Ghislaine Maxwell

[smartcooky]

Not when those comments would keep the defendant from getting a fair trial.

The right to free speech doesn't count when it violates the rights of someone else.

Give me an example of this - show me where any US Federal Court has forbidden the press from, or sanctioned any media outlet for, broadcasting facts relating to a defendant or a court case in progress, where it wasn't related to government classified material or slander/libel.

I'll save you some Google time... it has never happened.

 

[Bob001]

Give me an example of this - show me where any US Federal Court has forbidden the press from, or sanctioned any media outlet for, broadcasting facts relating to a defendant or a court case in progress, where it wasn't related to government classified material or slander/libel.

I'll save you some Google time... it has never happened.

It couldn't happen in a state court either. The Constitution applies to everybody.

 

[smartcooky]

It couldn't happen in a state court either. The Constitution applies to everybody.

I was just sticking to the Federal Court since that is the relevant jurisdiction, but yes, I agree. No state court can muzzle the press.

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Give me an example of this - show me where any US Federal Court has forbidden the press from, or sanctioned any media outlet for, broadcasting facts relating to a defendant or a court case in progress, where it wasn't related to government classified material or slander/libel.

I'll save you some Google time... it has never happened.

A recent case would be the Arbery trial where the court barred anyone from releasing any information about jurors. Not at all unusual. But that may be stretching what you mean by "facts" related to a court case.

I looked at the document Darat provided, but not carefully. It seems to be related to courts protecting the identify of certain victims and things of that nature. US courts obviously do that as well. I am not finding anything related to not being able to report information about an ongoing criminal trial.

 

[smartcooky]

A recent case would be the Arbery trial where the court barred anyone from releasing any information about jurors. Not at all unusual. But that may be stretching what you mean by "facts" related to a court case.

That is not what we are talking about, that is just routine; jurors cannot be identified, or if there are cameras in the court, they can't show the jurors


Go back and read Skeptical Greg's premise.

 

[Bob001]

A recent case would be the Arbery trial where the court barred anyone from releasing any information about jurors. Not at all unusual. But that may be stretching what you mean by "facts" related to a court case.
....

The prohibition, probably pretty routine, would apply to the lawyers and court employees. But it's inconceivable that a media outlet could be prevented from publishing information it has obtained from someone else, or punished after the fact beyond maybe being banned from the courtroom for the rest of the trial. The courts just don't have any authority over the press.

 

[zooterkin]

Does anyone happen to know offhand if it's similar in UK law or French law? I wouldn't be surprised if it is.

I believe that laws against sex tourism were introduced in the UK (as part of a Europe-wide agreement, I think) which means that people can be prosecuted in the UK for having sex with people who are deemed underage in the UK even if that is legal where the activity happened. No need for trafficking to be involved.

I'm a little vague because I'm not sure of the exact current status of the legislation, but it was talked about during the Gary Glitter case, for example.

 

[Vixen]

The prosecution case seemed pretty muted. Where were all these powerful rich influential men Maxwell was supposedly supplying girls to? What happened to all the underage sex orgies? Why wasn't Giuffre testifying about her being supposedly trafficked to London by Maxwell to have sex with Prince Andrew? What happened to all the alleged filming, extortion and blackmail claims?

Annie Farmer described how she was given air flight tickets by Epstein. She was at the movies with Epstein and he squeezed her hand. How does this relate to Maxwell?

What am I missing?

 

[abaddon]

The prosecution case seemed pretty muted. Where were all these powerful rich influential men Maxwell was supposedly supplying girls to? What happened to all the underage sex orgies? Why wasn't Giuffre testifying about her being supposedly trafficked to London by Maxwell to have sex with Prince Andrew? What happened to all the alleged filming, extortion and blackmail claims?

Annie Farmer described how she was given air flight tickets by Epstein. She was at the movies with Epstein and he squeezed her hand. How does this relate to Maxwell?

What am I missing?

The ability to instruct judge, jury, witnesses, victims as to what they really believe. That is what you want, what you really really want, right? After all, trash TV and media informs everyone of "da trooth" right?

 

[smartcooky]

The prosecution case seemed pretty muted.

I didn't think so. The last witness to testify was pretty devastating for Maxwell.

Where were all these powerful rich influential men Maxwell was supposedly supplying girls to?

Their appearance wasn't required as it was not relevant to the case. However the jury was shown Epstein's black book

What happened to all the underage sex orgies? what happened to all the alleged filming, extortion and blackmail claims?

What underage sex orgies would those be? What filming and blackmail would that be?

Oh wait, of course, I forgot. Your primary sources of information are the Daily Mail and other assorted trashy gutter press.

Why wasn't Giuffre testifying about her being supposedly trafficked to London by Maxwell to have sex with Prince Andrew?

Was she called to testify?

Annie Farmer described how she was given air flight tickets by Epstein. She was at the movies with Epstein and he squeezed her hand. How does this relate to Maxwell?

If you think that's all she testified to then you haven't been paying attention

https://nypost.com/2021/12/10/ghislaine-maxwell-accuser-annie-farmer-details-nude-massage/

What am I missing?

Just about everything I would say.
.
.

 

[Vixen]

I didn't think so. The last witness to testify was pretty devastating for Maxwell.



Their appearance wasn't required as it was not relevant to the case. However the jury was shown Epstein's black book




What underage sex orgies would those be? What filming and blackmail would that be?

Oh wait, of course, I forgot. Your primary sources of information are the Daily Mail and other assorted trashy gutter press.



Was she called to testify?



