Ghislaine Maxwell found guilty

[Chomper Higgot]

The jury has found her guilty on four counts, she’s going to spend the rest of what was her gilded life behind bars:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/29/ghislaine-maxwell-sex-trafficking-trial-verdict

[thonglorjimmy]

Actually found guilty of five of the six charges, I suspect that will not make a lot of difference though as I imagine she's going to spend the rest of her life behind her door.

[ezzra]

The woman has acted as a pimp/madam by procuring young girls to be abused by Epstein and as such deserves every punishment she will receive, here you have 2 educated, smart and immensely wealthy people who thought that they can use and abuse people as if they were objects and that there will not be a price to pay for it... What were they thinking i wonder?...

Edited December 30, 2021 by ezzra

[Pravda]

Personally I think American justice system is hypocritical. 

 

A cop killer a 14 year old girl yesterday. I wonder if he'll get any jail time.

[fredscats]

She should have de-camped US,tried Switzerland,or even UK,

[KhunLA]

Didn't follow the case, but I doubt if any of the 'abused' didn't know exactly what they were doing.  Compensated quite well for it also.  Always seems to be years later, when they realize they can squeeze more money out of the system, by claiming 'abuse'.

 

Don't think she was kidnapping anyone off the streets.

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

Didn't follow the case, but I doubt if any of the 'abused' didn't know exactly what they were doing.  Compensated quite well for it also.  Always seems to be years later, when they realize they can squeeze more money out of the system, by claiming 'abuse'.

 

Don't think she was kidnapping anyone off the streets.

The abused where minors at the time they were abused. As minors they cannot give consent to sex with an adult. A sexual abuser cannot ‘compensate’ a minor they have sexually abused.
 

What you think she did or did not do is irrelevant, she had been found guilty by the jury in an open court of law.

 

As for “Always seems to be years later, when they realize they can squeeze more money out of the system, by claiming 'abuse'.”

 

Wrong again. 
 

Maxwell was charged and found guilty of heinous criminality, her prosecution was in a criminal court and has nothing to do with anyone seeking to ‘squeeze more money out of the system’.

 

In short your comments are factually incorrect, blaming minors for the heinous crimes committed against them and offering cover for a vile sexual abuser.

 

Let me repeat this because you clearly not get it:

 

Adults committing sex acts with minors is always a crime, adults trafficking minors for sexual is always a crime.

 

Have a word with yourself.

[cmarshall]

2 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Didn't follow the case, but I doubt if any of the 'abused' didn't know exactly what they were doing.  Compensated quite well for it also.  Always seems to be years later, when they realize they can squeeze more money out of the system, by claiming 'abuse'.

 

Don't think she was kidnapping anyone off the streets.

Doesn't apply to the minor children involved who no more have the legal authority to give consent to sexual activity than a two-year old can.  So, whatever the children said or did or got paid does not reduce Maxwell's legal liability one whit.

 

This seems to be a concept that the pro-pedophile faction has difficulty in grasping.

 

[KhunLA]

49 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Doesn't apply to the minor children involved who no more have the legal authority to give consent to sexual activity than a two-year old can.  So, whatever the children said or did or got paid does not reduce Maxwell's legal liability one whit.

 

This seems to be a concept that the pro-pedophile faction has difficulty in grasping.

 

After  replied, I read a transcript of some of the 'damaging' testimony given.  As silly as an actress going to a producer's hotel room at midnight after drinks in a bar, and thinking it's really about a movie script.  They saw dollar signs, and all this 20+ yrs after the fact.

 

They or parents didn't go to the police to file a report back then.   Only came forward when Epstein's estate was up for grabs. 

Edited December 31, 2021 by KhunLA

[cmarshall]

9 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

After  replied, I read a transcript of some of the 'damaging' testimony given.  As silly as an actress going to a producer's hotel room at midnight after drinks in a bar, and thinking it's really about a movie script.  They saw dollar signs, and all this 20+ yrs after the fact.

 

They or parents didn't go to the police to file a report back then.   Only came forward when Epstein's estate was up for grabs. 

Really do try to grasp the concept of legal age to give consent.  I know it is difficult, but really the behavior of the legal minor has no bearing on the issue of consent since there is no legal consent for a minor which is established by statute not by behavior.  Similarly, the statute of limitations for various crimes is established by statute, not by what you personally consider reasonable and may also be extended by statute.

