As people are just now starting to wake up to the fact that the U.S. allows the trafficking of tiny humans through child welfare, funded by Medicaid fraud and other Social Security programs, I am going to advance the illumination of these operations.
Of course, there are those who will readily dismiss me, but I do not care.
Trafficking tiny humans is not limited to physically taking and removing the child from the home, it is also through the intellectual property of the child, more understood as the birth certificate, the digital birth certificate.
Vital statistics are used when it come to appropriations of child welfare programming.
Child welfare programming is riddled with fraud and the DOJ, FBI, HHS OIG will not do a thing about it because it makes money.
The FBI has been covering up its covert opertions to profit off of tiny humans to fund political campaigns by laundering money through child welfare NGOs for their special dark projects.
CODIS is the acronym for the Combined DNA Index System and is the generic term used to describe the FBI’s program of support for criminal justice DNA databases as well as the software used to run these databases. The National DNA Index System or NDIS is considered one part of CODIS, the national level, containing the DNA profiles contributed by federal, state, and local participating forensic laboratories.
CODIS is a DNA profile that links to the individual through the birth certificate for "designer profiling".
Designer profiling is predictive modeling that can, as is claimed, predict what the fullest potential of human captial, or the likelihood of growing up to a life of poverty.
"The Poors" (always said with clinched teeth) are then determined as to what their contribution to society will be based upon pseudo-scientific "evidence based" stupid labeling crap called race.
If your prediction of what you are to become when you grow up is to not be cost-effective, then, private interests, as States are now allowing private corporations to file UCC1s to take ownership of the birth certificates through the patent process.
UCC1s are filed to be placed into maritime jurisdiction, where no one will prosecute them, ever, because no one has considered privatization to be a criminal operation.
Yes, privatization is a the new form of chattel law where corporations now, legally, own you by owning the birth certificate they file as patents.
These biometric birth certificates are patents, too, and worth a bit more than the old fashioned birth certificate because they can be financially leveraged for mortgages to purchase land.
Mortgages can then be, through many different techniques, most notably for this situation, in the form of quiet titles.
It is a win, win situation when it comes to profiting from the ills of society, making poverty a crime and an automatic default to the State, or rather, through privatization, to the state contracted UCC1 corporation.
So, while you are busy getting emotionally upset through memes and youtube videos, reality is speculting biometric birth certificates and electronic health records on international stock markets as patents, where individuals are stealing national treasures, right under your noses, protected by the FBI, which is nothing more than modern human traffickig.
Human databaking is also used in health care systems, like pharmaceutical testing, organ transplants, or designer babies.
The Children's Trust Funds Predictive Modeling Crap Monster
The Database Offspring of CODIS & SACWIS
Child welfare law, is the foundation of chattel law, more intuitively known as property ownership of humans, but, soon, shall be properly recognized as parental rights.
They discuss universal background checks, yet fail to whisper the challenges in child welfare privacy laws, and the fraud, and the crappy predictive modeling white papers taught in the universities, promulgating more sociopsychological doctrines of human asset management for those beloved racial foreign corporate manifests.
The Privateers want those community data centers, badly.
Do you realize how much money can be had for these foreign Public Private Partnerships to swoop in to save the day with their ready to go, hit the ground running, Social Impact Bond programs to expedite the furtherance of stealin' the children, the land and the votes?
The days of the officer are just about transformed as the Privateers rendition of a private militia, of which this committee previously addressed as sworn v. civilian officers, and did not have a freaking clue to realize those civilian officers are sworn to foreign, privately contracted corporations?
I have published extensively on this crap.
So, how do you stop the tensions between the police and the people?
Uh... I dunno.....how about looking into the original concept of a police officer, and let them "protect and serve" the people....and not the corporation.
See how that works?
Police acquire the raw material from society for the corporation to produce goods to purvey and procure, called poverty.
When you are poor, you will find tensions run high with law enforcement when you are trying to survive, as a victim of a bloodless war.
People are supposed to run for help to the police, to bear of witness as the original sources, the people who are the real victims and the police refer for due process to a finding of fact in challenging the right to bear arms, or rather, to identify violations in the rights to a civil society.
