Ghislaine Maxwell

[Planigale]

Or France, where they would just be greeted with a shrug of the shoulders, apparently.

I think there is a great deal of evidence that the judicial system in France has taken an approach to sexual exploitation of women and children and a frankly astonishing attitude towards incest that is not reflected in most countries.

Stating that as a fact does not in anyway imply approval. I think France is worse than other countries, but sexual exploitation of young women in particular is something that happens widely. That Epstein got away with it for so long is an example, people obviously turned a blind eye. The same phenomena explains the mass exploitation of girls that has occurred in the UK and is only now being taken seriously. Close to home for me is that young women from Pakistani backgrounds are traficked out of the UK sometimes as young as 14 to be forced into marriages in Pakistan.

My anger at the Patriarchal misogynist social systems that allow this to happen does not mean that I cannot also argue that those held in pre-trial detention should only be there if necessary, and if so treated humanely.

Someone above posted that being on bail is a privilege. That may be so in the US and may explain why over 50% of the prison population in New York are in pre-trial detention. Elsewhere the right is not to be detained because one is accused of a crime, but like all rights there are limits. I recognise that a serial rapist may be a danger to others, that mobsters may try and intimidate witnesses, that someone who has previously fled abroad may do so again, and would be reasons for pre-trial detention. I just do not think these apply to Maxwell. I would hope we could discuss this without people trying to bully me by attacking me and making false claims that I favour pedophilia or rape. Stick to the discussion.

The fact that Maxwell knows famous / rich people does not seem to me to indicate she is a flight risk. these people have more to lose than average and would have little reason to assist her. There is no evidence she has hidden resources, Maxwell is rich as compared to most of us but she is not in the billionaire level. She has certainly never exhibited signs of being of limitless wealth. Having had ample opportunity to permanently leave the US despite the many law cases and impending investigations she did not do so, and no evidence has been provided that she planned to do so. There is no evidence that having ended her association with Epstein, Maxwell continued in any criminal activity, so I do not think she is a continued risk to young women. It is a well established strategy of US prosecutors to use pre-trial detention to broker plea deals. Whilst the crimes she is charged with are serious, it is also recognised that US prosecutors will use the most serious charge with the greatest penalty as leverage in plea deals, where in the jurisdictions where plea deals do not occur the most appropriate charge / penalty for the offences that occurred will be brought up front. In cases we read about it seems not unusual for initial charges to involve hundreds of years of jail time yet when conviction actually occurs the 400 years has come down to 4 years (not a claim about any particular case; just pointing out that in the US system ridiculously long terms of imprisonment are initially threatened as part of the plea deal system).

There may be other explanations for her being 'in hiding'. It was certainly rumoured that Epstein had been murdered for what he knew, and that Maxwell would be next. It could be argued her low profile and presence of security guards was a concern that she was in danger, rather than being a fugitive.

Certainly the incarceration in the same jail which failed to maintain the safety of Epstein, seems to be deliberately intimidating. I am sure that there are many other federal prisons where she could be held in the US. (I am not even sure why the trial is in New York given the crimes seemed to occur elsewhere, but I am sure there is a good reason, but does this require pre-trial detention in the same city given this is a Federal case? It is not as if she is being transferred to the court on a regular basis so proximity does not appear to be a reason?)

So I argue the incarceration in particularly inhumane circumstances in the same prison her ex was murdered / suicided in, is primarily a prosecutorial tactic to force a plea deal, and the claims of flight risk are created as a way of enabling this.

 

[JoeMorgue]

"If there's anything more important than my ego around, I want it caught and shot now."

Is that a quote from somebody?

Zaphod Beeblebrox, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy.

 

[jimbob]

I think there is a great deal of evidence that the judicial system in France has taken an approach to sexual exploitation of women and children and a frankly astonishing attitude towards incest that is not reflected in most countries.

