Ghislaine Maxwell

[Vixen]

I think you mean 2015/2016, yes?




If you knew the slightest thing at all about abused children and teenagers, you would know that it can be years, even decades before they come to terms with what happened to them... some never do, some even off themselves because they were simply unable to cope. Why is it do you think, that so many victims of priests come forward to tell their stories when they are in their twenties, thirties, forties, in some cases, even in their fifties?

It can often be a trigger in their lives that prompts them to come forward.. a news story about the kind of abuse they suffered.. the death of the abuser, a story about another person abused by the same abuser, getting married, having their first child, the death of a partner or other loved one.

Didn't they teach you any of this in "psychology school"

NOTE: ...and no, I don't give a fat rat's arse that you don't think she was a child when it happened. It is a cold, hard, undeniable fact she was legally a child, whatever your warped and disgusting worldview leads you to believe.

Giuffre's trump card is that she was a few months shy of age of consent. This is not the same as someone subjected to classic child abuse or the child grooming gangs in northern England recently. The question is, did Maxwell and Epstein really target children?

We should be careful abut having a snobbish attitude to sex work. When I was a teenager I was a 'girlyswot', spending all my time studying for one set of exams after another, groomed by my school to sit ten O-Levels (GCSEs), interspersed with ballet lessons, swimming, camping, hockey, netball. I never had underage sex nor have I ever gone home with some pervert who stopped me in the street. Whilst people like myself and many on this list are lucky they had the ability tp qualify for well-paid jobs, that still leaves about 80% of the population stuck in low paid work, with little chance of social mobility. Why shouldn't such a person choose sex work, or trading on their looks and body to earn a good living, for example, football 'wives and girl friends', fashion models, porn stars? You can't snobbishly assume that sex workers must have been forced into doing it, or 'trafficked'; for some it is a free choice. Let's not automatically assume torture was involved.

 

[smartcooky]

Giuffre's trump card is that she was a few months shy of age of consent.

<irrelevant BS snipped

The fact that you characterize her age as a "trump card" tells me everything I need to know about you.

I find your whole stand in this issue to be vile and disgusting, and I am pretty certain I am not alone here in that opinion.

 

[Vixen]

The fact that you characterize her age as a "trump card" tells me everything I need to know about you.

I find your whole stand in this issue to be vile and disgusting, and I am pretty certain I am not alone here in that opinion.

You don't think blackmail is vile and disgusting? Say you were a sex worker, and you use a photo of yourself and Prince Andrew to profit? You don't know, this might be the alternative scenario.

 

[smartcooky]

You don't think blackmail is vile and disgusting? Say you were a sex worker, and you use a photo of yourself and Prince Andrew to profit? You don't know, this might be the alternative scenario.

Don't try that crap with me. You bloody well know what I am talking about

You are defending Maxwell, a serial sex trafficker, and victim-blaming her accusers. That is what I find disgusting!

 

[carlitos]

It's a vile act, and one that I'm removing from my life. Good luck all.

 

[Vixen]

Accountancy school, surely? Or Scientific forensic school, was it? Or was it language school? Or law school? Or was it medicine? Perhaps when vixen was a well known astronaut?

Care to explain what you mean by this and what relevance it has to the topic? Can't tolerate a differing opinion from yourself?

Please provide a citation for the highlighted or we can presume you are just lying.

 

[Vixen]

Don't try that crap with me. You bloody well know what I am talking about

You are defending Maxwell, a serial sex trafficker, and victim-blaming her accusers. That is what I find disgusting!

You just cannot accept that in a trial there are two sides to the issue. All you have heard are endless commercially produced 'documentaries' claiming the defence's side of the matter and you believe that is enough to label someone guilty as charged without trial.

 

[jimbob]

You just cannot accept that in a trial there are two sides to the issue. All you have heard are endless commercially produced 'documentaries' claiming the defence's side of the matter and you believe that is enough to label someone guilty as charged without trial.

You don't seem to be arguing that she didn't commit those crimes, you seem to be arguing that they're technically not that serious.

 

[smartcooky]

Care to explain what you mean by this and what relevance it has to the topic? Can't tolerate a differing opinion from yourself?

Please provide a citation for the highlighted or we can presume you are just lying.

Let me introduce you a concept you are probably unaware of.. its called "taking the mickey".

You set yourself up for it... walked into a trap your own making, so to speak, in post#822

You just cannot accept that in a trial there are two sides to the issue.

Nope, I am fully aware of the fact that there are two sides in a trial, and I accept that as true.

Your problem is that neither side is going to be arguing the disgusting, unmitigated crap you have been been spewing in this thread. If Maxwell's lawyers try to go with your "14 - 17 year old girls are only technically under age and they knew what they were doing" bollocks, they will put themselves offside with the jury quick-smart

All you have heard are endless commercially produced 'documentaries' claiming the defence's side of the matter and you believe that is enough to label someone guilty as charged without trial.

In fact, I haven't watched a single documentary on Epstein/Maxwell. Most of the news I have read has been US news coverage (CNN, NBC, MSNBC), because the story is pretty much under the radar in the news cycle in this country. Most Kiwis would never have herd of Epstein before the story broke, and most probably still wouldn't know who he was now.

