Ghislaine Maxwell‘s brothers today insisted she was ‘denied’ a fair trial and suffered ‘tremendous injustice’ after being painted as the ‘most hated woman in the world’ and Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘demon queen’ following her arrest.
Ian Maxwell, 65, who flew to New York from his home in Oxford to support his sister at trial, said the guilty verdicts on Wednesday were a ‘shocking result’, claiming she is ‘innocent’.
While Kevin Maxwell, a TV executive, believes his sister has been unfairly portrayed as paedophile Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘demon queen’ accomplice. On Wednesday the jury took just over 40 hours to find Maxwell guilty on five of six charges.
Mr Maxwell said: ‘I think that anybody who sat in and listened to the accusers’ testimony – I’m a dad, I’m a brother, anybody, just any normal guy listening to their testimony – is going to have been moved. And I can also understand anger. But that doesn’t mean that I believe for a single second that my sister is guilty of the crimes of which she was convicted’.
Their 60-year-old younger sibling is on suicide watch in her New York cell as she faces up to 65 years in prison following her conviction for child sex trafficking.
Ian Maxwell has confirmed the family planned an immediate appeal and said: ‘This is a shocking result, which reflects the fact that Ghislaine has been denied the right to a fair trial, starting with the appalling conditions in which she has been held for over 18 months and which seriously impacted her ability to participate in her own defence.’
He added: ‘I am confident of the strong grounds for appeal both legal and evidential and that my sister will be vindicated and ultimately found innocent.
‘These were (Jeffrey) Epstein’s crimes and he’s not here to pay that price, and she has been made to pay the price that he should have paid.’
Ian Maxwell, 65, right, pictured with siblings Kevin, Christine and Isabel Maxwell, said the guilty verdicts on Wednesday were a ‘shocking result’
Kevin Maxwell, a TV exec, believes his sister has been unfairly portrayed as Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘demon queen’ accomplice
Ghislaine’s supportive siblings say they will be launching an appeal against her convictions for child sex trafficking
Maxwell is on suicide watch in her New York cell as she faces up to 65 years in prison following her conviction for child sex trafficking
‘I wish her well in hell’: Chauntae Davies was groomed by the ‘calculating witch’ Ghislaine Maxwell
Her message to the ‘calculating witch’ who destroyed her life was uncompromising and to the point. ‘I wish her well in hell. Ghislaine Maxwell is a monster in every sense of the word,’ says Chauntae Davies (pictured today)
Her message to the ‘calculating witch’ who destroyed her life was uncompromising and to the point.
‘I wish her well in hell,’ says Chauntae Davies.
‘Ghislaine Maxwell is a monster in every sense of the word. She deserves to die behind bars for what she did to me and the countless other women’s lives she destroyed. She and Epstein will meet each other in hell when her time comes.’
Still scarred by the four years she suffered at the hands of Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, Chauntae was jubilant at the sensational conclusion of the New York trial this week.
Maxwell, 60, was branded a ‘sophisticated predator’ who procured and served up young girls to her lover in what prosecutors described as a ‘pyramid scheme of abuse’.
Chauntae was one of those girls. She was a 21-year-old trainee massage therapist when she was lured into the couple’s depraved circle, where she was repeatedly raped over many years.
‘She and Epstein destroyed my life in every way. My relationships. My family life and my health,’ she says.
Unlike Epstein’s other young victims, who were below the age of consent, Chauntae was older and, some may assume, wiser.
Which brings us to the troubling question of why, having been assaulted on one occasion, she continued to put herself in harm’s way.
For four years she continued to be a part of Epstein and Maxwell’s circle, enduring repeated rapes by her depraved employer. Chauntae still struggles to come to terms with why she didn’t attempt to break free earlier.
‘There is a decent amount of shame and guilt I carried with me for years over this, and in many ways still do,’ she says.
‘Those feelings are now mixed with embarrassment and anger. It’s hard to understand why the strong, brave and independent woman that I’ve become could allow that to happen.
‘I am only now beginning to understand the manipulation and control that was used by both Jeffrey and Ghislaine. But especially Ghislaine. She was wearing a mask throughout the time I knew her. I wish I could have seen her for who she was.’
Blaming ‘media manipulation’ by the authorities, he told the Daily Telegraph: ‘US First Amendment rights are in clear conflict with a defendant’s rights to a fair trial – the USA has no equivalent of contempt of court, no guidelines of any description to prevent overt media manipulation by both the prosecuting authorities and the highly paid lawyers who represented both accusers in court and also the accusers who did not appear in court to have their allegations questioned’.
He also told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘This is essentially going to be on legal grounds, both in terms of pre-trial process and indeed the trial process itself.’
Asked what he made of the testimonies made against his sister, Mr Maxwell said: ‘(They were) heartrending testimonies. But, notwithstanding the testimony, my own view is that Ghislaine had nothing to do with it’.
Pressed on whether the women who testified against Ghislaine were lying, he replied: ‘Of course, the prosecution didn’t put into evidence the prior interviews they had with these accusers, which showed a completely different case.
