This may well be a contrverhal subject but I think one that should be mentioned. Let me preface this note with the fact that I do not date or have sex with underage women, never have and every movie I have made we have proof that all the girls are over the age of 18. I abaide by the laws of the United States.

Ghislaine is being beaten to death, I can't imagine the horror she is being subjected to, all this for going over a few lines in the USA. Keep in mind that what her and Jeffrey Epstein are accused of in not illegal in some countries, hell I think the age of consent in England is 16? Why is this front pages news? I think its a way to beat up the 'haves' by the 'have nots'

There are some facts that are not addressed and I am curious what you guys think? Why on Earth did Ghislaine come back to the US after all the fuss blew up? She must have known she would be arrested. I have met people like her and they are not stupid and they are very well informed.

Comments?

Yep the age of consent in the uk is 16 same as it is in many states in America. In practice every one ignores the age of consent. I was offered sex for the first time when I was 14. I still don't think the guy who offered did anything wrong. At that age I knew my own mind better than he knew his and he accepted my no without trying to pressure me into changing my mind.
The simple truth is that consent isn't taken seriously enough. In most countries you can't consent to sex if you're drunk. How many of us were drunk the first time we had sex? We're we all raped? Each generation gets a different message on consent so what happens when someone from one generation is asking for consent from another? What about heavy petting? Kissing? Hugging? Unless we all fill in a consent check list prior to every encounter we will all make mistakes. It's unfair that a few individuals pay for their mistakes so heavily but it's also wrong that most of us will have experienced some kind of consent violation during our lives.

I blame all the 70's and 80's rock we all love. Most of it was about nailing underage poon.

I dunno, maybe it has something to do with being the second in command of the largest child sex trafficking ring in the world?

This hearing isn't exactly her first either. Jizzlene has been dodging hearings and court appearances since at least 2010. Where she avoid depositions saying her mother was deathly ill while under investigation by the FBI for her involvement with Epstein, but manages to make Chelsea Clinton's wedding.

https://docplayer.net/amp/4070674-Exhibit-c-epstein-vs-edwards-undisputed-statement-of-facts.html

But your right, this trial is a mockery, as it's not addressing all of the photographs, plane ledgers, messages, emails, and any other involvement of innumerous people of wealth and power all across the political spectrum being all chummy with Epstein and Maxwell.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/07/jeffrey-epsteins-rolodex-famous-friends-and-acquaintances.html

There are a lot of people in this world that are being unfairly targeted, she ain't one of em.

Do you wanna be in my gang, my gang, my gang?

*Bets to himself the poster is from Florida* [Glances up] Indeed

It's not illegal in England is a poor excuse.
Well, I guess you could claim that you lost the ability to sweat.

She spent years finding and grooming kids for sex trafficking to billionaires. I don't need a law to tell me that's completely, totally, and utterly fucked up. To hell with her.

Messmaster

It's pretty uncomfortable seeing a veteran producer defend what looks like an actual trafficking situation as just "going over a few lines", TBH.

Oh it is not a controversial subject. It is a subject that shows you who are people that you need to be aware of who are ok with grooming and other people having underage sex and who is not.

Don't try to defend someone who provided underage girls to her lover and others for sexual pleasure. She knew exactly what she was doing and did not give a fuck about right or wrong.

I just wonder what she knows about other high-profile alleged abusers.

No, there is more. She and Epstein lured girls in and then boxed them in for his personal use.

The guy owned an island. Once you're on it, good luck getting off!

Since adults can be trafficked and entrapped too, Maxwell would get no strikes off from me if there were no underage girls involved at all.

Women ALWAYS must be able to leave, freely, any situation that they no longer want or never wanted at all. And for the underage, they can't even consent.

If I were judge and jury, I would put Maxwell away for as many years as I could.

Nessie

Nailed it.

Also, the fact that something is legal doesn't make it right. Even if everyone involved was of legal age, when there's a huge power imbalance such that someone doesn't have the option to say no, then consent becomes meaningless.

