The media has already determined they’re guilty...
Of course the jury will be influenced by what the media has run..
The judge will probably give out an overly harsh sentence just to satisfy the media’s appetite for revenge.
That’s the mainstream media and the social media vigilante groups that seem to scare governments and anyone who speaks out with a different point of view.

The courts then feel obliged to go along with it to appease the media,
there’s no chance of a fair hearing as it’s already been decided..

Events get exaggerated, a little white lie here and a little white lie there, numbers come down a peg or two, everything gets dressed up to enlarge the story, make things look totally wicked and evil.
They’ll use language when describing things that really makes the accused sound like a truly horrible, nasty and dangerous person to society.

Bail is refused so then the accused won’t have access to materials to prove their innocence as they’re stuck inside a tiny cell.

Meanwhile the media bandwagon is in full swing carrying out the guilty verdict on the front pages and demanding the judge handout a very heavy onerous sentence.

You’re guilty unless or until you’re proved afterwards of being innocent and that may take years and years of appeals and retrials.. (at huge expense..)

What a world we live in..

Spot on Sausage!

Great post, Little Sausage. I think it's a real concern that her defence may be undermined by her being in jail, especially with extra restrictions due to covid.

Another quite interesting article. I wonder if any attempt by her to protect her assets from gold diggers is going to be portrayed by the prosecution as an attempt to hide money obtained from illegal activities.

Mystery of Ghislaine Maxwell’s Wealth Hangs Over Jeffrey Epstein Sex-Abuse Case

such utter claptrap on here repeating tabloid sensationalism that may not have a single thread of truth in it.

There is not an iota of proof presented that Maxwell filmed Epstein guests who may have encountered the teen hookers (who come accross as a vicious nasty mob especially the Andrew one who is going for a second bout of compensation. Hookers indeed).

What's this utter claptrap about her being a French citizen? Does that mean any French person arrested in the USA will unfairly be denied bail because of their countries constitution? I thought all suspects were to be treated equally (yeh I know)

What's this balderdash being perpetuated that she was somehow "on the run". Absolute crap- the only people she was running from was the media.

Not one single law enforcement body in the USA had issued an arrest warrant until the FBI struck.

A year in jail before trial? Absolutely shameful and unjust and against all principles of "swift justice"

Personally I'm perplexed why she didn't high foot to France the minute the vile media campaign began. Maybe she's not too bright. Surely she could have seen she was being set-up to step in for Epstein.

(1) A lawyer for Ghislaine Maxwell has sought a gag order for prosecutors, FBI agents and lawyers for accusers to prevent them from making statements about the case outside court or in legal filings because of public comments by the acting US attorney, the head of New York's FBI office and lawyers for accusers which he thinks have been prejudicial to her obtaining a fair trial (e.g. "one of the villains in this investigation", "slithered away"), but the judge has denied his request.

Judge denies gag order request by Ghislaine Maxwell in Jeffrey Epstein sex crimes case

I was also surprised at the "slithered away" comment. I'd have thought the FBI would have reported things dispassionately.

(2) This is also in the news.

Judge to rule on unsealing records in defamation case against Ghislaine Maxwell

Wonder which way it will go. I suspect if they do unseal them, the media will descend like a shoal of piranhas and any chances of a fair trial will be completely annihilated.

(3) This is the lawyer representing a number of accusers, including Virginia Roberts Giuffre:

David Boies’s Fall From Grace

Boies’s firm soldiers on and continues to rake in money by the barrel-load. Yet cracks in its once-burnished veneer are now visible to the naked eye. ... Many aspiring litigators, myself included, were once fans, following his high-profile cases with a keen interest and holding him up as a paragon of ethics and savvy. But, as has been revealed over the course of a single, skinny year, that favorable view of Boies was woefully, almost tragically, misplaced.

The dripfeed of documents and information has begun

GM was in court before - involving paper trails and evidence, in the public domain

With connections - to politics (US) and royalty (UK) - she's every newsreporter's dream


Slowly - famous people will be implicated

As well as those earning from gossip

For the next year, at least

Indeed, Barney. They've decided to release the documents.

Epstein floodgates open as judge rules explosive docs detailing Ghislaine Maxwell's sex life can be UNSEALED in Virginia Giuffre's defamation case within a week

Jo wrote:
(1) A lawyer for Ghislaine Maxwell has sought a gag order for prosecutors, FBI agents and lawyers for accusers to prevent them from making statements about the case outside court or in legal filings because of public comments by the acting US attorney, the head of New York's FBI office and lawyers for accusers which he thinks have been prejudicial to her obtaining a fair trial (e.g. "one of the villains in this investigation", "slithered away"), but the judge has denied his request.