Police are officers of peace, the recordkeepers of the trust, the children's trust.
Look at Detroit.
The Chief of Police sits on the Board of Elections.
Our elections for the last 10 years have been jacked, particularly the 2016 election, the reason for the ongoing DHS investigation into election interference.
The Chief of Police allowed these organized stealin' operations to exist in the City of Detroit, where there is rampant violence.
I consider running human experiments on the people of Detroit as reportable crime, a contributing factor to the conditions of poverty, yet, nothing has been done to protect the people, but I digress.
Gaetz asked about Sharpton calling "african-americans" who do not agree with him "Militant Negroes" and a series of #coloredrevolution statements of "Jews", "white crackas and homos".
This is awesome!
Sharpton is trying to keep the peace as Gaetz surely should have brought in a cocktail or two during the hearing.
Sharpton said he is "an equal opportunity attacker".
See it, say it, particularly when you see a corporation engaging in the stealin' of the children, the land and the votes.
Law Enforcement has internal early warning systems for citizens to file complaints, but not about corporate complaints, which are considered as civil, and not criminal, for fraud or public corruption.
Many officers are only a paycheck away from qualifying for SNAP, something which desperately needs to be discussed because it opens the door for the opportunity of public corruption in privatization.
This was a discussion about Steven Ross who had donated to Trump's 2020 campaign.
Steven Ross is in the middle of an investigation dealing with real estate fraud through his University of Michigan affiliations, which just so happens to be directly linked to the Childrens' Trust Funds.
Robert Davi introduced the concept of a CODIS community intelligence program, which is what piqued my interest because it sounds like the Phoenix Program on steroids, but hey, what do I know?
I know nothing because I cannot ask anyone in my group for critical input.
Unfortunately, it seems Facebook decided to arbitrarily determine the purpose of my post, which was to document dark propaganda and identify that the financial funding streams come from child welfare.
So, now, I guess I am at a 24 hour block on posting, with possibility of losing my account if I post again.
The timing is impeccable for bleachbitting history.
I should post again then file a charge on them for destroying the historic record, interfering in a federal investigation.
I will update.
UPDATE: FACEBOOK WILL NOT ALLOW ME TO CHALLENGE THE DECISION. FUN FACT! MESSENGER IS THE ONLY WAY SOME PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH THEIR CHILDREN. Something to think about...
The children are coming to Michigan because we have the contracts.
How can one use DNA to establish paternity, when the child is adopted?
Just thought I would throw that out there when trying to figure out the citizenship of children under the aegis of a private, foreign Foster Care Agency.
Houston – The U.S. government on Monday launched a pilot program to collect DNA from people in immigration custody and submit it to the FBI, with plans to expand nationwide.
In Detroit, people as young as 14 will be subject to DNA collection.
The information would go into a massive criminal database run by the FBI, where it would be held indefinitely. A memo outlining the program published Monday by the Department of Homeland Security said U.S. citizens and permanent residents holding a “green card” who are detained could be subject to DNA testing, as well as asylum seekers and people entering the country without authorization. Refusing to submit DNA could lead to a misdemeanor criminal charge, the document said.
Immigrant advocates and privacy experts have raised alarms and questioned whether data collected to stop criminal activity could instead be used for surveillance.
The DHS memo acknowledged that the DNA its agents collect may not be immediately useful. Agents plan to take saliva swabs of detained people, then mail them to the FBI. By the time the results are processed, the memo said, the people in question may have already been released, deported or transferred to another federal agency.
Stephen Kang, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union, questioned whether the U.S. was creating “a DNA bank of immigrants that have come through custody for no clear reason.”
Starting Monday, U.S. Customs and Border Protection will collect swabs from people apprehended by the U.S. Border Patrol at the Canadian border in or near Detroit, as well as people detained at the official port of entry at Eagle Pass, Texas, across from Piedras Negras, Mexico. CBP said its pilot program will last 90 days.
The memo said agents will not take DNA from people entering the country legally or being held for further screening without being placed into detention.