‘Memory is faulty, and so, in my view, the trial that has occurred was not a fair trial from Ghislaine’s perspective. And that is why she’s going to appeal, and I think she’ll be successful.’
After the guilty verdicts came in, Maxwell’s family said they were ‘very disappointed’ and had already begun the appeal process.
Their statement said: ‘We believe firmly in our sister’s innocence – we are very disappointed with the verdict. We have already started the appeal tonight and we believe that she will ultimately be vindicated.’
She has four potential grounds for appeal – including the judge’s decision to force the jury to work through New Year’s Eve holiday due to the coronavirus.
Lawyers for the former socialite, who is facing 65 years in jail for recruiting and trafficking underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein, could zero in on how Judge Alison Nathan handled the case as they seek to overturn the conviction.
But Lisa Bloom, who represents a number of Ghislaine Maxwell’s and Jeffrey Epstein’s accusers, said she does not see ‘any chance’ of Maxwell’s legal team successfully appealing the verdict.
Speaking to BBC Breakfast on Thursday, Ms Bloom said: ‘Her team can talk bravely about an appeal, I don’t see any chance of them winning that because the judge’s rulings were all very correct and followed the law and that would have to be the basis of an appeal.’
Maxwell’s lawyers’ primary argument will likely be how Judge Nathan ordered the jury to sit every single day of the final week until they reached a verdict.
That would have included New Year’s Eve and New Year’s Day, even though it falls on a Saturday and is a public holiday, and Sunday as well.
Maxwell’s lawyers complained that such instructions were essentially telling the jury they needed to ‘hurry up’.
Judge Nathan said that the move was necessary because the ‘astronomical’ numbers of Covid-19 cases fueled by the Omicron variant meant there was a real risk of a ‘mistrial’.
But at the end of that very day the jury came back with their verdict.
Other issues which could be raised on appeal include how Judge Nathan handled a question from the panel about count four – transportation of an individual under the age of 17 with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity – on which Maxwell was convicted.
Maxwell’s lawyers are likely to raise concerns about a jury note related to the accuser Annie Farmer and counts one and three, on which they also found Maxwell guilty.
Fourthly, Maxwell’s lawyers could object to how Judge Nathan brusquely handled their request for the US Marshals to force one witness to attend court, a request they ultimately dropped.
Maxwell has yet to formally file her appeal but outside the federal court in New Year after the verdict, her lawyer Bobbi Sternheim said they would be doing so.
In a statement, Maxwell’s family said she would be ‘ultimately vindicated’ despite the jury convicting her of five of the six charges.
Other high profile sex crimes cases do give Maxwell, 60, some hope, most notably that of Bill Cosby.
In 2018 he was sentenced to 10 years in prison for drugging and sexually assaulting Andrea Constand at his home 14 years earlier.
Cosby’s conviction was overturned on appeal in June after the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court ruled that his due process rights had been violated because a previous prosecutor agreed not to charge him.
Harvey Weinstein is currently appealing his 23-year sentence for rape and sexual assault that was handed down in March last year.
During an appeal court hearing in New York earlier this month, judges asked whether lining up three Weinstein accusers as bad character witnesses was ‘overkill’ – a decision is due in Spring 2022.
Judge Nathan’s handling of the jury instructions about the coronavirus will undoubtedly feature highly in Maxwell’s appeal.
On day 16 Judge Nathan discussed instructing the jury to sit until 6pm instead of 5pm because of the risk one of them may become infected.
Maxwell’s lawyer Laura Menninger strongly objected.
She told the court: ‘Because it has only been three days, we believe that any suggestion that they should stay later is beginning to sound like urging them to hurry up, when clearly they know that they can deliberate as long as they want and they should be able to deliberate as long as they want’.
Ghislaine Maxwell is facing 65 years in jail for recruiting and trafficking underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein after a jury found her guilty on five of six counts. A courtroom sketch shows Maxwell sitting as the guilty verdict in her sex abuse trial is read in New York
Ghislaine Maxwell, the Jeffrey Epstein associate accused of sex trafficking, wearing a borrowed oversize coat sits in front of her brother Kevin Maxwell and sister Isabel Maxwell during a charging conference in a courtroom sketch in New York City, U.S., December 18
Maxwell has yet to formally file her appeal but outside the federal court in New Year after the verdict, her lawyer Bobbi Sternheim said they would be doing so
Maxwell’s defense team Jeffery Pagliuca and Laura Menninger are seen leaving court in New York after yesterday’s verdicts
Maxwell suffered a setback Tuesday after Judge Nathan rejected her defense team’s request to give the jury additional instructions on one of the counts related to transporting accuser ‘Jane’. They will likely use this as grounds for appeal
Harvey Weinstein is currently appealing his 23-year sentence for rape and sexual assault that was handed down in March last year. Bill Cosby’s conviction was overturned on appeal in June after the Pennsylvania State Supreme Court ruled that his due process rights had been violated because a previous prosecutor agreed not to charge him
Menninger noted that the previous week Judge Nathan had offered the jury an extra day to deliberate but they declined it, stating in a note they had ‘made plans’ for the Christmas break.