Judge denies gag order request by Ghislaine Maxwell in Jeffrey Epstein sex crimes case

I was also surprised at the "slithered away" comment. I'd have thought the FBI would have reported things dispassionately.

(2) This is also in the news.

Judge to rule on unsealing records in defamation case against Ghislaine Maxwell

Wonder which way it will go. I suspect if they do unseal them, the media will descend like a shoal of piranhas and any chances of a fair trial will be completely annihilated.

(3) This is the lawyer representing a number of accusers, including Virginia Roberts Giuffre:

David Boies’s Fall From Grace

Boies’s firm soldiers on and continues to rake in money by the barrel-load. Yet cracks in its once-burnished veneer are now visible to the naked eye. ... Many aspiring litigators, myself included, were once fans, following his high-profile cases with a keen interest and holding him up as a paragon of ethics and savvy. But, as has been revealed over the course of a single, skinny year, that favorable view of Boies was woefully, almost tragically, misplaced.

sounds like a beat up to me.

These involve the Andrew accuser who lives in Australia.

She's never shut since day one (with her lawyer penning a trashy book full of unproved claims)

Can't be anything more substantial to be exposed.

I still say she's heading for a big fall.

The courtroom sketch depicts GM with villian-style eyebrows.

www.buzzfeed.com/lorynbrantz/this-is-wha...-like-without-makeup

I understood from a 60 Minutes documentary on YouTube that Virginia Roberts Giuffre's lawyer was David Boies but he no longer seems to be representing her in the defamation suit with Alan Dershowitz. A lawyer called Brad Edwards has written a book about the case ("Relentless Pursuit: My Fight for the Victims of Jeffrey Epstein"). He's apparently representing over 50 Epstein accusers. They're both named here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Roberts_G...and_related_lawsuits

The media seems to be chasing after this woman's stories and with them all behind her, lapping it up and not asking probing questions, she certainly seems to be riding high at the moment.

Tears of joy from Epstein’s Aussie victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre as FBI finally catches Maxwell

md wrote:
The courtroom sketch depicts GM with villian-style eyebrows.

www.buzzfeed.com/lorynbrantz/this-is-wha...-like-without-makeup
You're right! Well spotted.

A recent article by Alan Dershowitz on the woman who seems to have been the first to make sexual assault allegations against Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell:

Key Witness in Epstein Case Made Anti-Semitic Claims

I haven't listened to them but suspect that he's referring to interviews she gave on YouTube to someone called Whitney Webb. Judging from her Twitter account, Webb appears to be a conspiracy theorist.

Jo wrote:
I understood from a 60 Minutes documentary on YouTube that Virginia Roberts Giuffre's lawyer was David Boies but he no longer seems to be representing her in the defamation suit with Alan Dershowitz. A lawyer called Brad Edwards has written a book about the case ("Relentless Pursuit: My Fight for the Victims of Jeffrey Epstein"). He's apparently representing over 50 Epstein accusers. They're both named here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Roberts_G...and_related_lawsuits

The media seems to be chasing after this woman's stories and with them all behind her, lapping it up and not asking probing questions, she certainly seems to be riding high at the moment.

Tears of joy from Epstein’s Aussie victim Virginia Roberts Giuffre as FBI finally catches Maxwell

only 50?

There will be heaps more before the day ends.

Now a "former model" ( actress on the mattress?) has recovered memories.

All we need is a good looking male masseur to say he was an Epstein victim to take the whole thing into a new stratosphere.

Haha, yes, maybe there's a Sven out there biding their time.

I saw a comment in a news video on YouTube from one of the lawyers (can't remember her name, long blonde hair) who was saying she thought there were thousands of victims. Perhaps the number of victims will expand to fill the size of Epstein's estate.

I think this must be the only place on the internet where the possibility of Ghislaine Maxwell being falsely accused is being contemplated. I was looking at comments under news articles about her on Facebook the other day and they were overwhelmingly, in fact 100% negative. I could not see a single one that was in any way doubting that she's guilty, not even any concession to the idea that she's innocent until proven guilty. If the potential jurors aren't able to escape the media coverage and social media commentary, it's hard to see how she can get a fair trial.

Wonder which way this will go. Interesting that accusers have been yacking on a public forum (exchanging stories and building up their own?).

‘Alarming’ that Ghislaine Maxwell may publicize Jeffrey Epstein victims: prosecutors

Some witnesses in the criminal case against Jeffrey Epstein’s former girlfriend may face harassment and intimidation and could be reluctant to co-operate with the government if defence lawyers are allowed to discuss them publicly, prosecutors said Tuesday.

