Matthew Steeples joins those demanding that Ghislaine Maxwell’s henchwoman Sarah Kellen and other co-collaborators face justice for their roles assisting the convicted mucky madam sex fiend
Late last night the Daily Mail’s Stephen Wright and Daniel Bates published a story about Sarah Kellen, also known as Sarah Vickers and Sarah Kensington.
In it, of this 43-year-old wife of 38-year-old Nascar driver turned investor Brian Vickers, the Wright and Bates reported: “While Ghislaine Maxwell awaits her fate, Sarah Kellen – her ex-right-hand-woman and third key figure in Jeffrey Epstein drama – strolls carefree in Manhattan… The contrast in her fortunes… could not be starker.”
Reportedly living between a £4.3 million penthouse in SoHo, New York and a £5.1 million condominium in Miami, Florida, here is a woman “dubbed Epstein’s ‘lieutenant’ for allegedly souricng and booking underage girls for ‘massages’” but who “has has never faced justice over the scandal after becoming one of four women granted immunity from prosecution over Epstein’s abuse. In 2008, his lawyers persuaded the authorities to sign an agreement giving ‘potential co-conspirators’ protection from future charges.”
Of the lack of even an attempt to get justice, victims’ lawyer David Boies told the paper that he hoped that “co-conspirators should be held to account” whilst victims’ attorney Brad Edwards added that the likes of Kellen “should share evidence to those ‘still seeking justice’ or should face prosecution next.”
Unsurprisingly, “Miss Kellen’s lawyer did not respond to requests for comment.”
Jeffrey Epstein with Sarah Kellen on Madison Avenue in NYC on 30th January 2012. Of her involvement with the since croaked paedophile, this 43-year-old once stated: “[I am a] victim – not a monster.”Mr and Mrs Vickers were reported as being “horrible neighbours” to other residents of the building where they primarily live in an article in the ‘New York Post’ on 16th January 2021. Residents of 92 Greene Street – which was “once home to Lindsay Lohan,” another “neighbour from hell” – moaned: “It’s the other homeowners that have to put up with [their] endless apartment renovation.”Elsewhere yesterday in a 68-page document shared on ‘Court Listener,’ defence lawyer Bobbi C. Sternheim raged in support of her client and stated: “Ms. Maxwell’s sentencing proceeding should not a bully pulpit for anyone who was not identified as a victim of the charged federal offenses and does not qualify as such under the CVRA. We urge the Court to undertake its role as gatekeeper to ensure that Ms. Maxwell’s rights are not trampled by individuals who are not statutory victims or by the rights afforded to legitimate victims under the CVRA. To ensure that the appropriate balance of rights is achieved, those who qualify under the CVRA offenses should have the right to be heard but their statements should be in accordance with redactions and rulings made by the Court. Because the Individuals do not meet the definition of ‘crime victims’ under the CVRA, they should not be permitted to give oral testimony or have their written victim impact statements read during sentencing.”
On Twitter this morning, ‘The Prince & The Pervert’ podcast host Lisa Tait shared “five reasons why #GhislaineMaxwell thinks she’s the real victim.” They include that she thinks she’s not to blame, she was emotionally abused father, she is the replacement for the dead paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, conspiracy and that her victims are not actually her victims.
Prosecutors rightly demand mucky madam sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell gets maximum 55 years in the clink and thus likely deservedly dies there; they also want the deviant liar to pay the maximum £615,000 fine and call out her spreading “horror stories” about her incarceration as “unfounded”
Boob groping grabber and money motivated sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell – whose claims of “extreme weight loss are not true” given her weight has gone from 146 pounds to 144.5 pounds since she entered the clink – wants a laughable sentence of just 4 years; those that brought her to justice want her sent down 55 years. Yesterday setting out the case as to why in a 55-page document, United States Attorney Damian Williams observed:
“Ghislaine Maxwell sexually exploited young girls for years. It is difficult to overstate the magnitude of her crimes and the harm she caused. Her crimes demand justice. The Government urges the Court to impose a sentence within the applicable Guidelines range of 360 to 660 months’ imprisonment.”
This morning on Twitter, Matthew Steeples shared a poll that asked: “Does mucky madam sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell deserve 4 years or 55 years?” The majority of respondents thus far are in favour of “chucking the book at her” rather than the 4 years her defence team are laughably seeking.
“As the Government has emphasized throughout this case, Jeffrey Epstein could not have committed these crimes without the defendant. The defendant, an adult woman, was able to provide a cover of respectability to Epstein that lulled the victims and their families into a false sense of security.”
“This case sends the important message that those who would conspire with sexual predators will be held responsible for their significant role in these crimes. Accordingly, a Guidelines sentence is necessary to afford deterrence.”
“The lenient sentence the defendant seeks would send the message that there is one system of laws for the rich and powerful, and another set for everyone else.”
“It would also send the message to victims that, even if they have the courage to report their abusers and undergo the excruciating experience of testifying in court, there will be no meaningful accountability.”