CBP has wrongly accused American citizens in the past of entering the country illegally. An 18-year-old born in Texas was held for more than three weeks last year.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement will designate one of its jails for pilot testing.
Children are transferred to the custody of the States privatized, foreign corporations, where no one wants to talk about the policy of ICPC, which is not a law.
With a database, one can no longer file false claims, but do not tell that to DHS an its new immigration rule which allows a private, foreign corporation, like Bethany Christian, to keep families together, in the least restrictive, contained environment under human asset management systems, indefinitely, for billing purposes, transferring rights to the corporate parent. So, if a foreign corporate parent has sole, legal custody and guardianship of immigrant humans, what is the citizenship of the human assets of the foreign corporation? And this is why we are building the wall.
Criminal justice investigators across the nation use the FBI’s National Data Exchange (N-DEx) System in their daily work to connect people, places, things, and events—often across jurisdictional boundaries—that may at first glance seem unrelated. Recent N-DEx successes include identifying a suspect in a homicide case, identifying a felon involved in a fraud case, and locating three probationers who traveled outside jurisdictions into neighboring states. Here are details from the cases and information on how investigators used the N‑DEx System to close them successfully.
Homicide Suspect in North Carolina
Recently, the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department in North Carolina was investigating a drug-related homicide. Officers believed the suspect and the victim knew each other, since the victim had been talking on the telephone with the subject just before the homicide. The only information the officers had was a phone number they obtained from the victim’s cell phone. Charlotte-Mecklenburg staff searched the phone number in several databases without success. Finally, they ran the number in the Naval Criminal Investigative Service Law Enforcement Information Exchange (LInX) System and received a hit from the LInX System’s access to the N-DEx System.
The N-DEx System record included a name and address related to an effort by the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) to locate the suspect on a separate warrant. With the information from the USMS report, Charlotte-Mecklenburg staff obtained a photograph and subsequently positively identified the suspect. The suspect was arrested for murder and robbery, and the case was closed.
Felony Fraud Case in Tennessee
An investigator with the Belle Meade Police Department (BMPD) in Tennessee was investigating a felony fraud case involving a small group of professional con men who targeted female senior citizens. The women hired the men to perform odd jobs such as vehicle, driveway, or roofing repairs, but the men fraudulently overcharged the women for inferior work.
The investigator queried the subjects using the National Crime Information Center and the Interstate Identification Index, but found no records. However, when the investigator accessed the Regional Information Sharing System’s Regional Organized Crime Information Center portal and logged into the N-DEx System, he found multiple incident reports showing a pattern of similar complaints in other states.
One such incident in Glenview, Illinois, was nearly identical to the Tennessee case. The report included the details of the main subject, noting the man’s comment that he knew what he was doing was wrong, but he was there just for the money. When the BMPD investigator presented this information to the subject, he reacted uncomfortably and showed signs of his guilt.
Members of the group are currently awaiting trial in Tennessee. The investigator credited the N-DEx System with saving time and effort by helping him identify patterns in seemingly unrelated crimes and connecting him to law enforcement staff in Illinois. The investigator praised the N-DEx System, saying, “N‑DEx is one of the most valuable tools in my 35 years in law enforcement.”
Probation Absconders in New Mexico
An executive assistant in the Security Threat Intelligence Unit of the New Mexico Corrections Department (NMCD) searched the N-DEx System for any recent records on probationers who had absconded from their jurisdictions. Using the N-DEx System’s batch search tool to query multiple individuals at once, the executive assistant found three subjects who had fled and were later arrested in other jurisdictions.
Five days before the search, the Lubbock County Sheriff’s Office in Texas booked one subject for burglary, assault, public intoxication, and other offenses. The Wise County Sheriff’s Office in Texas arrested a second subject earlier in April for possession of drug paraphernalia and tampering with evidence. Twelve days prior to the search, an agency in Durango, CO, booked the third subject for driving while intoxicated.
The executive assistant verified the custody status of the subjects, then forwarded the updated information to the relevant NMCD officers. Those officers placed holds on the subjects, which means they will serve their sentences, then be returned to the NMCD.
