Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

International

Ghislaine Maxwell to be sentenced in Epstein sex abuse case

Published

8 minute read

NEW YORK (AP) — Ghislaine Maxwell, the jet-setting socialite who once consorted with royals, presidents and billionaires, is set to be sentenced Tuesday for helping the wealthy financier Jeffrey Epstein sexually abuse underage girls.

The 11 a.m. sentencing in New York is the culmination of a prosecution that detailed how the power couple flaunted their riches and prominent connections to lure vulnerable girls as young as 14, and then exploit them.

Prosecutors said Epstein, who killed himself in 2019 while awaiting trial, sexually abused children hundreds of times over more than a decade, and couldn’t have done so without the help of Maxwell, his longtime companion and onetime girlfriend.

“Maxwell’s conduct was shockingly predatory. She was a calculating, sophisticated, and dangerous criminal who preyed on vulnerable young girls and groomed them for sexual abuse,” prosecutors wrote in a court filing.

In December, a jury convicted Maxwell of sex trafficking, transporting a minor to participate in illegal sex acts and two conspiracy charges. Prosecutors say she deserves 30 to 55 years in prison.

Maxwell, 60, has denied abusing anyone. Her lawyers have asked U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan to impose a sentence of no more than five years.

“The witnesses at trial testified about Ms. Maxwell’s facilitation of Epstein’s abuse, but Epstein was always the central figure: Epstein was the mastermind, Epstein was the principal abuser, and Epstein orchestrated the crimes for his personal gratification,” they wrote in a court filing.

Epstein and Maxwell’s associations with some of the world’s most famous people were not a prominent part of the trial, but mentions of friends like Bill Clinton, Donald Trump and Britain’s Prince Andrew showed how the pair exploited their connections to impress their prey.

Over the past 17 years, scores of women have accused Epstein of abusing them. Many described Maxwell as acting as a madam who recruited them to give massages to Epstein.

The trial, though, revolved around allegations from only a handful of those women.

Four testified that they were abused as teens in the 1990s and early 2000s at Epstein’s mansions in Florida, New York, New Mexico and the Virgin Islands.

Three were identified in court only by their first names or pseudonyms to protect their privacy: Jane, a television actress; Kate, an ex-model from the U.K.; and Carolyn, now a mom recovering from drug addiction. The fourth was Annie Farmer, who identified herself in court by her real name after speaking out publicly.

They described how Maxwell charmed them with conversation and gifts and promises that Epstein could use his wealth and connections to help fulfill their dreams.

Then, they testified, she led them to give massages to Epstein that turned sexual and played it off as normal.

Carolyn testified that she was one of several underprivileged teens who lived near Epstein’s Florida home in the early 2000s and took up an offer to massage him in exchange for $100 bills in what prosecutors described as “a pyramid of abuse.”

Maxwell made all the arrangements, Carolyn told the jury, even though she knew the girl was only 14 at the time.

The allegations against Epstein first surfaced publicly in 2005. He pleaded guilty to sex charges in Florida and served 13 months in jail, much of it in a work-release program as part of a deal criticized as lenient. Afterward, he was required to register as a sex offender.

In the years that followed, many women sued Epstein over alleged abuse. One, Virginia Giuffre, claimed that Epstein and Maxwell had also pressured her into sexual trysts with other powerful men, including Prince Andrew. All of those men denied the allegations and Giuffre ultimately settled a lawsuit against Andrew out of court.

Federal prosecutors in New York revived the case against Epstein after stories by the Miami Herald in 2018 brought new attention to his crimes. He was arrested in 2019, but killed himself a month later.

Eleven months later after his death, Maxwell was arrested at a New Hampshire estate. A U.S., British and French citizen, she has remained in a federal jail in New York City since then as her lawyers repeatedly criticize her treatment, saying she was even unjustly placed under suicide watch days before sentencing. Prosecutors say the claims about the jail are exaggerated and that Maxwell has been treated better than other prisoners.

Her lawyers also fought to have her conviction tossed on the grounds of juror misconduct.

Days after the verdict, one juror gave media interviews in which he disclosed he had been sexually abused as a child — something he hadn’t told the court during jury selection. Maxwell’s lawyers said she deserved a new trial. A judge disagreed.

At least eight women have submitted letters to the judge, describing the sexual abuse they said they endured for having met Maxwell and Epstein. Four of them plan to make oral statements at sentencing, including two women — Annie Farmer and Kate — who testified at the trial.

In letters to the judge, six of Maxwell’s seven living siblings pleaded for leniency.

Anne Holve and Philip Maxwell, her eldest siblings, wrote that her relationship with Epstein began soon after the 1991 death of their father, the British newspaper magnate Robert Maxwell.

They said Robert Maxwell had subjected her daughter to “frequent rapid mood swings, huge rages and rejections.”

“This led her to becoming very vulnerable to abusive and powerful men who would be able to take advantage of her innate good nature,” they wrote.

Prosecutors called Maxwell’s shifting of blame to Epstein “absurd and offensive.”

“Maxwell was an adult who made her own choices,” they wrote to the court. “She made the choice to sexually exploit numerous underage girls. She made the choice to conspire with Epstein for years, working as partners in crime and causing devastating harm to vulnerable victims. She should be held accountable for her disturbing role in an extensive child exploitation scheme.”

Larry Neumeister And Tom Hays, The Associated Press

Storytelling is in our DNA. We provide credible, compelling multimedia storytelling and services in English and French to help captivate your digital, broadcast and print audiences. As Canada’s national news agency for 100 years, we give Canadians an unbiased news source, driven by truth, accuracy and timeliness.

Follow Author

Censorship Industrial Complex

UN General Assembly Adopts Controversial Cybercrime Treaty Amid Criticism Over Censorship and Surveillance Risks

Published on

 

 

By 

 

If you’re tired of censorship and surveillance, subscribe to Reclaim The Net.

Global cybercrime treaty faces scrutiny over human rights safeguards and potential misuse of cross-border powers.

As we expected, even though opponents have been warning that the United Nations Convention Against Cybercrime needed to have a narrower scope, strong human rights safeguard and be more clearly defined in order to avoid abuse – the UN General Assembly has just adopted the documents, after five years of wrangling between various stakeholders.

It is now up to UN-member states to first sign, and then ratify the treaty that will come into force three months after the 40th country does that.

The UN bureaucracy is pleased with the development, hailing the convention as a “landmark” and “historic” global treaty that will improve cross-border cooperation against cybercrime and digital threats.

But critics have been saying that speech and human rights might fall victim to the treaty since various UN members treat human rights and privacy in vastly different ways – while the treaty now in a way “standardizes” law enforcement agencies’ investigative powers across borders.

Considerable emphasis has been put by some on how “authoritarian” countries might abuse this new tool meant to tackle online crime – but in reality, this concern applies to any country that ends up ratifying the treaty.

Another point of criticism has been that UN members individually already have laws that address the same issues, rendering the convention superfluous – unless it is to extend some of those authoritarian powers to the countries that don’t formally have them, and can’t outright pass them at home for political reasons.

Since the UN General Assembly adopted the resolution without a vote – after the text was previously agreed on by negotiators – it is not immediately clear how many countries might sign it next year, and ratify what would then become a legally binding document.

In the meanwhile, a spokesperson for UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres referred to the treaty as “a demonstration of multilateralism.”

Where opponents see potential for undemocratic law enforcement practices spilling over sovereign borders, UN representatives speak about “an unprecedented platform for cooperation” that will allow agencies to exchange evidence, create a safe cyberspace, and protect victims of crimes such as child sexual abuse, scams and money laundering.

And they claim all this will be achieved “while safeguarding human rights online.”

Each issue we publish is a commitment to defend these critical rights, providing insights and actionable information to protect and promote liberty in the digital age.

Despite our wide readership, less than 0.2% of our readers contribute financially. With your support, we can do more than just continue; we can amplify voices that are often suppressed and spread the word about the urgent issues of censorship and surveillance.

Consider making a modest donation — just $5, or whatever amount you can afford. Your contribution will empower us to reach more people, educate them about these pressing issues, and engage them in our collective cause.

Thank you for considering a contribution. Each donation not only supports our operations but also strengthens our efforts to challenge injustices and advocate for those who cannot speak out.


Thank you.
Continue Reading

espionage

Textbook Case of FBI Grooming a Troubled Young Man to Commit Violent Crime

Published on

By John Leake

Schizophrenic Jerry Drake Varnell was encouraged and assisted by an undercover FBI agent in “foiled” plot to blow up BancFirst building in Oklahoma City

In researching the strange cases of Thomas Matthew Crooks and Luigi Mangione, I have wondered with whom they were in contact, and if they were possibly groomed, by an undercover FBI who—for reasons that are unclear—wished to incite these young men to participate in violent crimes.

I first started wondering about FBI grooming when I learned about an undercover FBI agent’s involvement in the 2015 plot to attack a convention at the Curtis Culwell Center in Garland, Texas (see my post “Tear Up Texas”: FBI Encouraged a 2015 Shooting & Did Nothing to Stop It).

This morning I learned about the remarkable case of a 23-year-old diagnosed schizophrenic named Jerry Drake Varnell who—with the encouragement and assistance of an undercover FBI agent in 2017—participated in what he believed was a plot to blow up the BancFirst building in downtown Oklahoma City. He was found guilty in 2019. In 2020 he was sentenced to 25 years in prison “for attempting to use a weapon of mass destruction at BancFirst in downtown Oklahoma City.”

According to the US Attorney’s Office press release on the conviction:

At trial, the jury heard testimony from an informant who made recordings of his conversations with Varnell. It also heard from the undercover FBI agent who helped Varnell build what he thought was a bomb, an FBI bomb technician, and others. It listened to numerous recordings in which Varnell planned the attack and reviewed numerous written electronic communications that corroborated his intent. Furthermore, it heard the testimony of a defense expert concerning Varnell’s mental health. Through its verdicts, the jury concluded any mental health problems did not prevent Varnell from forming the intent required for convictionIt also determined the FBI did not entrap him.

To me, what is most striking about this case—apart from the fact that the offender was a diagnosed schizophrenic—is how he drew the attention of federal law enforcement. As reported by KGOU (an Oklahoma NPR station):

Government witnesses said they deemed Varnell a threat based on his online activity such as “liking” anti-government groups on Facebook and messages referencing Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh and Tyler Durden, a split personality character from the 1999 film “Fight Club.” Agents also said Varnell claimed he had built homemade explosives during conversations with undercover FBI agent Williams and an FBI informant named Brent Elisens.

As was repeatedly pointed out by Varnell’s defense attorney:

Varnell is a diagnosed schizophrenic. He told federal agents that his anti-government sentiments started around age 16, the same age his parents say his schizophrenic episodes began.

Defense attorneys asked FBI agents if they knew of Varnell’s paranoid schizophrenia. Retired FBI agent Jennifer Schmidtz, who testified Wednesday, said she knew of “allegations” in a Custer County case involving Varnell and self-reported mental health issues in Varnell’s college transcripts. In a 2017 statement, Varnell’s parents claimed he has been institutionalized on multiple occasions.

The defense has team also focused on an FBI report from Dec. 2016 that stated, “Varnell does not have a job or a vehicle. The threat has not been repeated. Varnell does not have the means to commit the act at this time.

By August 2017, the defense pointed out, Varnell was still unemployed and without a car. …

Varnell’s property was searched the day of his arrest, and Schmidtz, who supervised the search, testified there was no physical evidence showing Varnell experimented with chemicals capable of causing an explosion. The search did uncover a speech written by Varnell laiden with conspiracy theories about developing psychotropic drugs, the Clintons and Timothy McVeigh.

During cross examinations the defense continued to point out that Varnell never followed through on pieces of the plan he was responsible for, like choosing a time and place and supplying barrels. Varnell came up with a list of locations after encouragement from undercover agent Williamsand he settled on the on the BancFirst location after Williams took him to scout the location on July 13. He suggested Nov. 5 as an attack date, but Williams said it was too far away. And Varnell never supplied barrels, so Williams provided them.

In other words, “undercover agent Williams” was the chief planner and executor of the apparent plot. Jerry Varnell participated in this plot with the encouragement of undercover agent Williams and under the direction of undercover agent Williams.

Share

Continue Reading

Trending

X