A U.S. judge who was assigned to rule over Ghislaine Maxwell’s habeas corpus petition has dismissed her claims as "frivolous" and "meritless”, while the mainstream media are intentionally refusing to cover the important points raised in the petition.
Maxwell had appealed against her five felony convictions, claiming her constitutional rights had been "violated in multiple respects".
But, ruling today, U.S. District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer, who was nominated into his position by Barak Obama, stated that the appeal "falls very far from the mark", adding: "Nearly all its claims are procedurally barred; the overwhelming testimonial and documentary evidence adduced at trial conclusively established her guilt; and her petition's claims are demonstrably meritless, and generally based on speculation, distortions, and/or outright falsehoods.”
He did not specify what he believed to be “falsehoods”, nor provide evidence. In fact, when I asked an individual close to Ghislaine Maxwell why the judge passed his ruling so swiftly (habeas corpus petitions usually take over a year to be ruled on), they told me that ‘the judge wanted to quickly get it off his docket.’
The habeas petition raised concerns over how Maxwell was denied her constitutional rights during her trial.
The habeas highlighted, with evidence, multiple issues, including that two jurors lied on their juror application forms that they had never been victims of sexual abuse (the opposite turned out to be true, and those jurors are now proven to have emotionally pressured other jurors into finding Ghislaine Maxwell guilty and to dismiss their doubts about the credibility of her accusers); that evidence submitted to the court by prosecutors was intentionally misrepresented; that evidence was withheld from her legal team, and that she was even prosecuted at all, considering that the non-prosecution agreement granted to Epstein also protected his alleged ‘co-conspirators’.
This month, Maxwell submitted a supplementary filing that listed further issues with her conviction - yet, as with all of her previous filings, there delivery to the judge was hugely delayed despite Maxwell filing them on time.
Some had already told me that they believed Engelmayer being able to rule over the petition was questionable and that he could potentially harbour bias. He had previously worked as an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Southern District of New York, where Ghislaine was convicted, and as an assistant to the U.S. Solicitor General.
Shockingly, in his ruling, Engelmayer warned Maxwell against making further appeals, saying it "would not be taken in good faith" by the court, despite it being her constitutional right to do so, and despite a U.S. court of law being legally bound to handle any appeals fairly and impartially.
Maxwell can appeal Engelmayer’s denial of her §2255/habeas motion to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. Today’s ruling does not itself end the litigation.
If the Second Circuit rejects her, she could ask the Supreme Court to take the case, although the Supreme Court has already declined to hear her earlier appeal, making another trip there a difficult proposition.
There is also a separate route that isn’t judicial at all: Presidential clemency.
A pardon or commutation is now particularly significant because the Supreme Court has already refused her direct appeal. Her lawyer David Markus has previously indicated that he intends to pursue a presidential pardon.
I’ll have more to say about this very soon, and will be reaching out to her family for comment.
In the meantime, stay tuned for my newsletter and for episode six of my podcast The Life & Death of Jeff (both out later today). In this episode, we’ll be exploring the beginning of Virginia Giuffre’s role in the Epstein scandal, and you’ll be able to listen to clips of my interviews with Giuffre’s former longterm partner.
This is devastating news she was not complicit at no 44 kinnerton st belgravia in march 2001 virginia giuffre was complicit with epstein