Swimming
Add news
News

Epstein madam Ghislaine Maxwell was ‘constantly taking photographs of topless girls by the pool to keep in a folder’

0 14

GHISLAINE Maxwell “constantly” snapped pics of topless girls by swimming pools, it’s alleged in newly unsealed court documents.

An unnamed witness in federal court papers unsealed on Saturday claimed Jeffrey Epstein’s right-hand woman had a high-tech camera, and the half-nude shots were stored in an album.

Reuters
Deposition in relation to a civil suit has been unsealed[/caption]

The witness said in the deposition: “She was very avid with photographs,” reports the New York Post.

The documentation continued: “She had this high-tech camera. She was constantly taking photographs.”

Most of the pics were taken of women near pools, and were “topless”, the witness added.

Maxwell would later add them to an album she kept on her desk, according to the witness identified as ‘Jane Doe 1’ in court papers related to a 2016 civil suit against her.

The British socialite, 58, is currently locked up in a New York jail on charges that she groomed girls for Jeffrey Epstein, who died in a New York jail in August last year.

Maxwell has denied all accusations.

She could be immune from prosecution thanks to a sweetheart deal drawn up for Jeffrey Epstein in 2007, a Department of Justice report claims.

Southern District of Florida lawyers intended for the deal to protect four  purported female associates allegedly involved in claims made against Epstein at the time.

Getty Images - Getty
Prosecutors who gave Jeffrey Epstein a plea deal failed to realise they were giving immunity to Ghislaine Maxwell[/caption]

But the badly worded document said the US would not charge “any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited to (the four)”.

The language used was so loose, it could also apply to Maxwell, 58, who is accused of being Epstein’s chief recruiter.

The blunder was in a report by the Department of Justice’s internal watchdog, the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) which has been seen by the DailyMail.com.

The OPR report was designed to look into whether or not any of the prosecutors involved in Epstein’s case engaged in corruption or professional misconduct.

It was concluded that it did not happen – but over 350 pages dug up disturbing questions about how the case was handled.

SWEETHEART DEAL

In 2007 Jeffrey Epstein signed a non prosecution agreement (NPA), to make federal charges against him disappear.

He had been charged the previous year with four counts of lewd and lascivious behavior for unlawful sex with a minor.

Five victims and seventeen witnesses were interviewed, and alleged that Epstein engaged in unlawful sexual behavior.

He plead guilty in state court to two felony prostitution charges, and was to be sentenced to 18 months in jail and register as a sex offender.

Department of Justice Report into Epstein's sweetheart deal

The following key points were discussed by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) in the explosive report.

  • The OPR revealed the errors that led to Epstein serving just 15 months in jail in 2007 despite the FBI identifying dozens of his underage victims.
  • Both FBI agents and the lead prosecutor involved in Epstein’s case had also apparently repeatedly pushed for Epstein’s arrest.
  • But they are said in the report to have been overruled by senior officials.
  • Prosecutors reportedly failed, for example, to grab Epstein’s computers and CCTV tapes which could have proved he had child pornography.
  • An attorney working for Epstein at the time also reportedly had a prior relationship with one of the prosecutors and told him to “do us a solid (favor)”.
  • The report is said to have faulted ex Labor Secretary Alexander Acosta, then the U.S. Attorney in Miami, for exhibiting “poor judgement” in deciding to resolve the Epstein case through a non-prosecution agreement.
  • It reportedly found that Acosta decided to make Epstein his sweetheart deal before the investigation was complete.  
  • The OPR also detailed for the first time the breadth of the personal connections many of Epstein’s lesser-known defense lawyers had to the prosecutors conducting the investigation.
  • It concluded that the deal with Epstein was made with little thought to how it could be interpreted in the future.

Under the immunity clause, which was worded by Epstein’s lawyers, four women were also given protection from prosecution.

They were Sarah Kellen, who was allegedly one of his main recruiters, Nadia Marcinkova, an alleged sex slave, Adriana Ross, one of his associates, and Lesley Groff, who is said to have been his New York based assistant.

All the women have subsequently denied any wrongdoing and some have said they are victims.

The final language of the immunity clause was: “The United States agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein, including but not limited to (the four women)”.

The wording was loose enough that it could apply to Maxwell, Epstein’s ex girlfriend who his victims have claimed ran his sex trafficking operation.

Maxwell has vehemently denied the allegations against her.

The report also reveals the errors that led to Epstein serving just 15 months in jail in 2007 despite the FBI identifying dozens of his underage victims.

AP:Associated Press
Southern District of Florida lawyers thought they were only giving protection to four female Epstein associates in 2007[/caption]
Getty Images - Getty
The badly worded document said the US would not charge any potential co-conspirators of Epstein[/caption]

Prosecutors failed, for example, to grab his computers and CCTV tapes which could have proved he had child pornography.

An attorney working for Epstein at the time also reportedly had a prior relationship with one of the prosecutors and told him to “do us a solid (favor)” by getting his boss to suggest giving Epstein just two years in jail, the report apparently says.

The document concludes that prosecutors did not engage in corrupt or professional misconduct, partly because the bar was that prosecutors “intentionally or recklessly violated a clear and unambiguous standard”.

Загрузка...

Comments

Комментарии для сайта Cackle
Загрузка...

More news:

Read on Sportsweek.org:

Other sports

Sponsored