- Feb 10, 2013
- 36,793
- 21,155
- 29
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Catholic
- Marital Status
- Celibate
- Politics
- US-Republican
Does anyone believe her?Especially hoping for a pardon.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Does anyone believe her?Especially hoping for a pardon.
I don't think I am well informed on her.I like Ghislane Maxwell. I hope she gets freedom!
Yes, but I don't think she was ever given a fair chance. Everyone seemed to hate her, before her trial. I doubt she was treated fairly.I don't think I am well informed on her.
Was she friends with Epstein?
Ahhh, I need to read up more on her. I find it difficult to trust any associates of Epstein.Yes, but I don't think she was ever given a fair chance. Everyone seemed to hate her, before her trial. I doubt she was treated fairly.
No one ever was saying like that before it looked like this issue could turn against Trump.Yes, but I don't think she was ever given a fair chance. Everyone seemed to hate her, before her trial. I doubt she was treated fairly.
...To this day, she claims that she had no involvement with grooming minors. I kind of believe her for some reason.
No one ever was saying like that before it looked like this issue could turn against Trump.
A jury found her quite guilty. Doesnt matter how "the discussion" regarded her.
She is certainly not a good source for finding the truth.![]()
Trump ‘was never inappropriate with anybody,’ Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell told DOJ
Audio and transcripts of the interviews were released Friday as the Trump administration seeks to quash rampant speculation about Epstein, who was found dead in his Manhattan jail cell.nypost.com
Of course. Soon the Democrats will come up with yet another claim about something.
I know nobody ever showed any sign of fairness toward the possibility of Ghislaine Maxwell's innocence. Nobody ever has!
...That's the problem! She was treated like a witch in Salem.
And appeals?They had grand jury indictments and voir dire and a right to legal counsel at Salem in 1691?
The magistrates and juries did benefit from divine guidance tho. So it was all good.They had grand jury indictments and voir dire and a right to legal counsel at Salem in 1691?
Gee, but it's nice to have a reason, you know? I don't think that we'd like it if the judge in the case was to say 'Hey, I'm going to let you go. Because I kind of believe you for some reason'.I kind of believe her for some reason.
Gee, but it's nice to have a reason, you know? I don't think that we'd like it if the judge in the case was to say 'Hey, I'm going to let you go. Because I kind of believe you for some reason'.
I'm sure that you'd agree that it would be an idiotic thing for him to say.
Her prior statements garnered her perjury charges. She did not testify at her own criminal trial.Has anyone taken her testimony seriously at
all?
The jury did not hear her testimony as she took her right to not testify in her own defense. The declared her "guilty".Or did the jury simply call her a liar and choose to believe the plaintiffs testimony instead?
The plaintiff was "The United States of America" and she was proven guilty.It would sure be a bummer if in every court case, the plaintiffs testimony held more weight than the defendant, in a situation without evidence, as the gold standard. In fact, if there were a gold standard, it would have to be the other way around for a justice system that touts "innocent until proven guilty".
Interesting. I thought there was testimony by some of the alleged victims. And that the victims testimonies became the evidence, with no physical evidence, aside from Maxwell being at certain places that the victims said she was at a particular time.Her prior statements garnered her perjury charges. She did not testify at her own criminal trial.
The jury did not hear her testimony as she took her right to not testify in her own defense. The declared her "guilty".
The plaintiff was "The United States of America" and she was proven guilty.
She had a defence team put forward her case. Evidence for both sides was produced and given all due attention by the court. Due process was followed. She was then found guilty by a jury of her peers. If you have anything you think wasn't presented that should have been, if you have any new evidence or you know an aspect of the case that you think was biased then I suggest that you find out who her council actually was and inform them asap. Other than 'I think she's innocent for some reason'.Has anyone taken her testimony seriously at
all? Or did the jury simply call her a liar and choose to believe the plaintiffs testimony instead?
The case docket is available at:Interesting. I thought there was testimony by some of the alleged victims. And that the victims testimonies became the evidence, with no physical evidence, aside from Maxwell being at certain places that the victims said she was at a particular time.
...That's not really satisfactory. Lots of room for error in making a judgement on that alone.
Ah, another day, another round of supporting and defending people convicted of crimes related to sec abuse as really “not all that bad.” How nice.