If you think that's all she testified to then you haven't been paying attention

https://nypost.com/2021/12/10/ghislaine-maxwell-accuser-annie-farmer-details-nude-massage/



Just about everything I would say.
.
.

But didn't she change her story? She originally said she only took off her bra.

It seems obvious Maxwell's wealth was founded on ill-gotten gains, possibly running a sex empire for the rich and famous via Epstein and Les Wexner, but none of that has been dealt with in this trial. Maxwell had a helicopter licence. Why has no-one testified she literally transported teenage girls across to these islands, where they became a captive audience? There was little to nothing about the sex pyramid scheme by which recruited females were tasked with recruiting their schoolmates.

The renowned New York prosecutors don't seem to have presented a watertight case ISTM.

 

[Bob001]

......
It seems obvious Maxwell's wealth was founded on ill-gotten gains, possibly running a sex empire for the rich and famous via Epstein and Les Wexner, but none of that has been dealt with in this trial.
.....

Maxwell's wealth comes from her father, late media magnate/crook Robert Maxwell. She's not on trial for every single thing she may ever done wrong. A telephone book list of charges would be confusing to the jury and make the prosecution look desperate. The prosecution has presented compelling testimony from specific victims about the specific acts that injured them. That should be enough.

 

[Vixen]

Maxwell's wealth comes from her father, late media magnate/crook Robert Maxwell. She's not on trial for every single thing she may ever done wrong. A telephone book list of charges would be confusing to the jury and make the prosecution look desperate. The prosecution has presented compelling testimony from specific victims about the specific acts that injured them. That should be enough.

From what I understand coming out of the trial is that she had an £80,000 pa income coming from a trust fund. Robert Maxwell stole a huge amount of money, and this would have been sequestered (what the authorities knew of it), plus there were nine children as heirs. Whilst £80K pa as a young adult is nice without having to lift a finger for it, her real wealth seems to have been a series of bank transfers directly from Epstein, worth far more than that, plus she sold a couple of multi-million pound homes, which still doesn't add up to what she has in the bank.


I can only imagine that half the trial must have been in camera as I can see nothing that is enough to incriminate her, other than being present in Epstein's home, which she shared.

 

[smartcooky]

But didn't she change her story? She originally said she only took off her bra.

Or it could have been that she simply didn't want to admit to anything more because she was embarrassed and traumatised by what happened.

Or it could have been that, like almost all witness victims who have been traumatised, she remembered more as she was recounting what happened to them.

 

[abaddon]

Or it could have been that she simply didn't want to admit to anything more because she was embarrassed and traumatised by what happened.

Or it could have been that, like almost all witness victims who have been traumatised, she remembered more as she was recounting what happened to them.

Interesting point. Just how comfortable would you be with whatever intimate details of your exact activities in sex with whatever partner you have? That would bother me, probably you and certainly our protagonist.

How much worse would it be for a trafficked rape victim?

 

[Bob001]

.....
I can only imagine that half the trial must have been in camera as I can see nothing that is enough to incriminate her, other than being present in Epstein's home, which she shared.

So you reject all of the evidence and all of the testimony?

 

[Vixen]

Or it could have been that she simply didn't want to admit to anything more because she was embarrassed and traumatised by what happened.

Or it could have been that, like almost all witness victims who have been traumatised, she remembered more as she was recounting what happened to them.

Fair point. However, a professional masseuse (as op[posed to a sex worker) does expect you to remove clothes and bra straps and what have you. It is quite normal for a back massage. How can you have a back massage with your bra straps in the way?


OK, so Annie Farmer interpreted it as a creepy lesbian encounter although she said Maxwell only touched the upper part of her chest. She said Epstein 'might' have been watching.


This is all fine in the context of a newspaper interview but in a court of law, saying Epstein 'might' have been watching cannot be considered proof that he was watching. In addition, saying you only took your bra off in a magazine interview and then later in court saying you were instructed to strip completely does raise an element of doubt that you remembered correctly and are now saying that because you are eager to have Maxwell convicted.

Farmer interpreted a hand squeeze as sexual abuse but by that criteria half the male population would be in jail. It was Epstein who was doing it, not Maxwell.

 

[Vixen]

So you reject all of the evidence and all of the testimony?

If Maxwell trafficked minors, then why has no-one testified that she did transport them? So far, it appears Epstein was the one who bought the air flight tickets and his private pilot who flew them about.

Giuffre has made much of being trafficked as a minor to service Prince Andrew. It should be easily provable Maxwell set it up. Yet she hasn't appeared in court to testify this damning evidence.

 

[angrysoba]

I was just sticking to the Federal Court since that is the relevant jurisdiction, but yes, I agree. No state court can muzzle the press.

I have it on good authority that the New World Order is suppressing the Maxwell Trial to save Hillary Clinton from something or another. Also Alex Jones is selling super reliable supplements!

 

[Bob001]

If Maxwell trafficked minors, then why has no-one testified that she did transport them? So far, it appears Epstein was the one who bought the air flight tickets and his private pilot who flew them about.
.....

You seem to be under the impression that "trafficking" means physically transporting someone. That's not what the feds say:

Sex trafficking is defined by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 as “the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, obtaining, patronizing, or soliciting of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act.” It involves the use of force, fraud, or coercion to make an adult engage in commercial sex acts. However, any commercial sexual activity with a minor, even without force, fraud, or coercion, is considered trafficking.

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/trafficking.html

If Maxwell induced or persuaded a minor to engage in any sexual activity anytime anyplace with anyone for compensation, she is guilty. And if she engaged in force, fraud or coercion against anyone of any age, she's also guilty.