Jeffrey Epstein’s Runaway Procurer
Ghislaine N. Maxwell is on the run again. A close friend of HRH Prince Andrew and former president Bill Clinton was sued once more. Maxwell refuses to accept service and instructed her Denver, Colorado attorneys, Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, not to accept service on her behalf. Maxwell’s attorneys also announced they do not know her whereabouts. The case: Jane Doe #43 vs. Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Sarah Kellen, Lesley Groff, and Natalya Malyshev, is the second pending civil lawsuit filed against Maxwell by a sex trafficked survivor.
Filed January 26, 2017, in New York, this case shows how Maxwell and her former companion, Jeffrey E. Epstein, sexually abused Jane Doe #43 when she was a minor living in Manhattan. Maxwell is a dual citizen of England and France and until recently owned a residence in New York City off Madison Avenue. Jane Doe #43 otherwise known as Sarah Ransome is a native South African.
Ransome was recruited in Manhattan by Natalya Malyshev who apparently procured for Epstein and Maxwell. Malyshev introduced her to Maxwell, Epstein, and the alleged procurers named in the case. Ransome, “Believed her [conformity] with [Maxwell’s and Epstein’s] demands were crucial to her physical, psychological, financial survival.” During the 6-month period of dependence, Epstein provided Ransome with a cell phone and an apartment at his building at 301 East 66 Street in Manhattan. The abusive relationship lasted between October 2006 until end of April 2007, when Ransome ran away and left the country.
Maxwell, who allegedly instructed Ransome how to massage Epstein expected the girl to, “Provide Epstein with massages in order to reap the benefits of his and Maxwell’s connections.” Ransome said, “Maxwell and Epstein threatened [her and] that while they had the ability to advance her education and career, they also had the ability to make sure she would obtain no formal education or modeling agency contracts if she failed to provide the sexual favors… [unless she obeyed] the instructions given her by Epstein and Maxwell.” Ransome agreed to perform sex acts with Maxwell and Epstein because she wanted to attend the Fashion Institute of Technology, “FIT,” in Manhattan. Case 1:17-cv-00616-JGK Filed 01/26/17
In fact, the introduction by defendant Malyshev, turns out to be part of the massive underage sex pyramid scheme created in the 1990s by Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein, Sarah Kellen and other defendants identified in this case. Sex crimes apparently committed by Maxwell and Epstein were perpetrated against dozens of at risk, underage, vulnerable girls looking primarily for part time jobs, modeling work, and money to pay for their higher education.
The scope and range of sex crimes against minors were so heinous that Epstein was eventually arrested in 2005. In 2008, Epstein served 13 months in a private cell in a private building at the Palm Beach County jail followed by 18 months of house arrest in his Palm Beach estate. Maxwell and the other defendants were never criminally charged in the 2005 criminal case.
Ransome said, “Epstein made it known that further sex would be required in order for her to obtain [his] assistance and avoid Ransome’s threatened retaliation if [she] did not perform as demanded.” Maxwell and Epstein told Ransome, “other young [girls]…were there not only to provide massages, but also sexual acts.” “Epstein gave [Ransome], no option.” The girl was coerced “dozens of times to provide body massages to Epstein at his [Manhattan] townhouse and on his private island [Little St. John], in the U.S. Virgin Islands. She was also “Required to perform [sex acts] with Epstein, [and was] transported [on his private jet].” With the intent to sexually exploit Ransome the defendants, Maxwell, Leslie Groff and Kellen also, “arranged [Ransome’s] commercial air travel on numerous occasions.”
“On one occasion, after suffering verbal abuse and threats by Epstein, Maxwell, and Kellen, Ransome attempted to escape Epstein’s island. A search party led by Epstein located her and physically returned her to [his] main house.” Ransome claims she remained with Maxwell and Epstein between October 2006-April 2007 because she was scared and if she had run away perhaps they, “Would physical[ly] restrain and potential[ly] harm her, as well as [damage] her reputation, employability, and state of mind.” In January 2007, “Maxwell and Epstein along with the other procurers sent Ransome back to South Africa to recruit, for a promised fee, one or more aspiring female models supposedly for Epstein to use as a personal assistant.” They threatened not to pay for her education and help her in her career if she did not meet their terms.
“While in South Africa Sarah Ransome refused to recruit the minor girls, and returned to New York. Maxwell and Epstein threatened her. They also [told] her she would not be [allowed] back to the U.S. unless she went on a diet and lost 57 kilos approximately 125 pounds.” Vulnerable, ambitious and inexperienced, Ransome believed, “she had no choice and attempted to lose the weight.”
The diet led to “kidney malfunction and extreme emotional and psychological distress.” Epstein and Maxwell, “Called Sarah’s parents in South Africa [to explain] they would take good care of Sarah when she returned to the U.S. and would use their connections and influence to have [her] admitted to FIT or another well-regarded fashion school.” In February 2007, Ransome returned to New York and was immediately forced to have sex with Epstein.” By May 2007, when Maxwell and Epstein did not keep their promise “Ransome left the U.S. and did not return.”
It seems, “Epstein’s wealth, influence, power and connections were used both as an inducement to provide sex (in exchange for promises of support), and as a means of threatening punishment (should [Ransome and other minors] refuse to comply with [his] instructions.”. On May 11th, Brad Edwards one of the attorneys representing several trafficked survivors in the Epstein cases, filed an extension of service. Edwards a South Florida attorney represents Ransome in partnership with David Boies in New York. Neither attorney returned my calls for comments. Edwards and Boies are jointly representing another victim, Virginia R. Giuffre, pro bono in the ongoing Virginia Giuffre vs. Ghislaine Maxwell case.
Virginia R. Giuffre vs. Ghislaine Maxwell is related to the same 2005 Epstein/Maxwell sex trafficking criminal case. Scheduled for trial May 15th, in New York, it has been rescheduled to May 25th. According to court filings that have been heavily redacted, attorneys for Virginia Giuffre postponed the May 15th jury trial pending settlement talks. Judge Robert Sweet, a Carter appointee, is the presiding judge. The New York Post and New York Daily News are on record objecting to the heavily redacted filings.
It seems that after so many years, the case of Virginia Louise Roberts Giuffre, and the attorneys who represented her have agreed to settle for a large payout with Ghislaine Maxwell, the lover and alleged principal procurer of Jeffrey Epstein. This is after displays of lengthy legal battles in the public eye. Confrontations that served only to massage the egos of the attorneys and make a lot of noise. The Roberts-Giuffre and perhaps the Ransome sex trafficking cases are text book cases where money, politics, power, and greed win the day over truth and justice.