[sirineou]

True love

 

[KhunLA]

33 minutes ago, cmarshall said:

Really do try to grasp the concept of legal age to give consent.  I know it is difficult, but really the behavior of the legal minor has no bearing on the issue of consent since there is no legal consent for a minor which is established by statute not by behavior.  Similarly, the statute of limitations for various crimes is established by statute, not by what you personally consider reasonable and may also be extended by statute.

I understand the law, thank you.  She was tried in Fed court.

 

 

Edited December 31, 2021 by KhunLA

[cmarshall]

21 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

I understand the law, thank you.  She was tried if Fed court.

 

 

For which the same legal concepts apply even if the specifics may differ slightly.

 

Maxwell was not herself charged with rape although she might have committed that crime, because rape is not a federal crime.  She was charged with sex trafficking of a minor, transportation of a minor with intent to engage in illegal sex acts, enticement of a minor to travel for illegal sexual purposes, and three counts of conspiracy, all of which violate Federal statutes. 

 

The federal legal age of consent that applies to these crimes is:

 

Cross-border travel for sex. The PROTECT Act, §105(a)(b), establishes an age of consent of 18 for travel into or out of the country or between states for the purpose of a sexual encounter.  

 

http://www.solresearch.org/report/US_Federal_Age_of_Sexual_Consent

 

So, legally the girls under the age of eighteen were children at the time exactly like two-year olds in the eyes of the relevant law.

Edited December 31, 2021 by cmarshall

[Chomper Higgot]

1 hour ago, KhunLA said:

After  replied, I read a transcript of some of the 'damaging' testimony given.  As silly as an actress going to a producer's hotel room at midnight after drinks in a bar, and thinking it's really about a movie script.  They saw dollar signs, and all this 20+ yrs after the fact.

 

They or parents didn't go to the police to file a report back then.   Only came forward when Epstein's estate was up for grabs. 

“As silly as an actress going to a producer's hotel room at midnight after drinks in a bar, and thinking it's really about a movie script.”

 

‘Silly’ you say, but it wasn’t actresses, it was minors trafficked for sex.

 

And here you are blaming the victims.

 

 

 

 

Edited December 31, 2021 by Chomper Higgot

[Longwood50]

The girls were "victimized" however they were hardly babes in the woods.   Not any different than children who sell illegal drugs.  They knew what they were doing was not right but were willing to do it for the money.  The fact it was "age of consent" is a red herring argument.  Though it may be a legal point it hardly portrays them as some innocent victim that did not know they were selling sex. 

Now while I have no sympathy for Maxwell, I do find it interesting that the records have been sealed.  So as to the American System of Justice.  Those in positions of power that used Epstein and Maxwell's services get off scot free?   If these were just average citizens I would imagine they would be getting warrants any day now.  

[Chomper Higgot]

18 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

The girls were "victimized" however they were hardly babes in the woods.   Not any different than children who sell illegal drugs.  They knew what they were doing was not right but were willing to do it for the money.  The fact it was "age of consent" is a red herring argument.  Though it may be a legal point it hardly portrays them as some innocent victim that did not know they were selling sex. 

Now while I have no sympathy for Maxwell, I do find it interesting that the records have been sealed.  So as to the American System of Justice.  Those in positions of power that used Epstein and Maxwell's services get off scot free?   If these were just average citizens I would imagine they would be getting warrants any day now.  

‘The age of consent is not a ‘red herring argument’.

 

As a general rule, if you come across a report or claim regarding a conspiracy check the validity before passing it on:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/fact-focus-misinformation-persists-after-maxwell-trial-ends/2021/12/31/78db7f86-69f8-11ec-9390-eae241f4c8b1_story.html

 

 

[ratcatcher]

On 12/30/2021 at 7:35 AM, Chomper Higgot said:

The jury has found her guilty on four counts, she’s going to spend the rest of what was her gilded life behind bars:

Having read the column so far, it seems everyone is relieved that Ghislaine Maxwell is going to be imprisoned for her role as a pimp and participant in these sexual encounters involving young girls.  What puzzles me is there is no mention of why or to whom she was pimping these girls. Epstein was obviously a stud and enjoyed the reputation, but how many famous names are there that we do not know about? Yes, Prince Andrew & Bill Clinton seem to have been involved in the parties on Little Saint James Island, but who else will emerge from the smoke & mirrors of this case. IMHO very few others and the two I named will likely never see the inside of a courtroom on this case.  Maxwell is the sacrificial lamb. Whether she survives inside is anyone's guess.