Prosecutors asked a Manhattan federal court judge to block lawyers for British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell from publicly identifying women who have already spoken about the financier or Ms. Maxwell on a public forum.

“The victims of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein have suffered enough,” prosecutors said, urging privacy for accusers except for anyone who acknowledges publicly they are part of the criminal case against Ms. Maxwell.

Defence lawyers said Monday that banning them from publicly identifying alleged victims or potential witnesses in the case will hinder their ability to investigate, prepare witnesses for trial and advocate on Ms. Maxwell’s behalf.

“Permitting defence counsel to publicly identify witnesses who have not identified themselves on the record in this case risks subjecting witnesses to harassment and intimidation, with no conceivable benefit to the defence other than perhaps discouraging witnesses from co-operating with the Government,” prosecutors wrote in court papers.

They said defence lawyers said they believed they could reference victims by name publicly prior to trial because the individuals had gotten a “benefit” by publicly identifying themselves.

“Beyond the offensive notion that victims of sexual abuse experience a ‘benefit’ by making the incredibly difficult decision to share their experience publicly, the suggestion that victims who receive this supposed ‘benefit’ should receive fewer protections than the law ordinarily offers to victims in criminal cases is alarming,” prosecutors wrote.

The dispute arose as lawyers on both sides tried to agree on the rules of secrecy about evidence prior to a July 12 trial, when Ms. Maxwell will face charges that she recruited three teenage girls for Mr. Epstein to abuse in London and the United States in the 1990s.

Ms. Maxwell, 58, incarcerated since her July 2 arrest at her New Hampshire estate, has pleaded not guilty to charges alleging she sometimes joined in the abuse of the girls, which included one who was 14.

Mr. Epstein, 66, was facing sex-trafficking charges in Manhattan when he killed himself last August while awaiting trial.

“The defence believes it should not be restricted from publicly disclosing or disseminating the identity of any alleged victims or potential witnesses referenced in the discovery materials who have already identified themselves by speaking on the public record,” defence lawyers wrote in their submission.

Prosecutors, though, said “victims should be able to continue to come forward, in the ways and in the venues they themselves choose, without fear of reprisal, shaming, or other consequence arising from having their identities broadcast by defence counsel in this case.”

No lack of stories BUT A HUGE LACK OF EVIDENCE

I always ask myself what is the evidence. In sex cases it is phone records, DNA, videos, witnesses not trawled for, staff interviews not cherry picked i.e. all staff and not individual staff coming forward much later selling a black book type of thing.


So far the best article and information is by the contributors of Wikipedia most other articles are based on " after the event stories" that are now gathering pace at the rate of knots as there is a lot of money out there.

For the Maxwell case one has to start at the beginning which as far as I can find is the 2005 investigation onwards of Jeffrey Epstein.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein


"First criminal case Initial developments (2005–2006)
....
In March 2005, a woman contacted Florida's Palm Beach Police Department and alleged that her 14-year-old stepdaughter had been taken to Epstein's mansion by an older girl. There she was allegedly paid $300 (equivalent to $390 in 2019) to strip and massage Epstein.[90] She had allegedly undressed, but left the encounter wearing her underwear.[91]

Palm Beach Police began a 13-month undercover investigation of Epstein, including a search of his home.[67][92] During the investigation, Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter publicly accused the Palm Beach County state prosecutor, Barry Krischer, of being too lenient and called for help from the FBI.[90]

The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) then became involved. ... "

The comments below from the article intrigued me as I started to think if the story is true... (I am drawing no conclusions other than perplexed at the lack of charges and evidence (real evidence that is), so no conclusions but items of concern are raised along with the missing media questions.

Here is what is stated from the article from Wikipedia i have noted already above.

"Palm Beach Police began a 13-month undercover investigation of Epstein, including a search of his home."

Story as far as i can tell was jeffrey Epstein had a massage 3x a day and had systems to entice young girls in for those times then some sort of sex thing happened. Vague. Think about it police surveillance, investigating
13 months and where are the videos, DNA, phone records staff, of all those girls coming three times a day. It does not make sense.

Jeffrey Epstein pleaded guilty to two charges - why because they were true or as JK's song states the pressure is on to "plead guilty" innocent or not Evidence wise the drawn out process, plea bargaining, confusion and only one witness presented to the grand jury is prima facie evidence of trawling and building a fictional case. Historic good example of building fictitious case is the Italian prosecutor in the Amanda Knox case in Italy where evidence did come to light of the true killer that due to the fiction no one wanted to believe the evidence by the time the fictin had been build up around Amanda Know and her boyfriend.