I didn't feel the OP was defending her. At the end of the day I think it's wrong for any prisoner no matter what they're guilty of to be put in a situation where other prisoners are going to beat them up. I also feel that she will suffer more because she's a woman. I don't feel that any crime should be punished with violence.

I have a full list of things that are easily solvable thru swift and blinding violence.

I agree with you about responding to violence with more violence. It's a high-profile case, so I don't think it's likely that she will be housed with other prisoners. I don't need to see her get beat up anyway. Prison is, by itself, enough.

Nessie

Don't just handwave them as lines, the exact nature of those lines matter. I'm not going to say all laws should always be followed as unjust laws can be made that should be opposed. Obedience in itself is not moral as demonstrated by the number of atrocities committed in the name of "just following orders." However anyone intent on breaking any such laws should be prepared to take personal responsibility for doing so and be prepared to make an open and honest case for why they were right to do so.

For instance back when I was working on student TV and radio I deliberately broke UK laws preventing the use of footage from parliament being used within a satirical context. I believed that particular law to be ridiculous and an affront to free speech that I was fully prepared to go to jail to protest it. (In the end though no one bothered to complain about it). I was fully prepared to stand in front of a jury of my peers and argue why I was right to cross the line that I did to seek jury nullification and set a precedent against such a dumb law that would have mattered in a common law system.

However the "few lines" we are talking about in Ghislaine's case are the grooming and sex trafficking of minors. If you wish to hand wave those lines you're going to need to explain why those lines are unjust a whole lot better than you have. "Other countries allow it," has never been a legal or moral justification for anything. 21 countries in the world still permit female genital mutilation that does not make it moral nor an argument for decriminalising it in all the other countries, in fact it is those 21 countries that I would argue are in the wrong. Also to be clear human trafficking whether for sexual or non-sexual purposes is illegal in England at any age and as this case involves the sex trafficking of minors as young as 14 the nature of her case wouldn't be treated any less seriously in England than the USA so frankly what age of consent is in England has no bearing on either the case or whether those lines can be handwaved.


Just to be absolutely clear on this the case involves the grooming of multiple victims. Grooming involves the deliberate manipulation of people over a prolonged period of time there is nothing accidental about this form of abuse, it is premeditated in nature and by its very definition cannot be done by mistake. Furthermore this was done repeatedly with multiple victims, there is absolutely no way this can be framed as a simple mistake.


If a person required a psychoactive drug to have sex then it de facto means they weren't consenting when they were in a clear and present mindset. Essentially a textbook case of date rape. Frankly I don't get intimate with anyone who has been drinking (or any other drugs for that matter). I do NOT regret walking out on any of the tipsy women that tried making a pass on me, good sex doesn't start with someone downing a CNS depressant if they're still interest when sober then it will be better for all involved, if they're not interested sober then I dodged a bullet. And if they say they need a little alcohol to loosen up for sex then suggest what they really need is a therapist whilst walking out on that giant red flag.


I've probably got a good idea. In the UK prison officers have coined the term "Nonce" which is an acronym for Not On Normal Communal Exercise for any prisoner that was jailed for any sexually related crime as the other inmates would regularly attack them. I've also heard about some of the pretty dreadful conditions going on in US prisons for just petty criminals and can extrapolate from there. I have got to be honest parts of this thread stinks of a sort of Missing White Woman Syndrome.

For sure the mistreatment of prisoners and doing more for rehabilitation are both issues that the US prison service needs to address and I think it should be something for you all across the pond to discuss BUT rather than argue that point or use examples from those on much lesser sentences (with 1% of the US population there is sure to be many examples of abused prisoners on much lesser sentences) this thread instead poses the question whether because of these conditions perhaps the accused should either be let off or given leniency. Not because of the nature of their potential crime it is one of the worst ones on the books but because of who they are a rich white woman. When we apply the laws differently for those that have money and those that don't it is corruption. When we apply the laws differently based on identity attributes it is discrimination. The mere suggestion that a woman shouldn't be held accountable for her actions because she's a woman is disrespectful to all other women as it both implies being a woman is tantamount to a diminished capacity defence and undermines all other women taking responsibility for their actions and kicking ass whilst doing so. It also denies justice to the women she conspired to help get abused.