Stating that as a fact does not in anyway imply approval. I think France is worse than other countries, but sexual exploitation of young women in particular is something that happens widely. That Epstein got away with it for so long is an example, people obviously turned a blind eye. The same phenomena explains the mass exploitation of girls that has occurred in the UK and is only now being taken seriously. Close to home for me is that young women from Pakistani backgrounds are traficked out of the UK sometimes as young as 14 to be forced into marriages in Pakistan.

My anger at the Patriarchal misogynist social systems that allow this to happen does not mean that I cannot also argue that those held in pre-trial detention should only be there if necessary, and if so treated humanely.

Someone above posted that being on bail is a privilege. That may be so in the US and may explain why over 50% of the prison population in New York are in pre-trial detention. Elsewhere the right is not to be detained because one is accused of a crime, but like all rights there are limits. I recognise that a serial rapist may be a danger to others, that mobsters may try and intimidate witnesses, that someone who has previously fled abroad may do so again, and would be reasons for pre-trial detention. I just do not think these apply to Maxwell. I would hope we could discuss this without people trying to bully me by attacking me and making false claims that I favour pedophilia or rape. Stick to the discussion.

The fact that Maxwell knows famous / rich people does not seem to me to indicate she is a flight risk. these people have more to lose than average and would have little reason to assist her. There is no evidence she has hidden resources, Maxwell is rich as compared to most of us but she is not in the billionaire level. She has certainly never exhibited signs of being of limitless wealth. Having had ample opportunity to permanently leave the US despite the many law cases and impending investigations she did not do so, and no evidence has been provided that she planned to do so. There is no evidence that having ended her association with Epstein, Maxwell continued in any criminal activity, so I do not think she is a continued risk to young women. It is a well established strategy of US prosecutors to use pre-trial detention to broker plea deals. Whilst the crimes she is charged with are serious, it is also recognised that US prosecutors will use the most serious charge with the greatest penalty as leverage in plea deals, where in the jurisdictions where plea deals do not occur the most appropriate charge / penalty for the offences that occurred will be brought up front. In cases we read about it seems not unusual for initial charges to involve hundreds of years of jail time yet when conviction actually occurs the 400 years has come down to 4 years (not a claim about any particular case; just pointing out that in the US system ridiculously long terms of imprisonment are initially threatened as part of the plea deal system).

There may be other explanations for her being 'in hiding'. It was certainly rumoured that Epstein had been murdered for what he knew, and that Maxwell would be next. It could be argued her low profile and presence of security guards was a concern that she was in danger, rather than being a fugitive.

Certainly the incarceration in the same jail which failed to maintain the safety of Epstein, seems to be deliberately intimidating. I am sure that there are many other federal prisons where she could be held in the US. (I am not even sure why the trial is in New York given the crimes seemed to occur elsewhere, but I am sure there is a good reason, but does this require pre-trial detention in the same city given this is a Federal case? It is not as if she is being transferred to the court on a regular basis so proximity does not appear to be a reason?)

So I argue the incarceration in particularly inhumane circumstances in the same prison her ex was murdered / suicided in, is primarily a prosecutorial tactic to force a plea deal, and the claims of flight risk are created as a way of enabling this.

The fact that she knows rich and powerful people is indeed not evidence for her being a flight risk.

The fact that she tried to evade arrest and even tried to run when she was found, COMBINED WITH her wealth and attempts to hide her bank accounts means that she demonstrated the desire to escape trial and the means.

 

[Belz...]

I can't see any of these publishing lurid accounts of how Maxwell was a paedophile. AFAICS they stick to the legal situation of 'being charged with'.

They report the facts, and we form opinions based on them.

And I thought we already discussed the word "pedophile", Vixen. It's quite odd that you continue to get it wrong.

 

[smartcooky]

Someone above posted that being on bail is a privilege. That may be so in the US and may explain why over 50% of the prison population in New York are in pre-trial detention. Elsewhere the right is not to be detained because one is accused of a crime

What happens everywhere else in the world is of no consequence whatsoever. You can bleat and moan and whine all you like about how terribly unfair it is that Maxwell's white privilege and entitlement carries no weight in prison under US Federal jurisdiction which is, after all, the country where she committed the criminal offences she has been charged with.

