• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Ghislaine Maxwell

smartcooky said:
Err, what? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Flawed characters.
Ghislaine Maxwell.
Virginia Giuffre.
Planigale sees nuance and why would we resile from discussing accuser and accused in the broad sweep of character flaws.
 
Last edited:
I disagree with either Maxwell or Giuffre being called a 'bitch'. I can see the story on both sides. Whilst I have every sympathy with Giuffre and Ransome, and the other victims, there seems to lack balance in who is to blame for the latter's suffering. There is no doubt they have suffered enormously. However, Giuffre was being trafficked out to prostitution by her sixty-something pervert boyfriend years before she crossed paths with Epstein and Maxwell. Giuffre, contrary to belief was nearer 17 when she met the pair and became employed as Epstein's personal masseuse and recruiter of other young women, from local high schools. Yes, Maxwell was clearly part of a conspiracy to provide prostitutes for rich men in a sophisticated prostitution ring but it takes more than one person to have a conspiracy. I get that Ransome ended up in hopsital after trying to kill herself. However, I am not seeing that it is Maxwell who si 100% responsible for this. Yes, she was calculating, sly and wicked. However, she may have been avictim of Epstein, too. The evidence for this is that after the pair split in 2004, Maxwell's pimping activities ceased.
 
Vixen said:
I disagree with either Maxwell or Giuffre being called a 'bitch'. I can see the story on both sides. Whilst I have every sympathy with Giuffre and Ransome, and the other victims, there seems to lack balance in who is to blame for the latter's suffering. There is no doubt they have suffered enormously. However, Giuffre was being trafficked out to prostitution by her sixty-something pervert boyfriend years before she crossed paths with Epstein and Maxwell. Giuffre, contrary to belief was nearer 17 when she met the pair and became employed as Epstein's personal masseuse and recruiter of other young women, from locale high schools. Yes, Maxwell was clearly part of a conspiracy to provide prostitutes for rich men in a sophisticated prostitution ring but it takes more than one person to have a conspiracy. I get that Ransome ended up in hopsital after trying to kill herself. However, I am not seeing that it is Maxwell who si 100% responsible for this. Yes, she was calculating, sly and wicked. However, she may have been avictim of Epstein, too. The evidence for this is that after the pair split in 2004, Maxwell's pimping activities ceased.
Click to expand...
I think you are trying to say....

Just kidding.
These sins will never be resolved by vilifying Maxwell and sanctifying Giuffre.
Deconstructing the pecadilloes of the rich and famous gets in the way of dealing with those who truly suffer in miserable jurisdictions that are everywhere except America.
 
Last edited:
Samson said:
Flawed characters.
Ghislaine Maxwell.
Virginia Giuffre.
Planigale sees nuance and why would we resile from discussing accuser and accused in the broad sweep of character flaws.
Click to expand...

Bollocks I say! There is NO nuance in the sexual exploitation of children, and certainly not when such exploitation is carried out by the rich and powerful. Of course, victim-blamers and apologists for Maxwell would like people to believe there is. They want people to believe that this whole thing is fraught with doubt and grey areas, and that Maxwell was somehow a victim too. Its just a load of BS, and I'm not buying it - I'm not fooled for a moment.

There are no grey areas here. Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein were partners, co-conspirators in a loathsome criminal enterprise to procure and groom under-aged girls for sex, and to sell those girls' sexual services to the pair's own rich and powerful friends, as well as to satisfy their own vile sexual proclivities for young girls. Maxwell is NOT a victim. She walked into this with her eyes wide open, knowing EXACTLY who and what Jefferey Epstein was, and what he was doing, yet she did what she did voluntarily and knowing it was a criminal offense of the absolute worst kind.

As for Virginia Giuffre - she would not have done any of the the things she has been accused of doing later, if she had not first met Maxwell as a 15/16 year old, and been coerced, manipulated, groomed and then sex-trafficked to Maxwell and Epstein's friends (such as Prince Andrew).

