The family of Ghislaine Maxwell has voiced concerns regarding the fairness of her trial, asserting that the proceedings were unjust.
This statement emerged as Maxwell, once an associate of the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, sought to overturn her 2020 conviction on charges of sex trafficking. Currently, she is serving a 20-year sentence at the Federal Correctional Institution in Tallahassee.
As reported by Breitbart, Maxwell's family is contemplating further legal action to secure her release. They are considering filing a writ of habeas corpus in the Southern District of New York, a move that would question the legitimacy of her incarceration.
The family's statement elaborated, "If necessary, in due course they will also file a writ of habeas corpus in the U.S. District Court, SDNY. This allows her to challenge her imprisonment on the basis of new evidence such as government misconduct that would have likely changed the trials outcome."
Central to Maxwell's appeal is the argument that her prosecution contravened a prior plea agreement. According to Fox News, the 2007 non-prosecution agreement between Epstein and federal prosecutors in Florida included a clause stating, "the United States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Despite this, lower courts have dismissed this defense, potentially necessitating a review by the U.S. Supreme Court.
David Oscar Marcus, one of Maxwell's attorneys, expressed skepticism about President Trump's awareness of the legal strategy involving the Supreme Court. Marcus remarked, "Id be surprised if President Trump knew his lawyers were asking the Supreme Court to let the government break a deal. Hes the ultimate dealmaker and Im sure hed agree that when the United States gives its word, it should keep it."
In December 2021, Maxwell was found guilty by a jury of several charges, including sex trafficking of minors, transporting a minor for criminal sexual activity, and multiple conspiracy counts. Her conviction resulted in a 20-year prison sentence.
The unfolding legal battle raises questions about the integrity of plea agreements and the extent to which they should be honored, particularly when new evidence or allegations of misconduct come to light.
Login