Long legal battle by Jeffrey Epstein victims could sink Ghislaine Maxwell's defence

  • Alleged victims of Jeffrey Epstein are fighting a legal battle to undo an unusual plea deal that spared him from federal prison.
  • Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell's legal defence could also be impacted by the outcome of this legal battle.
  • Maxwell's lawyers said in court papers on Friday she intends to argue she cannot be prosecuted because of the plea deal.

Women who say they were victims of Jeffrey Epstein have spent 12 years trying to undo an unusual plea deal that spared the deceased financier from federal prison. Now their efforts could sink a key legal defence for Ghislaine Maxwell, who was charged this month with luring girls so Epstein could abuse them.

The 2007 deal allowed Epstein to plead guilty in a Florida court to soliciting minors to engage in prostitution and serve just 13 months in county jail.

The once-secret agreement included non-prosecution protection for unidentified co-conspirators such as Maxwell, a provision that US attorneys since have acknowledged in court was unprecedented.

Maxwell's defence lawyers did not respond to requests for comment and prosecutors declined to comment.

But Maxwell's lawyers said in court papers on Friday she intends to argue she cannot be prosecuted because of the agreement, a defence Manhattan federal prosecutors on Monday called "absurd".

The government charged Maxwell with luring and grooming minors for sexual abuse by Epstein at his mansions in Florida, New York and New Mexico, as well as at Maxwell's London residence, in the 1990s. She is also charged with perjury from 2016 testimony in a civil case.

Deal violated Crime Victims Rights Act

A judge on Tuesday afternoon is expected to decide whether Maxwell should get bail.

The 2007 plea deal also came up last year when Epstein was charged with child sex crimes by Manhattan federal prosecutors, who said the Florida deal did not protect Epstein in New York. Before the issue could be resolved in court, Epstein was found hanged in a Manhattan jail while awaiting trial. His death was ruled a suicide.

Several alleged victims of Epstein have been challenging the plea deal since 2008, arguing it violated the Crime Victims Rights Act (CVRA) by concealing the Epstein plea and non-prosecution agreement until after it was signed.

Had the alleged victims been informed of the deal, which they argue was their right under the CVRA, they could have tried to prevent a judge from approving it.

The plaintiffs are seeking to invalidate the deal and the provision that protected co-conspirators, but after Epstein died, a federal judge tossed their case.

That ruling was upheld by a three-judge panel on an appeals court in Atlanta this year, which ruled 2-1 that the CVRA had not been triggered because Epstein was never charged with a federal crime.

Crimes committed before and after time frame

The alleged victims have asked the full Atlanta federal appeals court to revive their case and determine if the lower court wrongly refused to invalidate the plea deal, said Paul Cassell, who represents alleged Epstein victim Courtney Wild in the CVRA case.

"If the agreement is ripped up, she can't get to first base," said Cassell, who is also a law professor at the University of Utah, former federal prosecutor and former federal judge.

On Monday, prosecutors dismissed Maxwell's plea deal defence. In a court filing, they said her crimes were committed before and after the time frame of the plea deal, Maxwell was not a named party to the deal and argued prosecutors in New York are not bound by their counterparts in Florida.

Retired Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, who helped defend Epstein in 2007, said Maxwell can counter each of those arguments. "When the United States government makes a promise, it’s binding all over the country," he said.

The alleged victims have garnered noteworthy support for their appeals case, including from US Senator Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat, and former Republican senators Orrin Hatch and Jon Kyl, authors of the 2004 CVRA law.

The trio filed a brief urging the Atlanta federal appeals court to revisit the Epstein plea deal and CVRA case.

"This miscarriage of justice," they said of the agreement, "is precisely what the act prevents."

We live in a world where facts and fiction get blurred
In times of uncertainty you need journalism you can trust. For only R75 per month, you have access to a world of in-depth analyses, investigative journalism, top opinions and a range of features. Journalism strengthens democracy. Invest in the future today.
Subscribe to News24
Lockdown For
Voting Booth
Is social media doing more harm than good?
Please select an option Oops! Something went wrong, please try again later.
Yes, our children are exposed and we can't protect them
49% - 4428 votes
Yes, but social media is part of the new reality
46% - 4100 votes
No, it's great for growing a child's world view
5% - 457 votes
Brent Crude
Top 40
All Share
Resource 10
Industrial 25
Financial 15
All JSE data delayed by at least 15 minutes Iress logo