National Data Exchange (N-DEx) Seal
For more information about how your agency can use the N-DEx System to help further its investigations, contact the N-DEx Program Office at ndex@leo.gov or call 304-625-0555.
Poor Wilbur Ross had a grueling time in hearings today House Oversight Committee on the U.S. Census.
Focus was on the question of citizenship on the census, which is currently in SCOTUS.
The members asked interesting questions like why does it budget $100 for each U.S. citizen to collect data in the age of technology.
Some asked about the reliability of the survey when people are not willing to respond to such invasive questions.
Census data are used for redistricting, so, when you have a situation of gerrymandering due to fraudulent property tax and mortgage foreclosures, you have corrupt data, based upon an exogenous variable called forced migration.
Then, you have the issue of homelessnesss.
"The Poors" are not willing to provide information on who is laying up on their sofas, for fear of losing their benefits, due to manufactured poverty.
Then, you have that one issue no one wants to talk about, children.
What happens with the identities of children whose parents rights were terminated?
What happens to former identities of children who have been adopted?
Do the corporate parents report on children in their care, in their facilities?
What about immigrants under student VISAs?
What about college students?
What about DACA?
What about the children's trusts?
Oh, wait, that is on the litigation menu.
Well, all I can say is that it was a really good thing none of the members in the hearing dared speak into the record those dreadful words when it come the maintaining their secret registries of tiny humans they like to traffic.
See, there are lots of databases which are supposed to track the kids, but, they are so jacked up, being private and all, designed specifically to do predictive modeling crap, that they no longer function as heraldry of the legacies of the children because they like to strip the civil assets through civil forfeiture, as a private, corporate parent, that no one knows what is going on with the children of "The Poors", (always said with clinched teeth).
You have SACWIS, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, Central Registries and you have CODIS.
Then you have public school educational records and medical records, which, by design, cannot be accesses because these are privatized databases.
I could continue, but I believe I have made my point that this entire system of keeping track of legacies is horrific.
It is time for the Quantum Renaissance and blockchain everything.
We have the technology, you know.
Wilbur is a proverbial representation of the entire Department of Commerce, which is over the selling of chattel, including patents and tiny humans, modern day slavery and human trafficking.
That budget is for the private contractors who are going to be doing data scraping for redistricting, surveying real property for gerrymandering.
Cummings pulled it out of Wilbur that Jeff Sessions was concerned about the preservation of voting rights.
(January 2007) The U.S. Census Bureau plans to eliminate the “foster child” relationship category on its questionnaires for the 2010 Census and the American Community Survey. They will be counted with other children, but foster children’s characteristics as a group will not be available.
Census Bureau officials had set a January deadline to approve the content of questions on the 2010 Census short form that goes to every U.S. household. Decisions about the 2010 Census form also affect the American Community Survey (ACS). The census survey is intended to replace the census long form, so the two data sets must be comparable.
Bureau officials said they had to eliminate one of the 15 relationship-to-householder categories because they had adopted a new questionnaire design in hopes of improving response rates and accuracy.1 In the census data collection process, the form designates one person in each household, usually the one who fills out the questionnaire, as the householder. Everyone else must be listed in a category that describes his or her relationship to the householder, such as spouse or boarder. “Foster child,” which had been included with roomers and boarders in the 1990 Census, became its own category in the 2000 Census.
The elimination of the foster-child category was among a number of proposals for census-form revisions on the agenda in November at the Bureau’s Joint Advisory Committee meeting. The Census Bureau is required to give Congress a list of topics it plans to ask about by April 1, which gives legislators a chance to voice their opinions.
Census officials said they decided to drop the foster child category because it had the fewest responses of any relationship option in the 2000 Census, and because census numbers do not match figures provided by state governments to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Census Bureau figures count about 50 percent to 60 percent of the number of foster children included in the Adoption and Foster Care Analysis and Reporting System (AFCARS).
The 2000 Census 100 percent file shows 334,974 children in the foster child category,2 compared with 544,000 in AFCARS in September 2000.3 The 2005 ACS shows 307,000 children in foster care compared with 513,000 in the 2005 AFCARS report.
