New York
7 accusers write to Ghislaine Maxwell’s sentencing judge
NEW YORK (AP) — Seven women who say Ghislaine Maxwell helped Jeffrey Epstein steal the innocence of their youth and poison the promise of their future are asking a judge to consider their pain as she decides what prison sentence she will dispense Tuesday to the incarcerated British woman.
Their statements were put in the public case file late Friday by Manhattan prosecutors who have asked U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan to sentence Maxwell to 30 to 55 years in prison for “monstrous” crimes resulting in a December sex trafficking conviction for a socialite who has been jailed since her July 2020 arrest.
Four women testified at Maxwell’s monthlong trial, where they described sexual attacks on teenage girls from 1994 to 2004 by Epstein and Maxwell at Epstein’s mansions and estates in Manhattan, New Mexico, Florida and the Virgin Islands.
In a statement, Annie Farmer, who testified at trial and spoke at Epstein’s bail hearing before he killed himself in August 2019 as he awaited a sex trafficking trial, said Maxwell’s lack of remorse and her repeated lies about victims forced “a long fight for justice that has felt like a black hole sucking in our precious time, energy and wellbeing.”
Defense lawyer Bobbi Sternheim included the victim statements in a submission to the judge Friday after the defense asked for a sentence of no more than five years, but she heavily redacted portions in asking the judge to disregard some entirely because they were not directly a part of the case that resulted in Maxwell’s conviction.
Prosecutors, though, said no redactions were required or necessary because any privacy interests belonged to victims and none asked for their statements to be sealed. They added that no “due process interest is protected by withholding victim impact statements from the public.” Three victims may speak at sentencing.
Included were nine graphic pictures of Sarah Ransome taken in a hospital bed after two suicide attempts she blames on the trauma of over a half year spent as a “sex toy” for Epstein and Maxwell and others that left her so distressed that she once considered jumping from a cliff into shark-infested waters off Epstein’s sprawling Virgin Islands estate.
Ransome, who wrote a book “Silenced No More” and traveled from her England home to observe Maxwell’s trial, said she was stopped from taking the plunge by “Maxwell and company” moments before jumping but that at the time, “that extremely risky escape seemed more appealing than being raped one more time.”
One woman, “Kate,” a former British model who testified at trial, spoke of the “silent screams” inside the minds of girls who were not yet adults when Maxwell and Epstein flashed wealth and ties to famous and powerful people before subjecting them to sex abuse and then fear so they would never disobey their prurient quests.
Calling Maxwell “dangerous and devious,” Maria Farmer said her intersection with the pair and sexual assault by Epstein during a trip to Ohio cost her a promising career as an artist and leaves her still feeling unsafe outside, firm in a belief that Maxwell will harm her “if she ever has a way.” She is the sister of Annie Farmer.
Another, Virginia Giuffre, said Maxwell “opened the door to hell” as she joked that she was like a new mother to dozens of girls and young women she fed to her financier boyfriend and later boss. “Ghislaine, like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, you used your femininity to betray us, and you led us all through it.”
She added: “You could have put an end to the rapes, the molestations, the sickening manipulations that you arranged, witnessed and even took part in. You could’ve called the authorities and reported that you were a part of something awful. ... Ghislaine, you deserve to spend the rest of your life in a jail cell. You deserve to be trapped in a cage forever, just like you trapped your victims.”
The AP does not identify people who say they were victims of sexual assault unless they have consented to being identified.
Florida
Judge to hear arguments on state’s new abortion law
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) — Reproductive health providers have asked a state court in Florida to block a new law limiting abortion from taking effect on Friday, arguing that the state constitution guarantees a broad right to privacy including abortion.
Planned Parenthood is among those seeking a temporary emergency injunction to stop the law approved this year by Florida’s Republican-controlled legislature and governor. A Florida synagogue also sued, saying the government intrusion violates the privacy rights and religious freedoms of Jewish women.
A judge set a hearing for 9 a.m. Monday in Tallahassee, days after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that abortion has no basis in the U.S. Constitution.
Florida currently allows abortions up to 24 weeks. The new law prohibits abortions beyond 15 weeks except to save the life or prevent physical harm to the pregnant woman, or in cases of a fatal fetal abnormality. It mirrors the Mississippi law that conservative justices used to overturn Roe v. Wade.
Violators could face up to five years in prison. Physicians or other medical professionals could lose their licenses and face administrative fines of $10,000 for each violation.
“The ban is blatantly unconstitutional under the state constitution,” the ACLU of Florida, which is representing the plaintiffs, said in a statement.
Florida voters in 1980 amended the state constitution to guarantee a broad right of privacy, which includes the right to abortion, the abortion providers said in court papers.
In 2012, Florida voters reaffirmed the right to privacy by rejecting a ballot initiative that would have weakened its protections and would have prohibited state courts from interpreting the Florida Constitution to provide stronger protection for abortion than federal law, they said.
“Despite Florida’s history of protecting the right to abortion, the Florida legislature recently engaged in a brazen attempt to override the will of the Florida people,” the abortion providers said.
The state asked the judge to reject the request. In court papers, the state argued that abortion providers don’t have standing to make a claim of a personal right to privacy since they are acting as third parties on behalf of their patients, and failed to show they will suffer “irreparable harm” if the injunction isn’t granted.
“Doctors are not irreparably harmed simply because they cannot perform a procedure prohibited by state law,” attorneys for the state of Florida said.