The correct action here isn't to shrug the shoulders at a broken prison system and just issue get out of jail free cards to rich white women but to reform the prison service to be fit for purpose and hold everyone accountable for their actions solely on the basis of those actions and not who they happen to be.


Disagree. Violence has the habit of propagating further violence as either the victim of the violence or their friends and family come back looking for revenge for the previous attack. The "you hurt me or my tribe or moral code so I'm going to hurt yours" is the blueprint for pretty much every conflict and war. The idea that violence is a swift way of solving something that make someone angry is an idea so short sighted it fails to foresee the inevitable counterattack that will come from taking that action.

As one of the "have nots" i very much approve of a great amount of punishment being dealt to these sycophantic disgusting fucking pedophile rich cunts.

Arresting anybody is communism. So WHERE are all the CONSERVATIVE ANARCHISTS/ ANTICOMMUNISTS not SCREAMING in the streets about the arrest of ANYBODY?

And something being illegal doesn't make it wrong.
And even something being illegal and wrong doesn't mean you have to agree with big government doing anything about it.

This sounds a lot like jury nullification. One of the very few ways the average citizen has to fight back against stupid laws. Too bad more people who serve jury duty are not educated about this. Granted that would not apply in this case because everything she did was absolutely wrong and thankfully illegal as well. The only reason Epstein is not rotting in prison is because he was killed for knowing too much. Would be nice to see the FBI do something with all those files they found and with his ledger. Unfortunately because of how many people of power are in that little book we may never see justice.

I did some research. There are some questions, some serious -- especially about the jail's failure to adequately monitor him -- but the verdict is still suicide.


I would agree that nobody wants to be found on any of his contact lists any more!

Nessie

Dead on. Lock her in a room and let the parents have at her.

m

Northern Wam:

The most eloquent sentence of the year.

Looks like one horrible excuse for a human will be spending some MUCH deserved time behind bars. Hopefully she will be having some company soon.

So she is Guilty, figured as much. So what's the best on sentence you can guess? 5 Years to life?

Do everybody hate rich people? What is the definition of a rich person?

Phil

People are in jail for decades over weed. She gets 100x life IMO. Nothing to do with hating on rich people or making her a "target." She really did that shit.

I am on two years probation for self defense because I couldn't afford a good lawyer. The "hate" towards rich people isn't because they are "rich" it's because of how most use/flaunt their money. So many people avoid justice in our legal system simply because they can afford to.

It's not that rich people aren't capable to good an noble things, it's that it affords them opportunities of corruption the poor can only imagine. What the rich can accomplish through a simple redirection of funds is infinitely more than an inner city kid can ever do with a gun.

This isn't hate against Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffery Epstein because they are rich. Poor people rape too, and I have too many friends who have been. No, the righteous anger here is because these two created the mother fucking Amazon.com of sex trafficking and have ties to world fucking leaders, and billionaires who shape our society. We have no idea how deep this rabbit hole goes or what else is even involved yet.

If this is an iceberg, than this mockery of a trial isn't even the tip, it's the new fallen snow that's drifted on top.

It doesn't take much effort to look around and see the loads of damning evidence against these people. And while she may take the brunt of it, her punishment will nothing compared to what it should be assuming she doesn't "commit suicide".

But The Clintons, Trumps, Gates, etc will never see a day in court, let alone jail. THAT is where the anger comes from. And I genuinely don't understand why or how you can't see that.

Wonderful to see the kind of person Phil is. Takes a real special man to defend what those monsters did.

Maybe Epstein has an uncle who is into mud...?