The figures provided by states include about 24,000 foster children aged 18 to 20, and census numbers only include foster children under age 18, but that explains only a small part of the difference between the two data sets. In addition, about 100,000 foster children in 2005 lived in group homes and institutions, which the Census Bureau classifies as group quarters.4 The Census Bureau does not identify foster children as such if they live in group quarters and not in households.
The rest of the gap between the two sets of data, experts believe, comes about because census counts miss and misclassify many foster children. Householders may not list foster children on their questionnaires: They often are in foster homes for only a short time, and the census respondent may not feel the foster child is part of the household. Or householders may list foster children in a different category. Because many are in “kinship care” with grandparents, aunts and uncles, or other family members, foster children may be listed as relatives on the census form. In 2005, according to state records, about a quarter of children in foster care (roughly 125,000 children) were in kinship care.5
Census Bureau surveys and the decennial headcount seem to capture a consistent proportion of children in foster care each year. But whether those numbers are representative of the foster child population is less clear. Analysis shows that data captured by the Census Bureau adequately reflects some characteristics of children in foster care, but not others.
In terms of age and gender distribution, 2005 American Community Survey estimates look very similar to state administrative data from AFCARS, especially considering the sampling errors in the census survey that are associated with these small categories. The proportions of foster children aged 15 through 18 in the ACS are slightly lower than the proportions in AFCARS, probably because the census survey does not account for the many teens in foster care who live in group homes.
There is a bigger gap between the two data sources for some racial and ethnic groups. About a third of the foster children counted by states are non-Hispanic black, compared with about a quarter of those in the 2005 American Community Survey. The opposite is true for Hispanics: State figures indicate that less than a fifth of foster children are Hispanic, but the Census Bureau reported that nearly one in four is Hispanic. Some of the discrepancy could be due to the fact that questions about race and Hispanic origin are not worded the same from state to state, in contrast to the uniform wording of census questions.
As the table (PDF: 34KB) shows, in general, the distribution of foster children by state in the American Community Survey looks similar to that in the AFCARS database, despite differing estimates of population size. For 42 states and the District of Columbia, the difference in proportions was less than one percentage point. The eight states with larger differences are California, Indiana, Texas, Florida, Pennsylvania, Illinois, Georgia, and Virginia. Of course, the ACS estimates have large sampling errors, and the difference between the two datasets in part reflects the small proportion of foster children in many states.
Foster children are a population of special concern because they often have been abused or neglected, then placed under government care. Many fall behind in school, and often have a host of other socio-emotional problems. State records on children in foster care focus heavily on their experience in the child welfare system. They have little information on the characteristics that census numbers are supposed to shed light upon, such as foster children’s soci/>
In addition, access to the AFCARS data is not now readily available, aside from a series of key tables that are available on the federal Health and Human Services Department website, because it requires sophisticated programming capability. If the data on foster children are eliminated from the Census and the ACS as the Census Bureau plans, it suggests that we need to do more to make the data from other sources such as AFCARS more accessible.
Below, I have provided a few snippets to introduce plausible explanations as to why the U.S. Patent and Trademark First Satellite Office is in Detroit, why cloning is the new term for human trafficking, which is in biomedical research, cloning & patents.
Always remember, corporations do not adopt, they acquire ownership of the goods through intellectual property, because they own us right down to the genome, which is legal to conduct biomedical research in other countries, because it always starts with the best interests of the child, because no one cares, unless there revenues are maximized to fund more political campaigns to fund more of human R & D.
A gene patent is the exclusive rights to a specific sequence of DNA (a gene) given by a government to the individual, organization, or corporation who claims to have first identified the gene. Once granted a gene patent, the holder of the patent dictates how the gene can be used, in both commercial settings, such as clinical genetic testing, and in noncommercial settings, including research, for 20 years from the date of the patent. Gene patents have often resulted in companies having sole ownership of genetic testing for patented genes.