The fact that Maxwell knows famous / rich people does not seem to me to indicate she is a flight risk. these people have more to lose than average and would have little reason to assist her. There is no evidence she has hidden resources, Maxwell is rich as compared to most of us but she is not in the billionaire level. She has certainly never exhibited signs of being of limitless wealth.

The judge(s) in five bail hearings disagree.

Having had ample opportunity to permanently leave the US despite the many law cases and impending investigations she did not do so, and no evidence has been provided that she planned to do so.

Wrong, she disappeared to another country to avoid being subpoenaed.

Like any other common criminal, she thought she could outsmart the FBI and would not be caught. The fact that she did not try to flee in the past means nothing. The circumstances have changed now - she faces charges that could land her in prison for decades. That she was not a flight risk previously does not mean she not a flight risk now.

There is no evidence that having ended her association with Epstein, Maxwell continued in any criminal activity, so I do not think she is a continued risk to young women.

Leopards and spots.

There may be other explanations for her being 'in hiding'. It was certainly rumoured that Epstein had been murdered for what he knew, and that Maxwell would be next. It could be argued her low profile and presence of security guards was a concern that she was in danger, rather than being a fugitive.

Poppycock. You're trying to minimize what she has done... just like Vixen

She was hiding from the FBI because she wanted to avoid prosecution - running and hiding from the law evinces a consciousness of guilt.

 

[Vixen]

What happens everywhere else in the world is of no consequence whatsoever. You can bleat and moan and whine all you like about how terribly unfair it is that Maxwell's white privilege and entitlement carries no weight in prison under US Federal jurisdiction which is, after all, the country where she committed the criminal offences she has been charged with.



The judge(s) in five bail hearings disagree.



Wrong, she disappeared to another country to avoid being subpoenaed.

Like any other common criminal, she thought she could outsmart the FBI and would not be caught. The fact that she did not try to flee in the past means nothing. The circumstances have changed now - she faces charges that could land her in prison for decades. That she was not a flight risk previously does not mean she not a flight risk now.



Leopards and spots.



Poppycock. You're trying to minimize what she has done... just like Vixen

She was hiding from the FBI because she wanted to avoid prosecution - running and hiding from the law evinces a consciousness of guilt.

Please stop with the 'white privilege' crap. Maxwell's father, Robert was a Czech-Jew, whose parents died in Auschwitz, her mother Elizabeth produced a journal Holocaust and Genocide Studies. I doubt very much Maxwell identifies as a 'white supremacist'. (Obviously it would be a sweeping generalisation to claim none do.) Please stop with the race card.

Planigale: the case was moved New York because it was found that Florida, who originally charged Epstein, had corruptly let him off [Acosta], in effect, with a short term 'house arrest' order and conferred immunity on his associates, which included Maxwell. In addition, she was arrested in New Hampshire, which I believe has limited jurisdiction.

 

[smartcooky]

I can't see any of these publishing lurid accounts of how Maxwell was a paedophile. AFAICS they stick to the legal situation of 'being charged with'.

None of that is what you claimed. Let me remind you what you said...

The only people writing about her are the 'tabloids'.

Since the newspapers I linked to are writing about her, and none of them are tabloids, it shows that you were lying... again!

Also, literally no-one here has accused her of being a paedophile - that is just you shtick - a strawman you made up.

Finally, no-one here has formed their opinions based on what "tabloids" have written. Personally, I formed my opinions based on...

• Statements by her victims
• Statements by Federal prosecutors
• Reading and understanding the content of the actual charging documents
• Researching the implications and meanings of the Laws she has been charged under
• Reading the content of her 2016 SDNY deposition (all 460+ pages of it)*

In other words, my opinions are based on facts... and I don't need a "psychology degree" to form those opinions, just the ability to comprehend what I read.


* When you see what is in her deposition, its not hard to understand why she didn't want it made public. She was very evasive and repeatedly lied under oath.
.
.
.