[Chomper Higgot]

6 minutes ago, ratcatcher said:

Having read the column so far, it seems everyone is relieved that Ghislaine Maxwell is going to be imprisoned for her role as a pimp and participant in these sexual encounters involving young girls.  What puzzles me is there is no mention of why or to whom she was pimping these girls. Epstein was obviously a stud and enjoyed the reputation, but how many famous names are there that we do not know about? Yes, Prince Andrew & Bill Clinton seem to have been involved in the parties on Little Saint James Island, but who else will emerge from the smoke & mirrors of this case. IMHO very few others and the two I named will likely never see the inside of a courtroom on this case.  Maxwell is the sacrificial lamb. Whether she survives inside is anyone's guess.

Post trial cometary by Informed commentators (ie those who have real experience of prosecuting serious crimes) suggests that the prosecution deliberately limited the prosecution case in order to make a clear and simple case before the jury.

 

Prince Andrew’s civil case brought by Virginia Giuffre is currently before the court. Immediately after the Maxwell verdict the judge in the Giuffe v Windsor case ordered that the Giuffe/Epstein settlement shall be unsealed on January 4th.

 

So now Maxwell can hear the clock ticking, she has to calculate if she wants to cut a deal and give up information in exchange for leniency against the possibility that January 4th will reveal information that undermines her own value to prosecutors.

 

There are other possibilities:

 

Prosecutors might already have all of Maxwell’s information, or prosecutors might not willing to do a deal with her.

 

The least likely scenario (imho) is prosecutors shutting down an investigation into such a high profile case with such widespread public interest.

[Pravda]

4 hours ago, cmarshall said:

Doesn't apply to the minor children involved who no more have the legal authority to give consent to sexual activity than a two-year old can.  So, whatever the children said or did or got paid does not reduce Maxwell's legal liability one whit.

 

This seems to be a concept that the pro-pedophile faction has difficulty in grasping.

 

Interesting. Actually not at all, but I do have a question. Since they were all minors, how come their parents weren't prosecuted for pimping their children?

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

Just now, Pravda said:

Interesting. Actually not at all, but I do have a question. Since they were all minors, how come their parents weren't prosecuted for pimping their children?

 

 

Because the parents did not ‘pimp their children’.

 

[Pravda]

5 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Because the parents did not ‘pimp their children’.

 

Really? They just let their kids fly in private jets with a pedo? 

[DaLa]

42 minutes ago, Pravda said:

Interesting. Actually not at all, but I do have a question. Since they were all minors, how come their parents weren't prosecuted for pimping their children?

 

 

The global definition of a minor ranges from 12 to 21. In fact there is no minimum age in a few countries. I’m glad you referred to them as minors , and not as in some cases ‘children’ which in my mind is a purely emotional label. Yes it’s a ‘legal’ age so it suits the prosecutors but not actually a biological age.

Whilst of course I now run the risk of being labelled with the ‘P’ group I do think a balanced view on this would be wise. No they were not ‘pimping’ their children, however one definition of a minor is that the person is accompanied by a ‘responsible’ adult. Now I might be old fashioned but where exactly were the responsible adults? ie. the parents?

 

Looking at society as a whole and media (especially but not entirely the internet) where young kids are subjected continuously visuals of a luxurious lifestyle, all gained with little or no effort. Is it that Maxwell is guilty, but also that the parents are guilty and modern day living is guilty?

[Chomper Higgot]

3 minutes ago, DaLa said:

The global definition of a minor ranges from 12 to 21. In fact there is no minimum age in a few countries. I’m glad you referred to them as minors , and not as in some cases ‘children’ which in my mind is a purely emotional label. Yes it’s a ‘legal’ age so it suits the prosecutors but not actually a biological age.

Whilst of course I now run the risk of being labelled with the ‘P’ group I do think a balanced view on this would be wise. No they were not ‘pimping’ their children, however one definition of a minor is that the person is accompanied by a ‘responsible’ adult. Now I might be old fashioned but where exactly were the responsible adults? ie. the parents?

 

Looking at society as a whole and media (especially but not entirely the internet) where young kids are subjected continuously visuals of a luxurious lifestyle, all gained with little or no effort. Is it that Maxwell is guilty, but also that the parents are guilty and modern day living is guilty?

It’s as simple as this.

 

Maxwell is guilty.

[Longwood50]

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

‘The age of consent is not a ‘red herring argument’.

Yes it is.  It is merely an arbitrary age at which the "law" says you can give consent. 


The age of consent in Thailand is 15, Arizona, North Dakota, Oregon and Virginia likewise have age of consent at 15.  Other states 16.  

So the age is "arbitrary"  meant strictly for legal purposes.  If two youths age 14 were having sex, the likelihood is that no charges would ever be brought.  