On June 13, 2013, in the case of the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that human genes cannot be patented in the U.S. because DNA is a "product of nature." The Court decided that because nothing new is created when discovering a gene, there is no intellectual property to protect, so patents cannot be granted. Prior to this ruling, more than 4,300 human genes were patented. The Supreme Court's decision invalidated those gene patents, making the genes accessible for research and for commercial genetic testing.
The Supreme Court's ruling did allow that DNA manipulated in a lab is eligible to be patented because DNA sequences altered by humans are not found in nature. The Court specifically mentioned the ability to patent a type of DNA known as complementary DNA (cDNA). This synthetic DNA is produced from the molecule that serves as the instructions for making proteins (called messenger RNA).
April 30, 2018: The Federal Circuit heard oral arguments in the appeal on Monday, April 30, 2018. A ruling is expected later this year.
Based on the oral arguments today, we are even more confident the Federal Circuit will affirm the PTAB’s judgment and recognize the contribution of Broad, MIT and Harvard in developing this transformative technology.
As this patent issue is resolved, and as new patents related to important uses of CRISPR are issued to the many institutions, including UCB, we call on UCB and the companies that control its IP to join our ongoing efforts to simplify, share, and open the IP landscape.
I bet Boo Boo Barr does not want to start there, or even go there, but have not fear, for the heavens are falling and we are in Detroit.
#maytheheavensfall
DOJ: GHISLAINE MAXWELL CHARGED IN MANHATTAN FEDERAL COURT FOR CONSPIRING WITH JEFFREY EPSTEIN TO SEXUALLY ABUSE MINORS
Maxwell is Alleged to Have Facilitated, Participated in Acts of Abuse
Additionally Charged With Perjury in Connection With 2016 Depositions
Audrey Strauss, the Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, William F. Sweeney Jr., the Assistant Director-in-Charge of the New York Field Office of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (“FBI”), and Dermot Shea, Commissioner of the New York City Police Department (“NYPD”), announced that GHISLANE MAXWELL was arrested this morning and charged with enticing a minor to travel to engage in criminal sexual activity, transporting a minor with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, conspiracy to commit both of those offenses, and perjury in connection with a sworn deposition. The Indictment unsealed today alleges that between at least in or about 1994 through 1997, MAXWELL and co-conspirator Jeffrey Epstein exploited girls as young as 14, including by enticing them to travel and transporting them for the purpose of engaging in illegal sex acts. As alleged, knowing that Epstein had a preference for young girls, MAXWELL played a critical role in the grooming and abuse of minor victims that took place in locations including New York, Florida, and New Mexico. In addition, as alleged, MAXWELL made several false statements in sworn depositions in 2016. MAXWELL is expected to be presented this afternoon in the in federal court in New Hampshire. This case is assigned to U.S. District Judge Alison J. Nathan.
Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss said: “As alleged, Ghislaine Maxwell facilitated, aided, and participated in acts of sexual abuse of minors. Maxwell enticed minor girls, got them to trust her, and then delivered them into the trap that she and Jeffrey Epstein had set. She pretended to be a woman they could trust. All the while, she was setting them up to be abused sexually by Epstein and, in some cases, Maxwell herself. Today, after many years, Ghislaine Maxwell finally stands charged for her role in these crimes.”
FBI Assistant Director William F. Sweeney Jr. said: “Preserving the innocence of children is among the most important responsibilities we carry as adults. Like Epstein, Ms. Maxwell chose to blatantly disregard the law and her responsibility as an adult, using whatever means she had at her disposal to lure vulnerable youth into behavior they should never have been exposed to, creating the potential for lasting harm. We know the quest for justice has been met with great disappointment for the victims, and that reliving these events is traumatic. The example set by the women involved has been a powerful one. They persevered against the rich and connected, and they did so without a badge, a gun, or a subpoena - and they stood together. I have no doubt the bravery exhibited by the women involved here has empowered others to speak up about the crimes of which they've been subjected.”
NYPD Commissioner Dermot Shea said: “The heinous crimes these charges allege are, and always will be abhorrent for the lasting trauma they inflict on victims. I commend our investigators, and law enforcement partners, for their continuing commitment to bringing justice to the survivors of sexual assault, everywhere.”
