case against or involving Jeffrey Epstein, either civil or criminal.

* I don't know how/why any US District Court Judge would assume this to include Andrew. moo

 

[kdg411]

*I like this Judge

Ghislaine Maxwell lawyers file for retrial over juror’s revelations

Lawyers submit documents under seal requesting new trial after juror revealed he was victim of sexual abuse

www.independent.co.uk

Judge Lewis Kaplan caused a stir during Tuesday’s hearing when he appeared to take a shot at a prior president.

Discussing the specificity of Ms Giuffre’s allegations after Prince Andrew’s lawyer called it into question, the judge noted a specific line in the suit which read: “During this encounter, Epstein, Maxwell, and Prince Andrew forced Plaintiff, a child, to have sexual intercourse with Prince Andrew against her will.”

Judge Kaplan said there isn’t any doubt over the meaning of “nonconsensual sexual intercourse”, adding: “Not since someone else was in the White House.”

 

[Tresir]

Per the 2009 agreement;

Additionally, as a material consideration in settling, First Parties and Second Parties agree that the terms of this Settlement Agreement are not intended to be used by any other person nor be admissible in any proceeding or case against or involving Jeffrey Epstein, either civil or criminal.

* I don't know how/why any US District Court Judge would assume this to include Andrew. moo

Because Andrew is a second party. What party do you think he is? Epstein is one of the first parties and presumably other enablers are as well, even Guiffre herself is a first party therefore. People like Andrew and Dershowitz would be second parties who are being sued, as they are being accused and are friends or business acquaintances of the first parties. That is how I see it. However, the jurisdiction could just be Florida and I am not sure if she is accusing him of abuse in Florida, but UK, NY, and VI, I believe. NM, when she was 18, has not been mentioned but was in her memoirs.

This paragraph also only refers to material considerations in settling, so presumably doesn't apply otherwise ie if the decision is made by a court.

Here is a Sky article indicating we should not have to wait long to hear whether the case will be dismissed or not. To me, it sounds like the judge is not going to dismiss the case.

Prince Andrew: Decision on duke's bid to get Virginia Giuffre court case dismissed due 'pretty soon', judge says

Virginia Giuffre, formerly known as Virginia Roberts, is suing Andrew after claiming he "committed sexual assault and battery" upon her when she was a teenager.

news.sky.com