Epstein, Maxwell et al: exposed in child sex trafficking

0_Epstein.jpg

Do we have a Jefferey Epstein thread?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, judge ruling against numerous Maxwell and defense objections. While this seems significant as to so many, it probably isn't as all of these things were basically believed or credited or not already as to who and what they believed by a jury with convictions, and with the judge having heard the testimony etc. and seen the evidence and seeing the jury find against her and convicting.

Just defense throwing all they can I'm sure in that respect.
 
This tweet answers one question we discussed earlier in the thread - under the 2003 guidance, the range is 188 to 235 months (approx 15 - 20 years )

Inner City Press
@innercitypress
·
53m

Judge Nathan: I find the offense level is 37, history of 1, under the 2003 guideline it begins at 210 months... Or, the offense level is 36, so guideline range of 188 to 235 months.



 
So now what about the co conspirators and the men that the girls were trafficked to? Will she now appeal the sentence and the conviction?

I can't see she would have anything to lose by appealing, as Judge Nathan appears to have given her more than the max of 235 months.
 
Last edited:
So now what about the co conspirators and the men that the girls were trafficked to? Will she now appeal the sentence and the conviction?

I can't see she would have anything to lose by appealing, as Judge Nathan appears to have given her more than the max of 235 months.
Her attorneys will most definitely appeal. They keep getting paid that way
 
20 years!

Fits the range that i would hope and think. It also is pretty much what the presentence investigation people recommended wasn't it? That's pretty safe for a judge to go by if fair and done thoroughly I guess. And they would have taken into account everything like her lack of record and a lot more.
 
So now what about the co conspirators and the men that the girls were trafficked to? Will she now appeal the sentence and the conviction?

I can't see she would have anything to lose by appealing, as Judge Nathan appears to have given her more than the max of 235 months.
Judge Nathan did what many do and went right along with the presentence investigation and right between/right down the middle of the defense and prosecution requests which if I recall were 5 to 10 and 30. Many judges do this and neitehr side can really say it was way too light nor way too harsh.

I'm also sure the presentence investigation took every factor for sentencing into account, that is what they do and provide a full report and basis.
 
I never thought she'd provide any info or make a deal, the time for that was before trial and verdict. And apparently she didn't.
 
Her attorneys will most definitely appeal. They keep getting paid that way
Trying to recall, they are private attorneys aren't they? Or does she have the federal version of public defenders?

If private, which I believe they are, when does her or whoever is paying for her run out of money? Is her pot endless? Has to be a HUGE total bill by now... Staggering in fact.
 
Trying to recall, they are private attorneys aren't they? Or does she have the federal version of public defenders?

If private, which I believe they are, when does her or whoever is paying for her run out of money? Is her pot endless? Has to be a HUGE total bill by now... Staggering in fact.
Not sure but I am sure they are still billing somebody.
 
Not sure but I am sure they are still billing somebody.
In the tweets it was stated by the Judge that she declared $22m in assets when asking for bail and that she apparently expected a $10m settlement from Epstein's will. Her defence stated she had not received the money from the will and would likely not receive it because of the victim payouts. IIRC I think her Belgravia house was sold recently.
 
In the tweets it was stated by the Judge that she declared $22m in assets when asking for bail and that she apparently expected a $10m settlement from Epstein's will. Her defence stated she had not received the money from the will and would likely not receive it because of the victim payouts. IIRC I think her Belgravia house was sold recently.
so they definitely will appeal so they can get more of her $$, but as they should. It's their job.
 
"Now do the men."

A lot of people are now saying this.


Her sentencing today was met with a similar sentiment around the world.

"Who were Ghislaine Maxwell's rich, powerful and (sometimes) famous clients?" wrote broadcaster Piers Morgan.

"We should be told. It wasn't just her and Epstein engaged in this criminal sexual conduct. We need names."

"Maxwell has been sentenced to 20 years in a US prison, yet not one of the clients has been jailed," said fellow broadcaster Sophie Corcoran.


"Who are the clients? Who was she getting the girls for? Justice is not complete until every one of Epstein's clients is jailed. Justice doesn't stop at Maxwell.

Ghislaine Maxwell with Jeffrey Epstein. Photo / US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Ghislaine Maxwell with Jeffrey Epstein. Photo / US District Court for the Southern District of New York
"It's just the beginning. We want the names of the perverted elites who were the clients."

"I want names. All the other names," said comedian Dana Goldberg.

"If Ghislaine Maxwell is guilty of child sex trafficking, there's a list of her clients who participated in this proven trafficking," said author and columnist Tim Young.

"MAKE THEIR NAMES PUBLIC AND ARREST THEM ALL."

"I'm 100 per cent behind the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell, but where are all the men who used these young girls?" asked British Olympian Sharron Davies.


"When do the prosecutions begin of those powerful men who flew on the Lolita Express?" wondered newspaper columnist Allison Pearson, referring to Epstein's private jet.

"I must have missed the arrests. Or is a woman solely responsible for rapes?"