 

[smartcooky]

Please stop with the 'white privilege' crap. Maxwell's father, Robert was a Czech-Jew, whose parents died in Auschwitz, her mother Elizabeth produced a journal Holocaust and Genocide Studies.

What a load of crap. More minimising on you part

Regardless of her blood heritage, she has lived a life if privilege and excess.

I doubt very much Maxwell identifies as a 'white supremacist'. (Obviously it would be a sweeping generalisation to claim none do.) Please stop with the race card.

And this is another thing you have no ******* clue about.

"White privilege" and "White Supremacy" have absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with each other.

 

[Ian Osborne]

Please stop with the 'white privilege' crap. Maxwell's father, Robert was a Czech-Jew, whose parents died in Auschwitz, her mother Elizabeth produced a journal Holocaust and Genocide Studies. I doubt very much Maxwell identifies as a 'white supremacist'.

This is so confused it's not even worth addressing.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I swear the gift basket this board gives out every month for "Most Proudly and Stubbornly Wrong" must just be amazing given the number of people battling for the title.

 

[Vixen]

[qimg]https://www.dropbox.com/s/k17rpz8lg0rbbnb/goalposts.gif?raw=1[/qimg]

None of that is what you claimed. Let me remind you what you said...



Since the newspapers I linked to are writing about her, and none of them are tabloids, it shows that you were lying... again!

Also, literally no-one here has accused her of being a paedophile - that is just you shtick - a strawman you made up.

Finally, no-one here has formed their opinions based on what "tabloids" have written. Personally, I formed my opinions based on...

• Statements by her victims
• Statements by Federal prosecutors
• Reading and understanding the content of the actual charging documents
• Researching the implications and meanings of the Laws she has been charged under
• Reading the content of her 2016 SDNY deposition (all 460+ pages of it)*

In other words, my opinions are based on facts... and I don't need a "psychology degree" to form those opinions, just the ability to comprehend what I read.


* When you see what is in her deposition, its not hard to understand why she didn't want it made public. She was very evasive and repeatedly lied under oath.
.
.
.

And what is the elephant in the room?

- Maxwell's defence/side of the story.


If you look at the charge sheet, she is charged (for the first time) with offences allegedly committed between 1994 - 1997.

However, if we look on Virginia Giuffre's wiki page:

In the summer of 2000,[21][22] Giuffre first met Ghislaine Maxwell when working as a spa attendant at Donald Trump's private Mar-a-Lago club while reading a book about massage therapy.[17] Maxwell, a British socialite and daughter of the late media tycoon Robert Maxwell, approached Giuffre, noted the book that she was reading, inquired about her interest in massage, and offered her a potential job working for Epstein as a traveling masseuse with the assurance that no experience was necessary.[17] Giuffre has stated that after Maxwell introduced her to Jeffrey Epstein, the two quickly began grooming her to provide sexual services under the guise that she was to be trained as a professional massage therapist.

wiki

Giuffre claims that Maxwell and Epstein introduced her to sex trafficking as a minor but she already had experience of a sex trafficker, some 65-year-old guy she lived with for six months called Eppinger.

She lived on the streets at age 13 before getting abused by a 65-year-old sex trafficker, Ron Eppinger, in Miami.[19] Giuffre lived with Eppinger for approximately 6 months.[14] Eppinger reportedly ran a front business for international sex trafficking known as the modeling agency "Perfect 10".[20] He was raided by the FBI and later pleaded guilty to charges of alien smuggling for prostitution, interstate travel for prostitution, and money laundering.

ibid

She says she decided to speak out when her daughter was born, and in fact is a strong advocate against sex trafficking of minors, setting up a campaigning group.

She founded the US nonprofit organization Victims Refuse Silence[2] in 2015[3] and has been widely featured in interviews with American and British media describing her alleged experiences of being trafficked by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, to individuals including Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, and Jean-Luc Brunel.

ibid.

I am sure Giuffre feels strongly and sincerely that Maxwell be brought t justice. However, it must be remembered, it was only Epstein originally facing charges.