Besides which, I already told you where most of my information comes from.

• 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)*

 

[Vixen]

You don't seem to be arguing that she didn't commit those crimes, you seem to be arguing that they're technically not that serious.

Maxwell is only being charged with trafficking minors*. What about all the others...?

If, out of all the women procured by Maxwell (allegedly), Epstein and Giuffre (who admits it), there were hundreds and only four have come forward as being 'a minor' at the time, then they can't have been targetting children. I don't know about the USA but in the UK a guy only needs to claim he thought the woman was of the age of consent and that is an acceptable legal point.

 

[Belz...]

It used to be the case women were chattels of their husbands or if unmarried property of their father.

Yes, the law says a 17-year-old in most US states are technically chattels of their parents or guardians.

That is not the same as a 17-year-old voluntarily going to many parties time and again to have a good time and enjoy having sex with some guy or gal he or she met there. Yes, it is against the law but it is NOT the same as violent rape , being beaten up, abducted and forced into slavery, starved and kept in a room, forced to entertain up to fifty men a day. THAT is sex slavery.

This response is completely unrelated to the post you were responding to.

You have not challenged my point on the definition of "child". Shall I consider your objection to my use of it retracted?

 

[Vixen]

Let me introduce you a concept you are probably unaware of.. its called "taking the mickey".

You set yourself up for it... walked into a trap your own making, so to speak, in post#822



Nope, I am fully aware of the fact that there are two sides in a trial, and I accept that as true.

Your problem is that neither side is going to be arguing the disgusting, unmitigated crap you have been been spewing in this thread. If Maxwell's lawyers try to go with your "14 - 17 year old girls are only technically under age and they knew what they were doing" bollocks, they will put themselves offside with the jury quick-smart



In fact, I haven't watched a single documentary on Epstein/Maxwell. Most of the news I have read has been US news coverage (CNN, NBC, MSNBC), because the story is pretty much under the radar in the news cycle in this country. Most Kiwis would never have herd of Epstein before the story broke, and most probably still wouldn't know who he was now.

Besides which, I already told you where most of my information comes from.

• 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)*

It's great you've read the statements of Maxwell victims. Are you sure you are not mixing them up with Epstein's victims? Maxwell has not been told who these four victims are, so perhaps you can tell us all since you ahve privileged information about this.

As an example of the clever PR, I was watching a documentary supposedly about Maxwell and a woman claiming to be her victim actually described a rape by Epstein, whilst the producer kept fading Maxwell's face in and out during the most lurid bits, together with some creepy music in the background. However, the discerning viewer would have noticed that this victim was aged 39 in 2019, so would have been 21 as of the date she says it happened (not a minor), yet the narrator states, 'Most of Epstein's victims were under 18, some under 16', which is misinformation. The narrator also describes her as a fifteen-year-old [so where were the parents]. The victim describes how Epstein invited her to the Zorro ranch in New Mexico for a student seminar. She arrived to find she was the only person there.. Epstein crept into her bed at night. Maxwell was not present when she describes the rape, pulling faces, and twisting her face in disgust - and it's clear she has been told to 'ham it up' by the producer. She received compensation from the Epstein victims fund, after his death, as did Giuffre and others: a pretty penny, I am sure. Her accusation against Maxwell? Maxwell took her shopping and was nice to her, and this translates into <fx theme from twilight zone> 'Maxwell was grooming me'. Oh, please!

Likewise, Giuffre, she was a professional sex worker, and took the profession seriously. She received over half a million directly from Epstein to pay her off. She has made a lot of money out of this. I agree she had a horrible, deprived and deeply sad childhood and I am glad that she is now happy with a family of her own and has turned her life around. But the fact is, Maxwell had nothing to do with her childhood and Giuffre was a working sex worker before she even met Maxwell. (Psst, if some strange guy offers you $200 for a quick massage, he is buying sex, love. [At least in these northern climes, a masseuse is a genuine and respected profession, unlike all the massage parlours in London, which are regularly raided by the police as dens of sin.]

Truth is, the vast majority of women in the UK who suffer rape, sexual assault and violence very rarely even see their attacker in court. Those fourteen-year-old girls in Leeds who were groomed by Asian gangs and passed around, likely received no more than a small sum from the crime victims fund. None have found fame and fortune and star in their own Netflix series.

Most child abuse cases are people the child knows, often a close relative. No way is that equivalent to professional party girls who found themselves the victim of rape by Epstein (and rape is a hazard of being a sex worker).

 

[Vixen]

This response is completely unrelated to the post you were responding to.

You have not challenged my point on the definition of "child". Shall I consider your objection to my use of it retracted?

Remind me what it is you wish to debate.

 

[Belz...]

Remind me what it is you wish to debate.

Don't play that game with me. You were wrong about the word in question. Just admit it, and the "debate" you allude to will be over.

 

[jimbob]

Maxwell is only being charged with trafficking minors*. What about all the others...?

Apart from TRAFFICKING CHILDREN FOR SEX she was OK?

I suspect not, based on other credible accusations, but it's like a sick punchline to that old joke

" Do they call you that ....but you **** ONE goat..."

