Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Virginia Robert's Rejects Ghislaine Maxwell's Summary Judgement Push (Part 1) (6/7/26)

Transcript

Virginia Robert's Rejects Ghislaine Maxwell's Summary Judgement Push (Part 1) (6/7/26) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

0:00
Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles.
0:05
On today's episode, we're going to begin taking a look
0:08
at Virginia Roberts response to Glaine Maxwell's motion for a
0:13
summary judgment, and this goes right along with the Virginia
0:17
Roberts deposition that we just went through over the past
0:20
week or so. This document is pretty big, but not
0:24
quite as big as the deposition, so it won't take
0:27
us as long to get through this one. But with
0:29
that said, it is still relatively lengthy, So why don't
0:32
we just dive right in and get started. Case number
0:36
fifteen Dash CV DASH zero seven four three three Dash
0:41
RWs Virginia Roberts, First Gallainne Maxwell preliminary statement. There can
0:49
be no question that disputed issues of material facts preclude
0:52
granting somemary judgment. When in one count defamation case, defendant
0:57
presents the court with a sixty eight page member random
1:00
of law, a sixteen page statement of purported facts, and
1:04
approximately seven hundred pages of exhibits. The sheer scope of
1:08
defendant's response, if anything, conclusively demonstrates that volumes of disputed
1:13
facts surround the core question of whether defendant abused miss Roberts. Indeed,
1:19
defendant acknowledges a dispute between the parties as to whether
1:23
she abused Miss Roberts see motion for some rejudgment at
1:27
one motion did dismiss at one. This Court already said
1:32
that this disputed factual question is central to this case.
1:36
Either plaintiff is telling the truth about her story and
1:38
the defendant's involvement, or defendant is telling the truth and
1:42
she was not involved in the trafficking and ultimate abuse
1:45
of plaintiff. The answer depends on facts. Defendant statements are
1:50
therefore actionable as defamation. Whether they ultimately prove to meet
1:54
the standards of defamation, including but not limited to falsity,
1:59
is a matter for the fact finder order denying defendant's
2:03
motion to dismiss at ten. While this fact remains in dispute,
2:06
some rejudgment is foreclosed. But even turning to defendant's claims,
2:11
the avalanche of aspersions she casts upon Miss Roberts and
2:15
her counsel should not distract the court from the fact
2:18
that the instant motion cannot come within sight of meeting
2:22
the standard for an award of some rejudgment. The most
2:25
glaring and emblematic example of the defendant's far fetch claims
2:30
appears in her attempt to move away from her defamatory
2:33
statement by arguing that it was her attorney and not her,
2:36
who issued the defamatory statement for the press to publish,
2:40
though she is forced to admit the statement was made
2:43
on her behalf. This is an untenable position to take
2:47
at trial and an impossible argument to advance at some
2:51
rejudgment stage, as both the testamentary and documentary evidence positively
2:56
refute that argument. Defendant incorrectly asks this quest to make
3:00
a factual finding that her defamatory press release was actually
3:05
a legal opinion issued not by her but by her
3:08
lawyer to the media, despite documentary evidence showing otherwise. Defendant
3:13
also argues that she has proven the truth of her statement,
3:16
calling Miss Roberts a liar with respect to the statements
3:19
Miss Roberts made about defendant. To the contrary, evidence, both
3:24
documentary and testimonial from numerous witnesses corroborate Miss roberts account
3:30
of Defendant's involvement in the sexual abuse and trafficking of
3:33
Miss Roberts. Just to briefly highlight a few Johanna Schoberg
3:38
testified that defendant recruited her under the guise of legitimate
3:42
assistant position, but asked her to perform sexual massages for
3:46
Epstein and punished her when she didn't cause Epstein to orgasm.
3:51
Tony Figueroa testified that defendant contacted him to recruit high
3:55
school age girls for Epstein, and also testified that Maxwell
3:59
and Epstein participated in multiple threesomes with Virginia Roberts. Even
4:04
more shockingly, the butler for defendant close friend witnessed firsthand
4:08
a fifteen year old Swedish girl crying and shaking because
4:11
defendant was attempting to force her to have sex with
4:14
Epstein and she refused. This is a fraction of the
4:18
testimony that will be elicited at trial about Defendant's involvement
4:22
in the sexual abuse of trafficking Miss Roberts. Defendant's primary
4:27
argument in support of her contention that she did not
4:30
abuse in traffic Roberts as a minor child is at
4:34
employment records showed that Miss Roberts was either sixteen or
4:38
seventeen when defendant recruitedter from her job at mar A
4:41
Lago for sex with Epstein, not fifteen years old as
4:45
plaintiff originally thought. Call this. Yes, I'm a sex trafficker,
4:49
but only of sixteen year old Girl's defense, defendant does
4:53
not explain why sexual abuse of a fifteen year old
4:56
differs in any material way from the sexual abuse of
4:59
a seat sixteen or seventeen year old. All instances involve
5:03
a minor child who cannot consent and who is protected
5:06
by federal and state laws. The fact remains that the
5:09
defendant recruited Miss Roberts while she was a minor child
5:13
for sexual purposes, and then proceeded to take her all
5:16
over the world on convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's private jet,
5:20
the Lolita Express, as well as to his various residences
5:24
and even to her own London house. Flight logs even
5:28
reveal twenty three flights that defendant shared with Miss Roberts,
5:31
although defendant claims she was unable to remember even a
5:35
single one of those flights. In consequential details that Miss
5:39
Roberts may have originally remembered incorrectly do not render her
5:43
substantative claims of abuse by defendant false, much less deliberate lies.
5:48
At most, these minor inaccuracies in the context of a
5:51
child's suffering from a troubled childhood and sexual abuse create
5:55
nothing more than a fact question on whether defendant statements
5:59
that Miss Roberts lied when she accused defendant of abuse
6:03
is substantially true, thereby precluding some rejudgment. See Mitro Sports
6:08
International Ltd. Vers Home Box Office, Incorporated, twenty two f
6:13
Dot supp Dot three D two forty two fifty five
6:17
sdn Y, twenty fourteen. Because determining whether Coy is substantially
6:23
true would require this Court to decide disputed facts, some
6:27
rejudgment is not appropriate. Defendant has tried to spin these
6:31
inconsequential mistakes of memory into talismanic significance and evidence of
6:36
some form of bad faith litigation, but this claim fails
6:40
under the weight of the evidence. As the Court knows,
6:43
the clear weight of the evidence establishes defendants heavy and
6:46
extensive involvement in both Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking ring and
6:51
in recruiting Miss Roberts, living with her and Jeffrey Epstein
6:55
in the same homes while Miss Roberts was a minor
6:58
and traveling with Miss Roberts and n Jeffrey Epstein, including
7:01
twenty three documented flights. Even the house staff testified that
7:06
defendant and Miss Roberts were regularly together. See the declaration
7:11
of Sigared McAuley at exhibit one. Alessi's deposition at one
7:16
oh three, four through nine. Question after that day, do
7:20
you recall that she started coming to the house more frequently?
7:23
Answer yes, she did. Question in fact, did she start
7:28
coming to the house approximately three times a week? Answer
7:32
yes probably. It is also undisputed that a witness deposed
7:37
in this case have testified about defendant's role as a
7:40
procurer of underage girls and young women for Jeffrey Epstein.
7:45
At the very least, a Trier effect should determine whether
7:49
the evidence establishes whether or not Miss roberts claims of
7:52
defendant being involved in her trafficking and abuse are true.
7:56
Defendant summary judgment motion should be denied in its entirety.
8:02
Part two undisputed facts. The record evidence in this case
8:06
shows that defendant shared a household with convicted pedophile Jeffrey
8:10
Epstein for many years. While there, she actively took part
8:14
in recruiting underage girls and young women for sex with Epstein,
8:18
as well as scheduling the girls to come over and
8:20
maintaining a list of girls and their phone numbers. Miss
8:24
Roberts was indisputably a minor when defendant recruiteder to have
8:28
sex with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Thereafter, Miss Roberts flew
8:33
on Epstein's private jets the low Litia Express with defendant
8:37
at least twenty three times a It is an undisputed
8:41
fact that multiple witnesses deposed in this case have testified
8:46
that defendant operated as convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein's procure of
8:51
underage girls. One, it is an undisputed fact that Johanna
8:55
Schuberg testified defendant lured her from her school to have
8:59
sex with Epstein under the guise of hiring her for
9:02
a job answering phones. Miss Schuberg's account of her experiences
9:06
with defendant are chillingly similar. As with Miss Roberts, Defendant
9:11
a perfect stranger approach Miss Schuberg while trolling Miss schuburg
9:14
school grounds. She lured Miss Schuburg into her in Epstein's
9:18
home under the guise of a legitimate job of answering phones,
9:23
a pretext that lasted only a day. A young college
9:27
student nearly two thousand miles away from home. Defendant soon
9:30
instructed Miss Schuburg to massage Epstein and made it clear
9:33
that Schuberg's purpose was to bring Epstein to orgasm during
9:37
these massages, so that defendant did not have to question
9:42
And when did you first meet Miss Maxwell? Answer two
9:45
thousand and one March probably and the February beginning of March.