There is also as per usual no indication of the reliability of the initial witness. Thus now in the Maxwell case I can see why the defence is quite rightly trying to find information of the accusers as it is not a case of DNA and rape in a park but "stories" only so the the story giver should be required to show they are of a truthful character to give any small chance of the reliability of there evidence Plus proof that they and Epstein were in the same place at the same time to get a starting position only evidence otherwise it is unreliable evidence full stop.

So researchig back finding real evidence as opposed to fiction seems the missing item her to date that is.

Very interesting analysis!

A four-hour Lifetime "docuseries", the first episode of which aired yesterday, is being broadcast that the makers seem to hope will result in further charges for Ghislaine Maxwell and others, as apparently happened following their similar docuseries on R. Kelly. And it gives yet more airtime to Virginia Roberts Giuffre.

It's time for Ghislaine Maxwell's reckoning in the "Surviving Jeffrey Epstein" docuseries

... "Surviving Jeffrey Epstein," as the title implies, follows in the path of Lifetime's previous documentary "Surviving R. Kelly" in granting a safe, supportive forum to the eight women who agreed to go on camera and recount their stories of being sexual exploited by Epstein and Maxwell, including Virginia Giuffre, perhaps the most prominent accuser associated with this case. ...

"What made ["Surviving R. Kelly] notable was the series itself helped lead to charges. It really helped effect criminal justice repercussions," Stern said. "We feel in some ways that we have some traction now with that, especially with the focus on Ghislaine in the fourth episode. And I think with her trial and the case pending, everyone will be curious to see now if there'll be additional charges that will be laid against some of the people who have been previously either protected or not named." ...
From Ghislaine Maxwell’s ‘veneer of respectability’ to a ‘creepy’ birthday song: Most startling moments in Lifetime’s Surviving Jeffrey Epstein documentary

If anyone can stomach to watch four hours of fabricated stories to date and if by any remote chance some real evidence is presented that can be substantiated. I would lke to hear and see some as I am so stick of stories

Virginia - As it stands Virginia appears to be for most of the time, part of the staff of Epstein. Her duties mainly described by her and some after the stories -staff popping out of the blue. So real evidence would be all staff giving account of their duties, times and who was where and when from the time 2005/2006 Presume the police / FBI should have this but nothing said and accounted for in the last 15 years. Photo of Andrew and a trip to Thailand to learn massaging all seem plausible. The Thailand trip indicates she did do something in the message duties area but the trip and other things not substianted. But apart from the odd possible fact of been a normal staff person there is no evidence itself presented of any wrongdoing but rather as the stories continue a character who shows a lying streak that continues to grow to date. Bottom line untess some substantiated evidence Virginia has nothing to offer real evidence

Maxwell seems shy, afraid and unable to cope. A mystery, One thing confirmed from recent court emails (seems the only evidence of any substance) is Maxwell was definitely telling the truth about no contact communication with Epstein over recent times. yes I think there was one email and the cazies waved it as evidence she was lying. Yet probally a;; of us would sy the exact smae thing in similar circumstances not necessarily remembering the one odd email in ten years. maybe even a phone call. but a to all intends and purposes no contact. That is so far the big story with reliable evidnce and once considered in context by the non existence reasonable jury would be seen as such. I want to state this I would hate to see the terrible nonsense that happened to Rolf Harris over Cambridge and calling him the liar where the unidentied nor never investigated girl (actually older teenager) changed her story by three years so age and location and event all difference at the trial end and thus she was truthful and Rolf the liar, presented by Wass who failed on the CPS standard of conduct and was required (ignored of course) to present reliable evidence thus perverting the course of justice.
I know ao nothingmuch else of Maxwell. Yes tons of stories from Virginia but that it.

Epstein what is realy known of his supposed crimes by reliable evidence. Yes the possible story is a report by a 14 year old 2005 but all true, none of it true, some true. All we know after a long investigation is that nothing of substance is known to the media or the public. Thus looks like a real effort to create a case out of thin air.

The school in Wiki shows no mention of criminal activities at the time so the stories are new thus unreliable. Schools and religious institutions often record minutes and notes at the time thus creating a good record at the time - evidence. Hospitals the same. It was the hole so big in the hospital stories against Jimmy Savile it wasan absolute disgrace and maddness to acknowledge any wrongdoing by any of the hospitals not a shred of written/recorded evidence from the time.

Thus the programme makrs here have 4 hours to present real evidence as opposed to stories and conjecture. Tealevidenc fine by all means it will make a change but please no more stories.