the times | Saturday January 1 2022 2GM 11
News
The true size of Ghislaine Maxwell’s
fortune may never be known, a legal
expert has said.
Questions about the former social-
ite’s money — how much she had and
where it came from — hung heavily
over her sex trafficking trial.
The jury was told that Maxwell’s
former boyfriend and longtime asso-
ciate Jeffrey Epstein transferred more
than $30 million to her between 1999
and 2007. Prosecutors alleged that the
money was one of the motivating
factors behind Maxwell’s procuring of
under-age girls for Epstein, as she
wanted to maintain the luxurious life-
style she was accustomed to.
She was ferried around the world on
Epstein’s private jet and the court was
told of her many homes in London and
New York. Since her arrest in July 2020,
Maxwell’s lawyers sought to paint their
client as far less well-off than imagined
but the judge in the case was sceptical
and said the now convicted sex traffick-
er had not been “fully candid” about her
fortune.
Mitchell Epner, from the law firm
BBC in more
trouble after
interview
with brother
Jake Kanter Media CorrespondentGhislaine Maxwell was warned to cut a
deal with prosecutors years ago and
failed to heed the advice, the lawyer
bringing the sex abuse case against the
Duke of York has said.
David Boies, who represents Virginia
Roberts Giuffre, said that he had tried
to warn Maxwell five years ago “that
she was making a mistake not trying to
cut a deal. She could have cut a very
good deal early on but passed up that
opportunity.”
He added: “I think that’s proven to be
Maxwell ‘ignored warning to do a deal five years ago’
a fatal mistake.” Maxwell, 60, is await-
ing sentencing for sex trafficking and
for conspiring to “entice” and “trans-
port” teenagers across state lines for il-
legal sexual activity. The charges carry
up to 65 years in prison if she is ordered
to serve the terms consecutively.
Although Maxwell may have been
reluctant to heed the advice of the law-
yer representing Giuffre, who had sued
her for defamation in 2015, Boies be-
lieves she was badly advised by her own
attorneys. “It was partly arrogance,” he
said, adding: “I don’t think her lawyers
did a good job in protecting her.”citizens. “I think it was a combination of
arrogance, and she had gotten away
with it so long,” he said. “When you get
away with something for years and
years, you begin to think that you are
above the law.”
After her conviction, there was spec-
ulation that she might try to work with
prosecutors to cut her sentence. “The
problem is... she has relatively little to
offer at this point,” Boies said. “She had
a lot to offer five years ago.” He added:
“If she has any sense at all she will try to
accept responsibility and co-operate.”
Saturday interview, pages 34-Maxwell gave two depositions to
Boies and his colleague Sigrid McCaw-
ley which were later used by prosecutors
to charge her with perjury, counts which
were severed from the case but could
still form the basis of a separate trial.
The defamation suit, which was set-
tled in Giuffre’s favour in 2017, should
have been “a wake-up call” and the
arrest of Epstein in 2019 was an even
greater warning, Boies said.
Some have wondered why she did
not flee the country, as someone who
holds multiple passports, including for
France, which does not extradite itsWill Pavia
The BBC has provoked more anger
over Ghislaine Maxwell’s conviction by
interviewing her brother, Ian, for five
minutes on Toda y on Radio 4.
Maxwell, 65, discussed the decision
to find his sister guilty of sex trafficking.
He said that her trial had not been fair
and he maintained her innocence.
“Ghislaine had nothing to do with it.
These were Epstein’s crimes and he’s
not here to pay that price, and she has
been made to pay the price that he
should have paid,” he said.
He was repeatedly asked by Mishal
Husain, the presenter, whether the
women who testified against Ghislaine
were lying. “Of course, the prosecution
didn’t put into evidence the prior inter-
views they had with these accusers,
which showed a completely different
case,” he said.
“Memory is faulty, and so, in my view,
the trial that has occurred was not a fair
trial from Ghislaine’s perspective. And
that is why she’s going to appeal, and I
think she’ll be successful.”
The BBC had previously admitted
that it had been a mistake to interview
Alan Dershowitz, Epstein’s former law-
yer, without explaining his connection
to the case. That interview was strongly
criticised by listeners.John Nicolson, an SNP MP who sits
on the culture select committee, said
that having Ian Maxwell on Toda y was
“another odd decision” following the
Dershowitz interview on the BBC
News channel.
Lord Adonis tweeted: “Very poor
editing of the Toda y programme to give
air time to Maxwell family claiming
that the verdict was wrong. Who else
would get prime BBC time to object to
a jury verdict for sex trafficking after a
fair trial?”
