Above: Ghislaine Maxwell with President Clinton
A federal appeals court dealt Ghislaine Maxwell, the alleged madam to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, twin blows late Monday by declining to consolidate her appeals in numerous overlapping cases and striking down her effort to thwart release of a controversial deposition she gave in a now-settled civil lawsuit.
The three-judge Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held more than two hours of oral arguments last week, and issued a succinct Monday afternoon order holding that a lower court judge did not err in ordering the release of a 418-page deposition from April 2016 that could shed new light on the Epstein empire.
“We have reviewed all of the arguments raised by Defendant-Appellant Maxwell on appeal and find them to be without merit,” the judges wrote, also turning away a request for consolidation with Maxwell’s criminal case in the Southern District of New York. “We DENY the motion to consolidate this appeal with the pending appeal in United States v. Maxwell.”
The 2016 testimony of Ghislaine Maxwell’s Deposition of Jeffrey Epstein is included below:
A judge has released hundreds of pages of Ghislaine Maxwell’s testimony from a civil lawsuit by one of her accusers. The documents are the only substantive public record from Maxwell about what she said she did for her former boyfriend Jeffrey Epstein https://t.co/oYwnM4QdBR pic.twitter.com/oiWYQcyshc
— Bloomberg (@business) October 22, 2020
The first item of note is that the documents released are heavily redacted. What is the deal with the Deep State redacting names and identities of individuals in the case. Why are the elites continuously protected?
Court also redacted the names of other men who may have been present at Jeffrey’s homes or on his plane. Unclear on what basis these names were redacted.
— julie k. brown (@jkbjournalist) October 22, 2020
The Clinton’s names are redacted in the documents:
Why are the Clintons’ names redacted from this? pic.twitter.com/Jj3TmXE2SD
— julie k. brown (@jkbjournalist) October 22, 2020
The names of the underage girls in the case are not redacted – only the names of the perpetrators:
It’s absolutely horrible that the court managed to miss redacting the names of two female victims from this document, identifying a 14-year-old victim — yet they spared all the men (including the names of lawyers!) from being identified…unbelievable!
— julie k. brown (@jkbjournalist) October 22, 2020