In 2006, a year before Giuffre was first contacted by authorities, the Palm Beach Police Department had a growing body of evidence against Epstein, and signed a probable cause affidavit charging him with multiple counts of unlawful sex acts with a minor.[34] Epstein hired a team of powerful lawyers, including Alan Dershowitz, Jack Goldberger, Kenneth Starr, and Jay Lefkowitz, to serve in his defense.

ibid

So, as you can see, there is a gap of nine years since 1997 when Giuffre first reported the crimes against her by Epstein. Epstein and Maxwell split up in I believe 2004, so any procuring after that date must have been one of any other of Epstein's various girlfriends.

Consider this, putting on the hat of Maxwell's defence lawyer:

• When Giuffre's daughter was born, Giuffre regretted her early teenage years in general
• she reported Epstein and he was arrested
• Maxwell was missing so Giuffre felt safe in naming her as well
• Maxwell organised high profile events, where men outnumbered women, or they were away from their wives and girlfriends
• Maxwell hired escorts and call girls to provide entertainment for the high profile guests
• Maxwell joined in various orgies, some including females
• Giuffre sees this as rape, ten years later, Maxwell saw it as 'fun' at the time
• In the meantime, Giuffre and Edwards, her attorney, have brought out books, films, tv slots
• from being a campaign for justice, it is now a money-making business opportunity.
• With Epstein dead with a large estate, and with Maxwell being also super rich, it is in her interests to make her claims against Maxwell as lurid as possible.
  
  

Derschowitz is a creep and I can't stand the guy, but he is not being charged, nor is Prince Andrew. Jean Luc Brunel has now been arrested and it is he who allegedly the two twelve-year-old Russian (French?) girls who flew over to one of these parties at Epstein's property in the USA. Apart from that, none of the johns have been charged or investigated. Without johns, there wouldn't be any prostitutes. A madam, such as Maxwell, would be the middleman, rather like a drug dealer, bring the buyer and the seller together to provide a commodity in demand.

 

[smartcooky]

And what is the elephant in the room?

There isn't one

- Maxwell's defence/side of the story.

It doesn't hold water

If you look at the charge sheet, she is charged (for the first time) with offences allegedly committed between 1994 - 1997.

There is no SoL on sex trafficking

However, if we look on Virginia Giuffre's wiki page:

wiki

Giuffre claims that Maxwell and Epstein introduced her to sex trafficking as a minor but she already had experience of a sex trafficker, some 65-year-old guy she lived with for six months called Eppinger.

Relevance?

She says she decided to speak out when her daughter was born, and in fact is a strong advocate against sex trafficking of minors, setting up a campaigning group.

Relevance?

I am sure Giuffre feels strongly and sincerely that Maxwell be brought t justice. However, it must be remembered, it was only Epstein originally facing charges.

And? So what?

So, as you can see, there is a gap of nine years since 1997 when Giuffre first reported the crimes against her by Epstein. Epstein and Maxwell split up in I believe 2004, so any procuring after that date must have been one of any other of Epstein's various girlfriends.

And?

Consider this, putting on the hat of Maxwell's defence lawyer:

• When Giuffre's daughter was born, Giuffre regretted her early teenage years in general
• she reported Epstein and he was arrested
• Maxwell was missing so Giuffre felt safe in naming her as well
• Maxwell organised high profile events, where men outnumbered women, or they were away from their wives and girlfriends
• Maxwell hired escorts and call girls to provide entertainment for the high profile guests
• Maxwell joined in various orgies, some including females
• Giuffre sees this as rape, ten years later, Maxwell saw it as 'fun' at the time
• In the meantime, Giuffre and Edwards, her attorney, have brought out books, films, tv slots
• from being a campaign for justice, it is now a money-making business opportunity.
• With Epstein dead with a large estate, and with Maxwell being also super rich, it is in her interests to make her claims against Maxwell as lurid as possible.

And the relevance of any of this?