And you know, what really ***** me off? It is that Maxwell has shown utterly no remorse for what she has done - no apology to the dozens (maybe more) of women whose lives she and Epstein so badly damaged by their actions. The sole extent of her comments was some snarky remark she made.... "To you, all the victims … I am sorry for the pain that you experienced. I hope my conviction and harsh incarceration brings you closure"...

Did you note the total lack of acknowledgement of her own culpability in inflicting that pain on those women? No remorse there!

Did you note in that last sentence that she referred to her sentence as "harsh"? The only person she is sorry for is herself, for being caught!
 
Samson said:
I think you are trying to say....

Just kidding.
These sins will never be resolved by vilifying Maxwell and sanctifying Giuffre.
Deconstructing the pecadilloes of the rich and famous gets in the way of dealing with those who truly suffer in miserable jurisdictions that are everywhere except America.
Click to expand...

One doesn't spell "underage rapes" like that.

If you said that Maxwell wasn't the only guilty party, I'd agree. And Maxwell's clients have so far got away with it. But that doesn't make her innocent. Or undeserving of being incarcerated for the rest of her life (which she probably won't be). She got off lightly.
 
jimbob said:
One doesn't spell "underage rapes" like that.

If you said that Maxwell wasn't the only guilty party, I'd agree. And Maxwell's clients have so far got away with it. But that doesn't make her innocent. Or undeserving of being incarcerated for the rest of her life (which she probably won't be). She got off lightly.
Click to expand...
Not innocent but a bit player in a terrible universe of sin, I have great difficulty separating her way of controlling the fates of young women from the methods constructed by pillars of society.
 
Vixen said:
I disagree with either Maxwell or Giuffre being called a 'bitch'. I can see the story on both sides. Whilst I have every sympathy with Giuffre and Ransome, and the other victims, there seems to lack balance in who is to blame for the latter's suffering. There is no doubt they have suffered enormously. However, Giuffre was being trafficked out to prostitution by her sixty-something pervert boyfriend years before she crossed paths with Epstein and Maxwell. Giuffre, contrary to belief was nearer 17 when she met the pair and became employed as Epstein's personal masseuse and recruiter of other young women, from local high schools. Yes, Maxwell was clearly part of a conspiracy to provide prostitutes for rich men in a sophisticated prostitution ring but it takes more than one person to have a conspiracy. I get that Ransome ended up in hopsital after trying to kill herself. However, I am not seeing that it is Maxwell who si 100% responsible for this. Yes, she was calculating, sly and wicked. However, she may have been avictim of Epstein, too. The evidence for this is that after the pair split in 2004, Maxwell's pimping activities ceased.
Click to expand...


Who's claiming that Maxwell was ever "100% responsible" for what went on? And why do you even think this is relevant to the safety/justness of her conviction? If three men kick a vagrant to death, each of those three can safely be convicted of murder, even though it's clearly arguable that none of the three is "100% responsible" for the vagrant's death.

And what difference does it make to Maxwell's criminal culpability if prior criminal offences were committed against the same victim(s) by others? In your view, does that somehow mitigate - or even obviate - Maxwell's own guilt??

Your attempted arguments here are baffling, ill-judged, and entirely incorrect in law and ethics.
 
LondonJohn said:
Who's claiming that Maxwell was ever "100% responsible" for what went on? And why do you even think this is relevant to the safety/justness of her conviction? If three men kick a vagrant to death, each of those three can safely be convicted of murder, even though it's clearly arguable that none of the three is "100% responsible" for the vagrant's death.

And what difference does it make to Maxwell's criminal culpability if prior criminal offences were committed against the same victim(s) by others? In your view, does that somehow mitigate - or even obviate - Maxwell's own guilt??

Your attempted arguments here are baffling, ill-judged, and entirely incorrect in law and ethics.
Click to expand...
But why not address Planigale's inconvenient truth?
 