"I don't want to live in a society that demands every detail of the Amber Heard-Johnny Depp case, but is somehow content without a single name from the Ghislaine Maxwell client list," said YouTuber and podcaster Blaire White.

And so forth.

The sixteen John Does​

Back in January, Maxwell's lawyers said she would no longer fight to protect the identities of eight people, potentially clients of the trafficking conspiracy, whose names had been redacted in a deposition released to the public.

The deposition came from a civil defamation lawsuit Guiffre filed against Maxwell in 2015, which ended in a settlement two years later.


In a ruling in September of last year, US District Judge Loretta Preska revealed there were a total of 16 non-party objectors in the case, meaning people who were not party to the lawsuit but objected to their identities being released.

Guiffre's lawyers want their identities unsealed.

"Aversion to embarrassment and negativity that may come from being associated with Epstein and Maxwell is not enough to warrant continued sealing of information. This is especially true with respect to this case of great public interest, involving serious allegations of the sex trafficking of minors," her team argued.

"Now that Maxwell's criminal trial has come and gone, there is little reason to retain protection over the vast swathes of information about Epstein and Maxwell's sex trafficking operation that were originally filed under seal in this case."

Annie Farmer, who testified against Ghislaine Maxwell at trial, speaks to members of the media outside federal court in New York today. Photo / AP
Annie Farmer, who testified against Ghislaine Maxwell at trial, speaks to members of the media outside federal court in New York today. Photo / AP
Judge Preska decided to deal with eight of the names first, then move on to the other eight, determining whether their right to privacy outweighed the public's right to know.

"Each of the listed Does has counsel who have ably asserted their own respective privacy rights. Maxwell therefore leaves it to this court to conduct the appropriate review," Maxwell's lawyers said in January.


That review is ongoing.

Should the names be unsealed, it could lead to a number of civil lawsuits.

"It's not over for the survivors, and we'll see new lawsuits against Epstein's co-conspirators – the men who willingly accepted the girls to abuse them," Professor Marci Hamilton, founder of a thinktank focusing on the protection of children, told The Guardian in February.

Read More​

Maxwell 'must die in prison'​

In her statement to the court before her sentencing, Maxwell painted herself as someone who had been manipulated by Epstein.

"It is the greatest regret of my life that I ever met Jeffrey Epstein," she said.

"I believe that Jeffrey Epstein was a manipulative, cunning and controlling man who lived a profoundly compartmentalised life and fooled all those in his orbit."


Sarah Ransome (left) and Elizabeth Stein, both victims of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, leave the federal courthouse in New York today. Photo / AP
Sarah Ransome (left) and Elizabeth Stein, both victims of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, leave the federal courthouse in New York today. Photo / AP
Speaking outside court, another of the pair's victims, Sarah Ransome, slammed her for continuing to avoid taking responsibility.

"After all of this, how can the five-star general of this enormous sex trafficking conspiracy, involving so many co-conspirators, that snared hundreds if not thousands of vulnerable girls and young women over three decades, continue to maintain her innocence?" she said.

"I have spent the last 17 years in my own prison for what she, Jeffrey and all the co-conspirators did to me.

"I was raped repeatedly. Three times a day, sometimes. And I was not the only girl; there was a constant stream of girls being raped over and over and over again.

"Ghislaine must die in prison. Because I've been to hell and back in the last 17 years."

Addressing her victims in the courtroom, Maxwell said Epstein "should have stood before you years ago".


"He should have spared victims the years of chasing justice," she said.

"To you I say: I am sorry for the pain you experienced. I hope my conviction, along with my harsh incarceration, brings you closure. I hope this brings the women who have suffered some measure of peace and finality."

Peace, perhaps. Finality might have to wait. "
 
Last edited:
"Now do the men."

A lot of people are now saying this.


Her sentencing today was met with a similar sentiment around the world.

"Who were Ghislaine Maxwell's rich, powerful and (sometimes) famous clients?" wrote broadcaster Piers Morgan.

"We should be told. It wasn't just her and Epstein engaged in this criminal sexual conduct. We need names."

"Maxwell has been sentenced to 20 years in a US prison, yet not one of the clients has been jailed," said fellow broadcaster Sophie Corcoran.


"Who are the clients? Who was she getting the girls for? Justice is not complete until every one of Epstein's clients is jailed. Justice doesn't stop at Maxwell.

Ghislaine Maxwell with Jeffrey Epstein. Photo / US District Court for the Southern District of New York
Ghislaine Maxwell with Jeffrey Epstein. Photo / US District Court for the Southern District of New York
"It's just the beginning. We want the names of the perverted elites who were the clients."

"I want names. All the other names," said comedian Dana Goldberg.

"If Ghislaine Maxwell is guilty of child sex trafficking, there's a list of her clients who participated in this proven trafficking," said author and columnist Tim Young.

"MAKE THEIR NAMES PUBLIC AND ARREST THEM ALL."

"I'm 100 per cent behind the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell, but where are all the men who used these young girls?" asked British Olympian Sharron Davies.


"When do the prosecutions begin of those powerful men who flew on the Lolita Express?" wondered newspaper columnist Allison Pearson, referring to Epstein's private jet.

"I must have missed the arrests. Or is a woman solely responsible for rapes?"

"I don't want to live in a society that demands every detail of the Amber Heard-Johnny Depp case, but is somehow content without a single name from the Ghislaine Maxwell client list," said YouTuber and podcaster Blaire White.

And so forth.

The sixteen John Does​

Back in January, Maxwell's lawyers said she would no longer fight to protect the identities of eight people, potentially clients of the trafficking conspiracy, whose names had been redacted in a deposition released to the public.

The deposition came from a civil defamation lawsuit Guiffre filed against Maxwell in 2015, which ended in a settlement two years later.


In a ruling in September of last year, US District Judge Loretta Preska revealed there were a total of 16 non-party objectors in the case, meaning people who were not party to the lawsuit but objected to their identities being released.

Guiffre's lawyers want their identities unsealed.

"Aversion to embarrassment and negativity that may come from being associated with Epstein and Maxwell is not enough to warrant continued sealing of information. This is especially true with respect to this case of great public interest, involving serious allegations of the sex trafficking of minors," her team argued.

"Now that Maxwell's criminal trial has come and gone, there is little reason to retain protection over the vast swathes of information about Epstein and Maxwell's sex trafficking operation that were originally filed under seal in this case."

Annie Farmer, who testified against Ghislaine Maxwell at trial, speaks to members of the media outside federal court in New York today. Photo / AP
Annie Farmer, who testified against Ghislaine Maxwell at trial, speaks to members of the media outside federal court in New York today. Photo / AP
Judge Preska decided to deal with eight of the names first, then move on to the other eight, determining whether their right to privacy outweighed the public's right to know.

"Each of the listed Does has counsel who have ably asserted their own respective privacy rights. Maxwell therefore leaves it to this court to conduct the appropriate review," Maxwell's lawyers said in January.


That review is ongoing.

Should the names be unsealed, it could lead to a number of civil lawsuits.

"It's not over for the survivors, and we'll see new lawsuits against Epstein's co-conspirators – the men who willingly accepted the girls to abuse them," Professor Marci Hamilton, founder of a thinktank focusing on the protection of children, told The Guardian in February.

Read More​

Maxwell 'must die in prison'​

In her statement to the court before her sentencing, Maxwell painted herself as someone who had been manipulated by Epstein.

"It is the greatest regret of my life that I ever met Jeffrey Epstein," she said.

"I believe that Jeffrey Epstein was a manipulative, cunning and controlling man who lived a profoundly compartmentalised life and fooled all those in his orbit."


Sarah Ransome (left) and Elizabeth Stein, both victims of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, leave the federal courthouse in New York today. Photo / AP
Sarah Ransome (left) and Elizabeth Stein, both victims of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, leave the federal courthouse in New York today. Photo / AP
Speaking outside court, another of the pair's victims, Sarah Ransome, slammed her for continuing to avoid taking responsibility.

"After all of this, how can the five-star general of this enormous sex trafficking conspiracy, involving so many co-conspirators, that snared hundreds if not thousands of vulnerable girls and young women over three decades, continue to maintain her innocence?" she said.

"I have spent the last 17 years in my own prison for what she, Jeffrey and all the co-conspirators did to me.

"I was raped repeatedly. Three times a day, sometimes. And I was not the only girl; there was a constant stream of girls being raped over and over and over again.

"Ghislaine must die in prison. Because I've been to hell and back in the last 17 years."

Addressing her victims in the courtroom, Maxwell said Epstein "should have stood before you years ago".


"He should have spared victims the years of chasing justice," she said.

"To you I say: I am sorry for the pain you experienced. I hope my conviction, along with my harsh incarceration, brings you closure. I hope this brings the women who have suffered some measure of peace and finality."

Peace, perhaps. Finality might have to wait. "
I absolutely agree that the "johns' should not go nameless or without prosecution and shame. Let's see if they do or not. And I hope media AND the public does not shut up about it if it seems to go sliding under the rug...

Well she takes pretty much no responsibility does she? No surprise I guess. Imo she basked in her role and took joy in it and loved her power. Sick woman, just as sick as he was I think.

BUT the sick perverted powerful men most definitely need to be addressed as well. Looking like a very one sided deal thus far...
 
She won't take responsibility while there is still a possibility of an appeal of sentence and conviction. It was reported she said "I am sorry for the pain you experienced." but did not take any blame herself. The prison she has requested (Danbury, Connecticut ) is a low security mixed facility for federal prisoners. Only 7% of inmates are female. Not sure if that is normal overall.

I hope she cooperates with exposing the others involved if she loses her appeals. I don't think she will cooperate before that.
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
3,014
Messages
242,034
Members
974
Latest member
elimortonslywir
Back
Top Bottom