Judge slaps down Ghislaine Maxwell’s bid for release as he trashes ‘new evidence’ claims in Epstein case

A federal judge has rejected Ghislaine Maxwell‘s bid to overturn her conviction and 20-year prison sentence, ruling that her claims of ‘new evidence’ are meritless.

Judge Paul Engelmayer said Maxwell’s ‘new’ evidence, much of it drawn from files recently released by the Justice Department, was ‘largely irrelevant’ to the charges against her.

‘On the contrary, to the extent it is relevant, far from exculpating her, it incriminates her or reinforces the correctness of the legal rulings Maxwell challenges,’ Engelmayer wrote in the opinion issued in the Southern District of New York.

Maxwell, who represented herself in the petition, had argued that newly released files supported claims of juror misconduct, a 2007 non-prosecution deal, prosecutorial misconduct and other errors that she said undermined her conviction.

Engelmayer branded her filing ‘lengthy and rambling’ and said that her claims were ‘all meritless and all or almost all are frivolous.’

Among Maxwell’s arguments was that a juror who had survived sexual abuse concealed his history during jury selection and was biased against her.  

But Engelmayer said the Second Circuit had already rejected that claim, finding the juror had served ‘fairly and impartially’, while Maxwell’s purported new evidence did not change that conclusion. 

Maxwell, 64, was sentenced to 20 years in prison in June 2022 over her role as Jeffrey Epstein’s madam, supplying the financier with underage girls. She is being held at Federal Prison Camp Bryan in Texas, a minimum security facility.

Epstein was found hanged in a Manhattan jail cell while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges in August 2019. The New York City medical examiner ruled his death a suicide, and the FBI found no evidence of a criminal act in his death.

Maxwell remains the only Epstein co-conspirator ever jailed.

She argued that she had been selectively prosecuted, claiming other people who could have been considered Epstein co-conspirators were never charged.

Engelmayer said Maxwell had identified no similarly situated person who participated in Epstein’s abuse to anything like the same degree, leaving her unable to establish the discriminatory prosecution required for the claim.

Judge Paul Engelmayer

She also argued that Epstein’s infamous 2007 plea deal in Florida shielded her from prosecution in New York, pointing to newly released DOJ records that she said showed the deal covered his co-conspirators.

But Engelmayer said the agreement was expressly limited to the Southern District of Florida. He said Maxwell had ‘distort[ed]’ some of the material to reach her conclusion.

The disgraced British socialite further claimed lawyers for Epstein’s victims had improperly acted as ‘de facto prosecutors’ and influenced the government’s decision to investigate her.

Engelmayer found that the lawyers had provided information to prosecutors but that the government itself had made the decision to investigate Maxwell. 

Maxwell also challenged her sentence, arguing that Judge Alison Nathan improperly considered allegations that she had committed perjury even though those counts were ultimately dismissed.

Engelmayer rejected that argument, saying Maxwell was not sentenced for the dismissed counts but that a judge can consider reliable evidence of uncharged conduct when determining an appropriate sentence.

President Donald Trump faced pressure over the release of the Epstein files, amid claims that he was suppressing their release because his name appears in the documents. Being named in the files is not evidence of wrongdoing

The judge’s ruling leaves Maxwell languishing in the Texas prison camp. 

Her conviction and sentence have already been upheld by the Second Circuit, while the Supreme Court denied her petition challenging the 2007 Epstein non-prosecution agreement last October. 

Maxwell was interviewed by then-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in July last year over her role in Epstein’s operation and whether she could give up the names of other conspirators.

The interview fueled speculation about what the Trump administration might do with Maxwell, amid renewed scrutiny of the Epstein case. 

Donald Trump faced pressure over the release of the Epstein files, amid claims that he was suppressing their contents because his name appears in the documents. Being named in the files is not evidence of wrongdoing. 

Attorney General Pam Bondi was ultimately fired over the fiasco. 

In the interview with Blanche, Maxwell herself told prosecutors that she continued running Epstein’s properties, staff and business affairs until 2009. Engelmayer said that account undermined her claim that she had largely left Epstein’s orbit by 2002.