Samson said:
Not innocent but a bit player in a terrible universe of sin, I have great difficulty separating her way of controlling the fates of young women from the methods constructed by pillars of society.
Click to expand...

No way was she just a "bit player"!! Maxwell was a fully participating, willing co-conspirator who knew exactly what she was doing, and was doing it for her own personal and financial benefit.
 
Samson said:
Not innocent but a bit player in a terrible universe of sin, I have great difficulty separating her way of controlling the fates of young women from the methods constructed by pillars of society.
Click to expand...

No she wasn't a bit player. She was a key accomplice of Epstein.
 
LondonJohn said:
Who's claiming that Maxwell was ever "100% responsible" for what went on? And why do you even think this is relevant to the safety/justness of her conviction? If three men kick a vagrant to death, each of those three can safely be convicted of murder, even though it's clearly arguable that none of the three is "100% responsible" for the vagrant's death.

And what difference does it make to Maxwell's criminal culpability if prior criminal offences were committed against the same victim(s) by others? In your view, does that somehow mitigate - or even obviate - Maxwell's own guilt??

Your attempted arguments here are baffling, ill-judged, and entirely incorrect in law and ethics.
Click to expand...

smartcooky said:
No way was she just a "bit player"!! Maxwell was a fully participating, willing co-conspirator who knew exactly what she was doing, and was doing it for her own personal and financial benefit.
Click to expand...
A bit player whose universe collided with Clinton etc. It is incomprehensible that she is the sole fall girl in this sordid narrative.
 
smartcooky said:
<snip>

And you know, what really ***** me off? It is that Maxwell has shown utterly no remorse for what she has done - no apology to the dozens (maybe more) of women whose lives she and Epstein so badly damaged by their actions. The sole extent of her comments was some snarky remark she made.... "To you, all the victims … I am sorry for the pain that you experienced. I hope my conviction and harsh incarceration brings you closure"...

Did you note the total lack of acknowledgement of her own culpability in inflicting that pain on those women? No remorse there!

Did you note in that last sentence that she referred to her sentence as "harsh"? The only person she is sorry for is herself, for being caught!
Click to expand...

I expect Maxwell has been advised by her counsel not to admit guilt as it is almost certain she will appeal. Expressing remorse - which of course, being an overprivileged self-entitled snob she doesn't feel anyway - would be tantamount to accepting liability.

In any case, it is clear she doesn't feel remorse so at least she is being honest here!
 
Samson said:
A bit player whose universe collided with Clinton etc. It is incomprehensible that she is the sole fall girl in this sordid narrative.
Click to expand...

No. The only thing that is "incomprehensible" is your (and other Maxwell apologists') inability to understand the difference between a "victim" and a "perpetrator" of sexual violence.

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are PERPETRATORS of sexual violence!

Virginia Giuffre, Annie Farmer, Sarah Ransome, Elizabeth Stein, Jane, Kate and Carolyn are just some of their VICTIMS!
 
smartcooky said:
No. The only thing that is "incomprehensible" is your (and other Maxwell apologists') inability to understand the difference between a "victim" and a "perpetrator" of sexual violence.

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are PERPETRATORS of sexual violence!

Virginia Giuffre, Annie Farmer, Sarah Ransome, Elizabeth Stein, Jane, Kate and Carolyn are just some of their VICTIMS!
Click to expand...

This is such a well written post. (According to Samson everyone is a victim, and
all law enforcement is corrupt down to planting evidence and so on).
 
smartcooky said:
No. The only thing that is "incomprehensible" is your (and other Maxwell apologists') inability to understand the difference between a "victim" and a "perpetrator" of sexual violence.

Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are PERPETRATORS of sexual violence!

Virginia Giuffre, Annie Farmer, Sarah Ransome, Elizabeth Stein, Jane, Kate and Carolyn are just some of their VICTIMS!
Click to expand...
More of a misogynist than an apologist, IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom