After Ghislaine Maxwell has had bail denied FIVE times and last week lost a bid to dismiss sex trafficking indictment, she would do best to give up and seek a plea bargain
Most people, when in a hole, realise the folly of their ways and eventually stop digging, but the grubby alleged sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell is certainly far from most people.
A one-time ‘bestie’ of aristocracy, dynastic tycoons, politicians and royalty, this mucky madam has now failed in all five of her attempts to get bail. This is hardly surprising given she has been deemed a flight risk due to having multi-millions in assets, has been known to use pseudonyms to hide her identity and possesses multiple passports.
Last week, making matters worse and no doubt yet again annoying the US district judge presiding over her case, mucky madam Maxwell attempted and failed to get the case against her dismissed on the basis of the recent overturning of Bill Cosby’s sexual assault conviction.
Justifying why this was quite rightly kicked out, ABC News reported: “Judge Nathan said Ms Maxwell had not been promised she would not be prosecuted, as the Supreme Court said Mr Cosby had been.”
“The judge also rejected Ms Maxwell’s arguments that prosecutors waited too long to charge her with sex trafficking between 2001 and 2004, saying the US Congress’s 2006 elimination of the statute of limitations applied retroactively.”
“Lawyers for Ms Maxwell said her case was similar because she had been immunised under Epstein’s 2007 non-prosecution agreement with federal prosecutors in Florida, in exchange for pleading guilty to Florida state prostitution charges.”
“Ms Maxwell had testified in a since-settled [for an undisclosed sum] £36 million ($50 million) civil lawsuit against her by Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre, and the lawyers said it was unfair for prosecutors to use that testimony to build their criminal case.”
“But Judge Nathan said the cases were not the same, and adhered to her April ruling that Epstein’s agreement did not bind the Manhattan prosecutors or cover accused co-conspirators.”
“Mr Cosby’s case ‘focused on whether prosecutors were required to honour a promise the court found to be clear in the absence of a formal plea agreement,’ Judge Nathan wrote.”
“’Even if this court agreed with the analysis in [Mr Cosby’s case], that opinion sheds no light on the proper interpretation of the NPA in this case,’ she added.”
Elsewhere, making matters even worse, meddling Maxwell – whom The Mail on Sunday today revealed has sold her Kinnerton Street, Belgravia mews house for £1.75 million ($2.4 million) to a “Hampshire-based property developer” Stuart Robinson with the help of the disgraced solicitor Malcolm Grumbridge – stuck her oar into the pending civil case against Prince Andrew in September.
Offering to give evidence on the royal’s behalf might seem to some as a generous act of continued friendship, but in fact it is of utterly no help at all to the stupidly silent Duke of York. Maxwell, facing trial herself in November is anything but a useful defence asset for him, really should keep her oar out and if she had any sense she’d stop getting the likes of Brian Basham and Jay Beecher from peddling nonsense and focus on saving herself from an 80-year sentence by just seeking a plea bargain. Like father, like daughter, given this stubborn woman’s past performance and arrogance, of course, she won’t.
Pictured top: Deviant daughter of ‘Bouncing Czech’ Robert Maxwell grinning like a Cheshire cat at her then home with his holiness the Gyalwang Drukpa in June 2014.
