At her seat in the well of a federal courtroom, Ghislaine Maxwell does not always look like a woman facing the prospect of spending the rest of her life in jail. Each day as a succession of witnesses testified against her, she has seemed engaged and resolute, speaking animatedly with two of her siblings, studying the evidence produced by the government and passing notes to her lawyers.
She had reasons to be optimistic. The young team of federal prosecutors made mistakes and her own experienced lawyers proved effective in cross-examining one of her alleged victims. But over the last week, the case against her has steadily grown stronger, bolstered by evidence from two key witnesses and a cascade of supporting photographs and documents.
When prosecutors signalled on Wednesday that they would call fewer witnesses and spend less time making their case against her, it did not look like an admission of weakness. It raised the prospect that Maxwell could face a verdict before Christmas, days before she turns 60.
Maxwell is accused of aiding Jeffrey Epstein in his abuse of minors. She has pleaded not guilty and her legal team have argued that she is being prosecuted in his stead, for acts that he committed. They have argued that she was his hardworking employee, not his accomplice. Cross-examining Maxwell’s alleged victims, they have suggested that her accusers only began to implicate Maxwell in Epstein’s abuses after he took his own life in jail, as Epstein’s estate set up a fund to compensate victims and the government promised to investigate possible co-conspirators.
After Jane, the first of Maxwell’s alleged victims to testify who is not using her real name, told of being sexually abused by both Maxwell and Epstein at the age of 14, Laura Menninger, for the defence, confronted her with notes from meetings she had with investigators in 2019 and 2020. In those, “you told the government you have no memory of Ghislaine being present when you claim Epstein engaged in any sexual contact with you, correct?” she asked.
Advertisement
“I don’t recall,” Jane replied.
Prosecutors had planned to call Jane’s brother this week. But on Tuesday morning prosecutors disclosed that Jane had phoned him after she testified — witnesses are specifically directed not to confer. Jane had told her brother about a document she was shown in the witness box. Menninger said she also “gave her characterisation of the defence attorney who cross-examined her, using an expletive that rhymes with ‘front’.” Prosecutors said they would not call her brother at all.
By then, however, their case looked stronger. A British witness testifying under the pseudonym Kate spoke of how Maxwell charmed and befriended her and led her to a room where Epstein stood nude, closed the door and asked her afterwards if she “had fun”. Kate was 17 years old at the time so over the age of consent in Britain. Judge Alison Nathan instructed the jury that what happened in the room could not be considered “illegal sexual activity” as the government had originally alleged in an indictment, nor could they find Maxwell guilty on Kate’s testimony alone.
But Kate offered jurors a more intimate picture of Maxwell and what her motives might have been. “She would talk about . . . how demanding Jeffrey was,” she said. “She would ask if I knew anybody who could come and give Jeffrey a blow job because it was a lot for her to do.”
Kate was from a wealthy household in Belgravia and had been offered a place at Oxford; another accuser under the pseudonym Carolyn came from a poor neighbourhood in West Palm Beach, Florida, and had dropped out of school by the age of 13. She told the court of Maxwell calling her to schedule “massage” appointments and asking her if she’d like to fly to Epstein’s Caribbean island. “I told her I was 14,” she said. “There was no way in hell my mom was going to let me leave the country.” She said Maxwell continued to call.
Advertisement
Prosecutors also introduced a series of photographs of Maxwell and Epstein together, found on CDs in Epstein’s New York home, over fierce objections from the defence. “There is a cumulativeness problem,” Menninger, told the judge. “You don’t need 20 photographs to say what two might just as well say.”
Alison Moe, for the prosecution, replied that “throughout this trial, the defence has repeatedly tried to distance Ms Maxwell from Mr Epstein and his affairs . . . they repeatedly suggested that she was only a personal assistant.”
The photographs showed them together all over the world over many years. Each one was described for the jury by Kimberly Meder, an FBI analyst. “Who do we see in this photograph?” a prosecutor asked. “Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell,” Meder replied. She did not need to say more: they told their own story.