Judge Nathan did instruct the jury they could stay until 6pm or longer but added that there was no ‘pressure’ and they should take as long as they wanted.
The next day Judge Nathan’s mood darkened and she said that the longer hours were necessary because ‘we are seeing an astronomical spike in the number of Covid positive cases in New York’.
Judge Nathan added that ‘we are facing a high and escalating risk that the jurors or participants (such as Maxwell) may need to quarantine, putting at risk our ability to complete this trial’.
At the end of the day the jury sent a note saying they were ‘making progress’.
On Wednesday, the morning of what turned out to be the final day of deliberations, the jury asked for clarification of their schedule for the week.
Judge Nathan told them that she would compel them to sit every day that week until they reached a verdict: previously they were told they would sit only Monday to Wednesday.
That would include New Year’s Eve on the Friday and New Year’s Day on the Saturday, as well as Sunday if necessary.
After appeals from Maxwell’s lawyers, the judge added the same qualifier as before: ‘Of course, by this I don’t mean to pressure you in any way. You should take all the time that you need’.
At the end of that very day, the jury came back with their verdict.
Another source of contention which could feature in the appeal was when Maxwell’s lawyers repeatedly argued with Judge Nathan on day 16 of the trial over a note from the jury about count four, which related to the accuser Jane.
The count was transportation of an individual under the age of 17 with intent to engage in illegal sexual activity.
Maxwell was found guilty and faces up to 10 years in jail for this count.
Maxwell’s siblings Kevin, Christine and Isabel walked out of court in New York yesterday and declined to speak to reporters. In a statement, Maxwell’s family said she would be ‘ultimately vindicated’ despite the jury convicting her of five of the six charges
The prosecution brought in pictures found in Epstein’s mansion in a bid to show that Maxwell and Epstein had been in a relationship
The note read: ‘If the defendant aided in the transportation of Jane’s return flight, but not the flight to New Mexico, where/if the intent was for Jane to engage in sexual activity, can she be found guilty under the second element?’
Prosecutor Alison Moe said they were ‘not able to parse the question because we find it confusing’ so the ‘safest course’ was to refer the jury to the instructions.
Maxwell’s lawyer Christian Everdell said that the ‘significant purpose’ of the trip was not that ‘Jane engaged in illicit sexual activity’ as required by the law.
In this case she was ‘just presumably going home, but is not for the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual activity’, Everdell said.
Judge Nathan said that the note was ‘ambiguous’ and told the court: ‘I don’t know what the question means, it’s too difficult to parse factually and legally’.
As a result she referred the jury to her instructions without further comment.
The following day Maxwell’s lawyers tried again to change the judge’s mind with a seven page letter filed to the court which said her decision was ‘incorrect and prejudicial to Ms. Maxwell’
They said that the jury were ‘confused’ about not just count four but count two as well and requested an additional, three paragraph instruction to clarify.
Judge Nathan rejected the request to address count two as the jury didn’t ask about it.
She told Everdell that he was seeking a ‘third bite of the apple’ and dismissed his letter as ‘just wrong’ as she stood by her original decision.
Another note on day 14 of the trial sparked intense argument from Maxwell’s lawyers and could form the basis of an appeal.
The jury asked if they could consider the accuser Annie Farmer’s testimony for the counts of conspiracy to entice and transport a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts.
Maxwell is facing five years on jail on each count.
Judge Nathan said she would tell the jury: ‘The answer is yes, you may consider it’.
Everdell said he was worried that the jury might use Farmer’s testimony ‘more broadly’ than they should.
He wanted to remind the jury that Farmer’s allegations were not ‘illegal sexual conduct’ as charged in the indictment.
Pictured: The Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) where Ghislaine Maxwell is being held and has been since her arrest in July 2020
Judge Nathan rejected the argument and said it would be ‘nonresponsive to their question’.
In their appeal Maxwell’s lawyers may well raise Judge Nathan’s handling of their problems calling defense witnesses.
Judge Nathan was blunt with Maxwell’s attorneys when they asked for help from the US Marshals to compel one female witness, Kelly Bovino, to come to court.
The judge sounded exasperated at the prospect of a delay in the trial especially as the defense knew two weeks ago that Bovino was not replying to their subpoena.
She said: ‘We’re not delaying trial, so this all needs to happen yesterday’.
During a testy exchange with Menninger Judge Nathan said that a ‘nonresponsive witness is not a little thing’.
A desperate-sounding Menninger replied: ‘We’ve been flying people across the country, across the pond.
‘Our client’s life is on the line and we’re being given one day to put on a defense, one and a half days, and there is one witness that we’re having problems with. We’re not asking for some weeks’ long delay’.
In the end Maxwell’s lawyer withdrew their request to engage the US Marshals, but on appeal this may well be raised to try and overturn the conviction.