If you believe you are a victim of the sexual abuse perpetrated by Jeffrey Epstein, please contact the FBI at 1-800-CALL FBI, and reference this case.
According to the Indictment[1] unsealed today in Manhattan federal court:
From at least 1994 through at least 1997, GHISLAINE MAXWELL assisted, facilitated, and participated in Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse of minor girls by, among other things, helping Jeffrey Epstein to recruit, groom, and ultimately abuse victims known to MAXWELL and Epstein to be under the age of 18. The victims were as young as 14 years old when they were groomed and abused by MAXWELL and Epstein, both of whom knew that their victims were in fact minors. As a part and in furtherance of their scheme to abuse minor victims, MAXWELL and Epstein enticed and caused minor victims to travel to Epstein’s residences in different states, which MAXWELL knew and intended would result in their grooming for and subjection to sexual abuse.
As alleged, MAXWELL enticed and groomed minor girls to be abused in multiple ways. For example, MAXWELL attempted to befriend certain victims by asking them about their lives, taking them to the movies or taking them on shopping trips, and encouraging their interactions with Epstein. MAXWELL also acclimated victims to Epstein’s conduct simply by being present for victim interactions with Epstein, which put victims at ease by providing the assurance and comfort of an adult woman who seemingly approved of Epstein’s behavior. Additionally, to make victims feel indebted to Epstein, MAXWELL would encourage victims to accept offers of financial assistance from Epstein, including offers to pay for travel or educational expenses. MAXWELL also normalized and facilitated sexual abuse by discussing sexual topics with victims, encouraging them to massage Epstein, and undressing in front of a victim.
As MAXWELL and Epstein intended, these grooming behaviors left minor victims vulnerable and susceptible to sexual abuse by Epstein. MAXWELL was then present for certain sexual encounters between minor victims and Epstein, such as interactions where a minor victim was undressed, and ultimately MAXWELL was present for sex acts perpetrated by Epstein on minor victims. That abuse included sexualized massages during which a minor victim was fully or partially nude, as well as group sexualized massages of Epstein involving a minor victim where MAXWELL was present.
As alleged, minor victims were subjected to sexual abuse that included, among other things, the touching of a victim’s breasts or genitals, placing a sex toy such a vibrator on a victim’s genitals, directing a victim to touch Epstein while he masturbated, and directing a victim to touch Epstein’s genitals. MAXWELL and Epstein’s victims were groomed or abused at Epstein’s residences in New York, Florida, and New Mexico, as well as MAXWELL’s residence in London, England.
Additionally, in 2016, while testifying under oath in a civil proceeding, MAXWELL repeatedly made false statements, including about certain specific acts and events alleged in the Indictment.
* * *
GHISLAINE MAXWELL, 58, is charged with one count of enticing a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison, one count of conspiracy to entice a minor to travel to engage in illegal sex acts, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison, one count of transporting a minor with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, which carries a maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, one count of conspiracy to transport a minor with the intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison, and two counts of perjury, each of which carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison.
The statutory maximum penalties are prescribed by Congress and are provided here for informational purposes only, as any sentencing of the defendant would be determined by the judge.
Ms. Strauss praised the outstanding investigative work of the FBI and the NYPD.
This case is being handled by the Office’s Public Corruption Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Alex Rossmiller, Alison Moe, and Maurene Comey are in charge of the prosecution.
The charges contained in the Indictment are merely accusations. The defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
[1] As the introductory phrase signifies, the entirety of the text of the Indictment, and the description of the Indictment set forth herein, constitute only allegations, and every fact described therein should be treated as an allegation. The defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
Yes, these people believe they can predict child abuse and neglect.
“Giving every child a chance to reach their full potential is the best work anyone can do.”
— Hillary Clinton
Yes, these people believe they can predict, or rather, optimize profitability of its human capital by "investing in the best interests of the child", or more intuitively understood, predicting who will or will not be going to university, who will become housekeepers, who will have their children removed and placed under the legal guardianship of a parent corporation....oh, I believe you get the "reach their full potential" picture.