9:50
Question and how did you meet her? Answer? She approached
9:53
me while I was on campus at Palm Beach, Atlanta College.
9:57
Question and how long did you work in that position
10:00
and answering phones and doing? Answer just one day? Question
10:04
and what happened that second time you came to the house? Answer?
10:08
At that point, I met Emmy Taylor, and she took
10:11
me up to Epstein's bathroom and he was president, and
10:14
her and I both massage Epstein. She was showing me
10:17
how to massage, and then she he took he got
10:21
off the table, She got on the table, She took
10:23
off her clothes, got on the table, and then he
10:26
was showing me moves that he liked, and then I
10:29
took my clothes off. They asked me to get on
10:31
the table so I could feel it. Then they both
10:33
massaged me. Question who did Emmy work for? Answer Golayne?
10:39
Question did Maxwell ever refer to Emmy by any particular term. Answer,
10:44
She called her her slave. Question did Jeffrey ever tell
10:47
you why you receive so many massages from so many
10:50
young girls? Answer? He explained to me that, in his opinion,
10:55
he needed to have three orgasms a day. It was
10:57
biological like eating. Question was there anything you were supposed
11:03
to do in order to get the camera? The witness?
11:06
And remember this witness is Johanna Schuberg. I did not
11:10
know that there were expectations of me to get the
11:12
camera until after she, the defendant, had purchased a camera
11:16
for me and I was over there giving Jeffrey a massage.
11:19
I didn't know that she was in possession of the
11:21
camera until later she told me called me after I
11:25
had left and said, I have the camera for you,
11:27
but you cannot receive it yet because you came here
11:30
and didn't finish your job, and I had to finish
11:32
it for you. Question and did you what did you
11:36
understand her to mean? Answer? She was implying that I
11:40
did not get Jeffrey off, and so she had to
11:42
do it. Question and when you say get Jeffrey off,
11:46
do you mean bring him the orgasm? Answer? Yes, Question
11:50
based on what you knew? Did Maxwell know the type
11:53
of massages Jeffrey was getting typically involved sexual acts? The
11:57
witness yes. What was Maxwell's main job with respect to Epstein?
12:03
The witness well beyond companionship. Her job, as it related
12:07
to me, was to find other girls that would perform
12:09
massages for him and herself. Miss Schuberg also testified about
12:14
sexual acts that occurred with her, Prince Andrew, and Miss
12:17
Roberts when she and defendant were staying at Epstein's Manhattan mansion. Question,
12:22
tell me how it came to be that there was
12:24
a private picture taken, Schuberg answers. I just remember someone
12:28
suggesting a photo, and they told us to get on
12:31
the couch, and so Andrew and Virginia sat on the
12:33
couch and they put the puppet, the puppet on her lap,
12:37
and so then I sat on Andrew's lap, and I
12:39
believe on my own volition, and they took the puppet's
12:42
hands and put it on Virginia's breast, and so Andrew
12:45
put his on mine. Miss Schuberg's testimony corroborates Miss roberts
12:50
account of the how defendant recruititor and others under a
12:54
ruse of a legitimate job in order to bring them
12:57
into the household to have sex with Epstein. Miss's testimony
13:01
also corroborates Miss Robert's account of being lent out to
13:04
Prince Andrew by the defendant, as even the interaction Miss
13:08
Schuberg witnessed included a sexual act, Prince Andrew using a
13:12
puppet to touch Miss Robert's breast while using a hand
13:15
to touch Miss Schuberg's breast. All right, folks, we're gonna
13:18
wrap up. We'll part one there in the next episode
13:20
on this topic, we'll pick up with part two. All
13:24
of the information that goes with this episode can be
13:26
found in the description box.