Derschowitz is a creep and I can't stand the guy, but he is not being charged, nor is Prince Andrew. Jean Luc Brunel has now been arrested and it is he who allegedly the two twelve-year-old Russian (French?) girls who flew over to one of these parties at Epstein's property in the USA. Apart from that, none of the johns have been charged or investigated. Without johns, there wouldn't be any prostitutes. A madam, such as Maxwell, would be the middleman, rather like a drug dealer, bring the buyer and the seller together to provide a commodity in demand.

Relevance?

Your post looks very much like you are throwing as much irrelevant bollocks at the the wall as you can, and hoping some of it might stick.
.
.
.

 

[Mojo]

There was a story in the tabloids t'other day about how Maxwell liked to make risqué conversation.


Must be guilty then!

So you read tabloids, a terrible source of information, and you think I do too?

The only people writing about her are the 'tabloids'.

[Posts long list of non-tabloid newspaper stories.]

I can't see any of these publishing lurid accounts of how Maxwell was a paedophile. AFAICS they stick to the legal situation of 'being charged with'.

Come back here with those goalposts.

 

[Planigale]

The fact that she knows rich and powerful people is indeed not evidence for her being a flight risk.

The fact that she tried to evade arrest and even tried to run when she was found, COMBINED WITH her wealth and attempts to hide her bank accounts means that she demonstrated the desire to escape trial and the means.

The 'tried to run' according to the FBI is that she went into another room, when the FBI were outside looking in through a window, so had not been able to identify themselves to her, nor show her a warrant. Moving out of the line of fire and contacting an attorney would both be reasonable explanations. What she did not do was leave the building nor did she attempt to do so. i think 'tried to run' is yet another exaggeration by the prosecution to obtain Maxwell's pre-trial incarceration to force a plea deal. The prosecution are not an unbiased party in this. We know that US prosecutors lie and conceal evidence to obtain convictions. We know they routinely exaggerate charges to pressurise accused to accept plea deals. US prosecutors are political appointees and not independent judicial appointees as they are in most of the developed world.

What evidence is there that she attempted to hide her bank accounts? The prosecution have never presented evidence that she tried to hide bank accounts. All they have claimed is she may have financial resources she has not disclosed, entirely non-evidence based claims. Claims they could make about anyone. There is no evidence for instance she lives above her apparent means.

The claims are that she did not make herself available to civil writs. This is not the same as evading arrest by the FBI. Now there are some here who have looked into the case in more detail than I have, and if they have facts to provide please do so, but I have not seen that the FBI actually informed her lawyers or Maxwell herself that they wished to arrest her and could she come into their offices*. Prior to them doing so she was under no obligation to make herself available to the FBI.

*In the UK most arrests in this situation would be by prior appointment. The accused accompanied by a lawyer will surrender themselves, be arrested, be interviewed, and be bailed.

 

[Planigale]

What happens everywhere else in the world is of no consequence whatsoever. You can bleat and moan and whine all you like about how terribly unfair it is that Maxwell's white privilege and entitlement carries no weight in prison under US Federal jurisdiction which is, after all, the country where she committed the criminal offences she has been charged with.



The judge(s) in five bail hearings disagree.



Wrong, she disappeared to another country to avoid being subpoenaed.

Like any other common criminal, she thought she could outsmart the FBI and would not be caught. The fact that she did not try to flee in the past means nothing. The circumstances have changed now - she faces charges that could land her in prison for decades. That she was not a flight risk previously does not mean she not a flight risk now.



Leopards and spots.



Poppycock. You're trying to minimize what she has done... just like Vixen
She was hiding from the FBI because she wanted to avoid prosecution - running and hiding from the law evinces a consciousness of guilt.

You lie again.

Why do you have to constantly bully me and not address the facts?

OK you win! I am not going to put up with your constant ad feminem attacks on me claiming I am defending rape or pedophilia when I have expressly said I am not. You win.

I hope you are proud of yourself. You said your daughter was assaulted as a teen ager I cannot pretend to know how you feel as a father but I do have some idea how your daughter would feel if some old man taunted her the way you do me. Posters here are real people. You can't say you haven't been asked not to attack me. But fine you win. I give up it is not worth the hurt you cause.

