92

Maxwell appeared virtually for a closed-door deposition from the Texas prison where she is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking.

Republican House Oversight Committee chairman James Comer said that "as expected", Maxwell pleaded the Fifth Amendment, invoking her right to remain silent.

"This is obviously very disappointing," he said. "We had many questions to ask about the crimes she and Epstein committed, as well as questions about potential co-conspirators."

top 12 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] mysticpickle@lemmy.ca 40 points 4 days ago

As per the terms of her agreement with Trump to continue her cushy stay at Club Fed 🙄

[-] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 16 points 4 days ago

So then did they submit the evidence they already had in the form of questions? For example, "we have this documented evidence here, which shows XYZ, do you wish to make comment on this matter?" "I plead the 5th.", GM. And keep doing that hour after hour till all of the evidence has been read into the record. Oh, right, and also make sure that this happened in public. Oh, what's that? This was a closed door session? Well there's your problem. We're trying to exhibit transparency, aren't we? Power cycle the system, and when it reboots, try again with an OPEN DOOR SESSION so that your bosses, the United States Citizens can know exactly what is going on. Try that and see how it works.

[-] Rhoeri@piefed.world 8 points 4 days ago

Back to solitary then, right??

[-] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 4 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

The intent of the fifth amendment is that one cannot be punished for failing to testify if the testimony is self-incriminating.

As much as Maxwell is a reprehensible human being, the law exists for good reasons.

ETA: using the fifth amendment as a bargaining chip (as in “if Trump grants clemency, I’ll talk) is an inevitable outcome, but also entirely dirtbag manoeuvre.

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

In criminal trials, not civil. You technically do not even have a fifth amendment right in civil trials.

[-] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 3 days ago

Can one be criminally prosecuted based on statements made in civil court?

[-] Madison420@lemmy.world 2 points 3 days ago

Yes. It just didn't work the same. Statements you refuse to answer can be seen in the light least favorable to your position whereas in criminal cases you can't make any determination or assumption about answers that people refuse to answer.

[-] bhamlin@lemmy.world 3 points 4 days ago

What are they gonna do? Put her more in jail?

[-] ryper@lemmy.ca 14 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Trump got her moved to minimum-security, so they could certainly move her back to a more jail-y jail.

[-] bhamlin@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

DOJ could, yeah. Congress less so.

[-] artyom@piefed.social 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Trump is running the show. DOJ has his arm up their ass. He can keep her in the cushy prison where she gets whatever she wants or put her in federal prison and have her killed just like her homie.

[-] bhamlin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Right. The only people who could do anything to her won't because the cheeto in charge won't let them. All congress can do is be angry about it.

this post was submitted on 09 Feb 2026
92 points (100.0% liked)

The Epstein Files

803 readers
353 users here now

We keep track of the release of the files, but also to explore what’s already available, and why – with enough exposure – this could bring the man down, and who knows even his regime or the empire.

Our Rules

(Subject to Change)

Our Justice System

This community is run by volunteers so please don't test the justice system, as with all justice systems it is critically underfunded.

founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS