Thoughts On Ghislaine Maxwell’s Appeal


Why I think It's Unlikely to Succeed

First off, thank you everyone for bearing with me. These past weeks, I have not been posting here because I’ve been working on the book I’m co-writing with James Patterson about the Moscow Murders. I’ll be back soon enough!

It’s very hard, if not impossible, I find, to immerse yourself in deep storytelling on too many fronts at once. You can certainly write multiple things that are top-of-mind, and bounce off of the news, but as you know, I prefer, when possible, to bring you reporting, not just insights.

But, given that Ghislaine Maxwell’s criminal trial was the genesis of this newsletter, I did want to give you my thoughts about Maxwell’s appeal. Oral arguments were made last Tuesday in New York. Maxwell was not present but reportedly listened in on the phone from prison in Florida.

The main argument made by Maxwell’s defense was that Maxwell was protected by the strange, controversial Non-Prosecution Agreement of 2007, entered into by Epstein and then U.S. attorney in Florida Alexander Acosta, in which Epstein agreed to plead guilty to two state counts: procuring a minor for prostitution and soliciting a prostitute. In exchange he got a cushy sentence and avoided the much more serious potential charges of a federal investigation.

However there was a crucial clause in the NPA in which Epstein asked that no one else be charged with his crimes, for which he took sole responsibility.

“The United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited to Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Lesley Groff or Nadia Marcinkova.”

He did not name Maxwell.

Read on at Vicky Ward Investigates