 

[The Common Potato]

Is there any corroborative evidence beyond many people making similar claims? I think that's what Vixen and Planigale are getting at. Also, I wouldn't trust US law enforcement / prosecutors to be honest, with a bargepole.

 

[Belz...]

Why do you have to constantly bully me and not address the facts?

Now, now. Let's not be overly dramatic, here. It's nothing like bullying.

Also, what's an:

ad feminem attack

?

 

[smartcooky]

You lie again.

No, I have an opinion.

You said: "There may be other explanations for her being 'in hiding'."

This is minimizing, any way you slice it. It is inferring that she has innocent reasons rather than her actual, guilty reasons (which are that she knew perfectly well the FBI were looking for her to file criminal charges and was therefore was a fugitive from justice).

Anything or anyone who tries to infer that what Maxwell has done is not really a serious offence, its minimizing that offence, and directly insulting those who have suffered the kind of torment that her victims have suffered. I will call out anyone who does this... including you.

Why do you have to constantly bully me and not address the facts?

I have addressed the facts... time and time and time and time again. You just refuse to accept them.

FACT: Maxwell has been accused by multiple victims of rape and sex trafficking

FACT: When she realised the FBI were looking for her to file charges, she went on the run and into hiding

FACT: This is not the first time she has made herself unavailable when she was subject to legal processes, including leaving the country to avoid same. She has a well-worn track record of doing this.

FACT: She has made multiple attempts to hide her bank accounts and finances. For all intents and purposes she has unlimited financial resources.

FACT: She has three passports in different nationalities, including one to a country that never extradites its citizens to other countries.

FACT: She has a network of very powerful and influential people to help her

All of the above makes her the very definition of an extreme flight risk. The problem I have with you is that you reject or hand-wave away the facts and substitute your own cockamamy minimalism and excuses.

The 'tried to run' according to the FBI is that she went into another room, when the FBI were outside looking in through a window, so had not been able to identify themselves to her, nor show her a warrant

Of course, you very conventionality fail to address the first part of what jimbob said...

"The fact that she tried to evade arrest and even tried to run when she was found...."

Is there any corroborative evidence beyond many people making similar claims? I think that's what Vixen and Planigale are getting at. Also, I wouldn't trust US law enforcement / prosecutors to be honest, with a bargepole.

Usually, multiple people making the same claims, especially from different time periods IS corroborative evidence - the various claimants corroborate each other's stories, and the fact that the claims come from different times as well shows a pattern of behaviour.

If you are really interested, you should read her 2016 deposition (its over 460 pages long (I have read the whole thing). You will see what a deceptive, lying piece of **** this woman is, and you will come to fully understand why she and her lawyers fought hard to prevent it being made public.

 

[gabeygoat]

What the hell PR firm is Vixen even referring to? What would be their goal and for what reason?



Also, in reference to previous posts by Vixen, I must register my disgust at the idea that being rich and privileged means someone should be treated more favourably than someone who had a hard life

 

[Matthew Best]

You lie again.

Why do you have to constantly bully me and not address the facts?

Hold on a minute. Let's recap.

You said:

As said if she had wanted to flee she could have gone to France before all this happened. France would not have extradited her, and the traditional French view of the sort of activities she is accused of would have been a gallic shrug of shoulder and comment on anglo-saxon prudity.

Then, when someone responded to this, you said:

I have never said anything about what the French judicial view of sex crimes is.

After that you disappeared from the thread for a couple of weeks, but now return with:

I think there is a great deal of evidence that the judicial system in France has taken an approach to sexual exploitation of women and children and a frankly astonishing attitude towards incest that is not reflected in most countries.

I can't be the only one confused here. You have posted two comments about the French judicial view of sex crimes, but in between those two comments, you denied ever saying anything about the French judicial view of sex crimes. And now you accuse other people of lying. It certainly makes for a conversation that's difficult to make sense of.