My point and I stick with it, some young girls under age 16 is approached to take a trip involving older men and she is being paid cash to do so and "she doesn't know what she is doing is prostitution".  That is <deleted>.  These were hardly innocent girls thinking they were going on a nice date. Hanging the "age of consent" out there is strictly a legal point and what these women consented to would be no more moral if they were 18. 

[Chomper Higgot]

11 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

Yes it is.  It is merely an arbitrary age at which the "law" says you can give consent. 


The age of consent in Thailand is 15, Arizona, North Dakota, Oregon and Virginia likewise have age of consent at 15.  Other states 16.  

So the age is "arbitrary"  meant strictly for legal purposes.  If two youths age 14 were having sex, the likelihood is that no charges would ever be brought.  

My point and I stick with it, some young girls under age 16 is approached to take a trip involving older men and she is being paid cash to do so and "she doesn't know what she is doing is prostitution".  That is <deleted>.  These were hardly innocent girls thinking they were going on a nice date. Hanging the "age of consent" out there is strictly a legal point and what these women consented to would be no more moral if they were 18. 

I’m not sure what the age of consent in Thailand has to do with Maxwell’s trial in a U.S. Federal court.

 

You can stick to your point as long as you like, the fact remains a minor cannot consent to sex acts with an adult.

 

Maxwell’s jury found her guilty of breaking numerous, non arbitrary, laws.

 

She’s going to spend the rest of her life behind bars.

 

[Longwood50]

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

You can stick to your point as long as you like, the fact remains a minor cannot consent to sex acts with an adult.

My point is that age of consent is merely an arbitrary number.  It is different throughout the world.  

Heck in Muslim countries girls as young as 10 are allowed to get married.
The Personal Status Law of Muslims, 1991, allows the marriage of a girl from puberty. Ten years-olds can be married with judicial authorization. 

You seem to want to portray these young girls as innocent virgins so naïve they didn't know what they were doing.  Yes the age of consent brings in "legal" charges but it hardly exonerates the girls from knowingly and willfully entering into sex for money.  The girls knew full well what they were doing was wrong and illegal.  Not any different than the 13 year old that shop lifts, or the 13 year old that sells drugs on the street corner.  Under the "eyes of the law" they may be juveniles and charged accordingly but no way were they just innocent children mislead and too young to realize what they were doing. 

[Chomper Higgot]

20 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:

My point is that age of consent is merely an arbitrary number.  It is different throughout the world.  

Heck in Muslim countries girls as young as 10 are allowed to get married.
The Personal Status Law of Muslims, 1991, allows the marriage of a girl from puberty. Ten years-olds can be married with judicial authorization. 

You seem to want to portray these young girls as innocent virgins so naïve they didn't know what they were doing.  Yes the age of consent brings in "legal" charges but it hardly exonerates the girls from knowingly and willfully entering into sex for money.  The girls knew full well what they were doing was wrong and illegal.  Not any different than the 13 year old that shop lifts, or the 13 year old that sells drugs on the street corner.  Under the "eyes of the law" they may be juveniles and charged accordingly but no way were they just innocent children mislead and too young to realize what they were doing. 

I don’t portray these minors as anything, I’ve merely stated the facts regarding they cannot give consent to any sexual act with an adult and that adult sexual acts with a minor is a crime, very serious crimes.

 

This, for some reason, triggers some people into arguing the victims are culpable, the parents of the victims are culpable or into irrelevant observations on the age of consent in other jurisdictions.

 

The facts are clear, Maxwell is convicted of very serious sex related crimes committed by her against minors.

 

Tge law is clear, and she’s been found guilty of breaking it.

 

 

Edited December 31, 2021 by Chomper Higgot

[cmarshall]

2 hours ago, Pravda said:

Interesting. Actually not at all, but I do have a question. Since they were all minors, how come their parents weren't prosecuted for pimping their children?

Irrelevant to the Maxwell case.

[cmarshall]

1 hour ago, Longwood50 said:

My point is that age of consent is merely an arbitrary number.  It is different throughout the world.  

Heck in Muslim countries girls as young as 10 are allowed to get married.
The Personal Status Law of Muslims, 1991, allows the marriage of a girl from puberty. Ten years-olds can be married with judicial authorization. 

No doubt Ghislaine Maxwell regrets that she didn't have the benefit of your legal insight when she was planning her crimes.  She could have chosen a more hospitable jurisdiction.

[Jingthing]

She is guilty under the law as the jury found.

But she's also right that she had been scapegoated because Epstein is dead.

If Epstein had lived she may have walked by giving evidence against him.

Edited December 31, 2021 by Jingthing