Adil Ray, a Good Morning Britain pre-
senter and creator of the comedy Citi-
zen Khan, added: “BBC and others run-
ning interview by brother of convicted
#ghislanemaxwell, claiming her inno-
cence. In 2011 when I filmed a doc on
the sexual exploitation of young girls by
some Pakistani men it would not have
been acceptable to hear a defence from
their brothers. Why is it ok now?”
Lord Vaizey of Didcot, a former cul-
ture minister and potential candidate to
be the next chairman of Ofcom, which
regulates broadcasters, said: “I think it’s
fair to say @BBCNews coverage of
Maxwell conviction is pretty poor.”
The BBC has been approached for
comment.
Yesterday it began an investigation
into the Dershowitz interview. He was
introduced as a “constitutional lawyer”
and no mention was made of his previ-
ous representation of Epstein.
The BBC also failed to make clear
that Dershowitz, 83, has been accused
of sexual abuse by Virginia Roberts Gi-
uffre. The corporation said: “The inter-
view with Alan Dershowitz after the
Ghislaine Maxwell verdict did not meet
the BBC’s editorial standards, as Mr
Dershowitz was not a suitable person to
interview as an impartial analyst, and
we did not make the relevant back-
ground clear to our audience.”Ian Maxwell said
that his sister was
paying for Jeffrey
Epstein’s crimesNews
Yesterday
Prince Andrew
drove to
Windsor for
lunch with the
Queen; he told
Newsnight that
he had been at
Pizza Express
when he was
said to have had
sex with
Virginia GiuffreKELVIN BRUCE; REX FEATURES; MARK HARRISON/CAMERA PRESS/BBCGhislaine Maxwell’s
former London home
has been soldMystery of true wealth may not be solved
Despite her claims of being worth
only about $3.5 million, months later,
during a bail application, Maxwell’s
husband, Scott Borgeson, volunteered
to pay a $25 million bond. In March
Maxwell sold a home in London to pay
her legal fees, having previously set
aside $7 million for her defence.
In 2015, Virginia Roberts Giuffre
sued for defamation when Maxwell la-
belled her a liar for claiming Maxwell
and Epstein had abused her. The case
was settled in 2017, with Giuffre’s
lawyer, David Boies, saying
his client received mil-
lions of dollars.
Maxwell was
spared the threat of
further civil cases
by requirements
attached to pay-
outs from the
fund set up to
compensate
victims of Epstein,
who killed himselfin 2019. His estate was facing lawsuits
from more than 30 women who alleged
he had abused them. Those who ac-
cepted compensation offers had to sign
papers stating they could not bring any
further claims against the estate, Ep-
stein’s former companies or employees.
At least three women were required
to drop civil claims against Maxwell as
a condition of receiving a payout from
the fund, according to court records.
Maxwell herself had previously sued
Epstein’s estate, claiming that before
he died he had promised to
pay her legal fees for any
lawsuits from his
alleged victims.
Any further
accusers who made
fresh allegations
would have to
again prove liabili-
ty, Epner said,
adding that the
criminal case
would have no bear-
ing on a new claim.
Maxwell’s traumatic
upbringing is no defence,
Sarah Ditum, page 25Rottenberg Lipman Rich and a former
US prosecutor, said that the US govern-
ment was excellently placed to track
down every penny belonging to
Maxwell and had the resources to scour
the global financial system. However,
he said there did not appear to be any
motivation to do so now that a success-
ful prosecution had been secured.
“It’s entirely possible that the true
size of her wealth may never be known,”
he said. “The only way that I think the
true size of her wealth will be known is
if she passes away in the United States
and her will were to be probated in the
United States then the size of the estate
would become public record.”
If investigators do decide to track
down Maxwell’s scattered wealth, it
could prove a sizable undertaking.
After her arrest, Maxwell told offi-
cials she had about $3.5 million worth
of assets but Judge Alison Nathan said
she had displayed a “pattern of provid-
ing incomplete or erroneous informa-
tion to the court or to pretrial services”.
Prosecutors said they had found
more than 15 bank accounts associated
with Maxwell, with some of the balan-
ces running to millions of dollars.Keiran Southern Los Angeles
mees, saying
d mil-as
ffhe died he
pay her l
lawsui
alleg
A
ac
fr
w
a
ty
ad
cr
wo
iing o
MMaxwe
upbringin
SSSSarah Ditum