"She arranged for scores of vulnerable women to be abused and all anyone bothers about is the handful of times she's being accused of trafficking children."

 

[Reformed Offlian]

Apart from TRAFFICKING CHILDREN FOR SEX she was OK?

I suspect not, based on other credible accusations, but it's like a sick punchline to that old joke

" Do they call you that ....but you **** ONE goat..."

I thought you were going to go with: "Yes, but apart from that, how did you like the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"

 

[smartcooky]

It's great you've read the statements of Maxwell victims. Are you sure you are not mixing them up with Epstein's victims? Maxwell has not been told who these four victims are, so perhaps you can tell us all since you have privileged information about this.

The statements I have read include both Epstein and Maxwell in the accusations, so in those cases one is as good as the other. They include statements by Victoria Guiffre, Annie Farmer, Maria Farmer and others

As an example of the clever PR, I was watching a documentary supposedly about Maxwell and a woman claiming to be her victim actually described a rape by Epstein, whilst the producer kept fading Maxwell's face in and out during the most lurid bits, together with some creepy music in the background. However, the discerning viewer would have noticed that this victim was aged 39 in 2019, so would have been 21 as of the date she says it happened (not a minor), yet the narrator states, 'Most of Epstein's victims were under 18, some under 16', which is misinformation. The narrator also describes her as a fifteen-year-old [so where were the parents]. The victim describes how Epstein invited her to the Zorro ranch in New Mexico for a student seminar. She arrived to find she was the only person there.. Epstein crept into her bed at night. Maxwell was not present when she describes the rape, pulling faces, and twisting her face in disgust - and it's clear she has been told to 'ham it up' by the producer. She received compensation from the Epstein victims fund, after his death, as did Giuffre and others: a pretty penny, I am sure. Her accusation against Maxwell? Maxwell took her shopping and was nice to her, and this translates into <fx theme from twilight zone> 'Maxwell was grooming me'. Oh, please!

Likewise, Giuffre, she was a professional sex worker, and took the profession seriously. She received over half a million directly from Epstein to pay her off. She has made a lot of money out of this. I agree she had a horrible, deprived and deeply sad childhood and I am glad that she is now happy with a family of her own and has turned her life around. But the fact is, Maxwell had nothing to do with her childhood and Giuffre was a working sex worker before she even met Maxwell. (Psst, if some strange guy offers you $200 for a quick massage, he is buying sex, love. [At least in these northern climes, a masseuse is a genuine and respected profession, unlike all the massage parlours in London, which are regularly raided by the police as dens of sin.]

Truth is, the vast majority of women in the UK who suffer rape, sexual assault and violence very rarely even see their attacker in court. Those fourteen-year-old girls in Leeds who were groomed by Asian gangs and passed around, likely received no more than a small sum from the crime victims fund. None have found fame and fortune and star in their own Netflix series.

Most child abuse cases are people the child knows, often a close relative. No way is that equivalent to professional party girls who found themselves the victim of rape by Epstein (and rape is a hazard of being a sex worker).

All irrelevant since I told you where I get my information from.

I deal in facts, which I get from the previously listed sources that deal in facts.

You're obviously someone who has a problem with how things are portrayed in documentaries... and them you watch them anyway

 

[Bob001]

....
No way is that equivalent to professional party girls who found themselves the victim of rape by Epstein (and rape is a hazard of being a sex worker).

WTF? Nobody has said that the Epstein/Maxwell victims, whatever their ages, are "professional sex workers." And if sex workers are especially vulnerable to sex crimes, do you think it's okay? Do you think they agree to it or deserve it? Armed robbery is a hazard for taxi drivers and 7-11 clerks; do they deserve it?

You're not only out on a limb, but you're busy sawing.

 

[Vixen]

Apart from TRAFFICKING CHILDREN FOR SEX she was OK?

I suspect not, based on other credible accusations, but it's like a sick punchline to that old joke

" Do they call you that ....but you **** ONE goat..."

"She arranged for scores of vulnerable women to be abused and all anyone bothers about is the handful of times she's being accused of trafficking children."

That is not what I said. See my allusion to the drunk driver who mowed down six or seven people, crashed into a lamp post and gave police a 140kph chase...and was charged with 'failing to indicate'.

IOW the 'core crime' in the eyes of the prosecutor is that four of the hundreds of procured women is that 'some were technically underage, otherwise, it's fine.'

 

[Vixen]

WTF? Nobody has said that the Epstein/Maxwell victims, whatever their ages, are "professional sex workers." And if sex workers are especially vulnerable to sex crimes, do you think it's okay? Do you think they agree to it or deserve it? Armed robbery is a hazard for taxi drivers and 7-11 clerks; do they deserve it?

You're not only out on a limb, but you're busy sawing.

I did not say it was OK. I was stating a fact, in the same way I might say 'Paris is the capital of France'. Prostitution is extremely dangerous, especially for the street prostitutes. Surveys show that many, many of them have clients who beat them up, refuse to pay and/or commit various atrocities. I did not make any value judgement about anybody 'deserving' it.

Stop faking hysteria and outrage.