Going further of a wicked woman they described as playing an “instrumental role in the horrific sexual abuse of multiple young teenage girls” and someone who “left her victims permanently scarred with emotional and psychological injuries,” they add “Maxwell was an adult who made her own choices.” Of her attempts to blame others, Williams adds:
“If anything stands out from the defendant’s sentencing submission, it is her complete failure to address her offense conduct and her utter lack of remorse. Instead of showing even a hint of acceptance of responsibility, the defendant makes a desperate attempt to cast blame wherever else she can.”
“On that score, the defendant’s attempt to cast aspersions on the Government for prosecuting her, and her claim that she is being held responsible for Epstein’s crimes, are both absurd and offensive.”
“… She made the choice to sexually exploit numerous underage girls. She made the choice to conspire with Epstein for years, working as partners in crime and causing devastating harm to vulnerable victims.”
“She should be held accountable for her disturbing role in an extensive child exploitation scheme.”
“The Government agrees that the defendant should be sentenced for her own conduct: she committed terrible crimes that caused irreparable harm to vulnerable children. Her own criminal actions demand that she serve every day of a Guidelines sentence in prison.”
“Moreover, even now, at sentencing, the defendant has shown no acceptance of responsibility, and her submission fails to even mention, much less accept responsibility for, the harm she has caused her victims. Instead, her entire submission is an effort to cast herself as a victim: of her father, of Epstein, of the media, of prosecutors, of the Bureau of Prisons.”
“Although much of the defendant’s sentencing memorandum aims to cast aspersions on the Government, these claims are baseless. This Office did what it always does in any case: it followed the facts and law.”
“The investigation uncovered that the defendant committed terrible crimes, and that is what this case is about. The Court should see the defendant’s attack on the Government’s motives for exactly what it is: a desperate attempt to shift the blame for her own crimes and distract from the gravity of her offense conduct.”
“In short, the defendant has lied repeatedly about her crimes, exhibited an utter failure to accept responsibility, and demonstrated repeated disrespect for the law and the Court. The defendant’s history and characteristics weigh in favor of a Guidelines sentence.”
Turning to this the very likely mostly hidden assets of this very wealthy 60-year-old – whose evil conman father plundered and hid assets of about £450 million via locations believed to number the British Virgin Islands, the Channel Islands, Lichtenstein, Panama and Switzerland – Williams concluded “the defendant apparently decides when she wishes to disclose facts to the Court, and those facts shift when it serves the defendant’s interests.”
Going further, he added:
“The breakdown of the defendant’s finances provided then demonstrated that the defendant is a remarkably wealthy woman. That wealth appears to have primarily come from Epstein.”
“The primary source of funds reflected in that financial breakdown was the sale of the defendant’s Manhattan townhouse. Kate testified at trial that the defendant told Kate that Epstein obtained the New York townhouse for the defendant. Additionally, evidence at trial demonstrated that Epstein transferred a total of approximately $23 million (£18.9 million, €21.9 million or درهم84.5 million) to the defendant.”
“The defendant’s dishonesty surrounding her finances is an aggravating factor weighing in favor of an above-Guidelines fine in this case. The defendant’s assets range in 52 the multiple millions of dollars. A $750,000 (£615,000, €715,000 or درهم2.8million) fine will hardly impact her financial outlook, but it is the most the law will allow in this case. The Court should impose it without hesitation.”
“With respect to forfeiture, the Government is not seeking to forfeit any property because the Government has not identified specific property used in the offense conduct that the defendant herself owned.”
“Finally, because each of the identified victims has already received monetary compensation for the harms caused to them by the defendant’s criminal conduct, the Government does not seek restitution in this case. Restitution is not available where victims have received compensation for their losses from another source.”
“Each of the six victims identified at trial – Jane, Annie, Kate,Carolyn, Virginia, and Melissa – has received funds from the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund and/or civil settlements as compensation for the harms they suffered as a result of the defendant’s and Epstein’s crimes.”
“… That amount constitutes a mere drop in the bucket for a multi-millionaire like the defendant, but it nevertheless sends the message that a defendant who uses wealth to accomplish criminal activity will suffer financial losses in addition to the loss of liberty.”
“No amount of money can undo the harm that the defendant’s crimes have done, but given the defendant’s substantial means, the majority of which appears to have come from her co-conspirator, a hefty fine is certainly warranted in this case.”
“Money is a key theme underlying the criminal conduct in this case. The defendant’s access to wealth enabled her to present herself as a supposedly respectable member of society, who rubbed shoulders with royalty, presidents, and celebrities.”
“That same wealth dazzled the girls from struggling families who became the defendant and Epstein’s victims. That same wealth enabled the defendant and Epstein to hire a parade of staff to transport victims and maintain the fabulous properties where those victims were abused.”
“That same wealth motivated the defendant to make sure that Epstein’s repulsive desire for sexual contact with teenage girls was always met.”
“That wealth was the defendant’s reward.”
“The defendant has lived a life of extraordinary privilege, and she profited from her relationship with Epstein. It is only right that she should suffer some small financial penalty for the incalculable harm she has caused.”
Of Jeffrey Epstein’s co-collaborator and one-time lover’s moaning about jail conditions, Williams observed:
“At bottom, the defendant’s complaints about jail seem to come down to the vast gulf between the conditions of her confinement and the defendant’s lived experience up until her arrest and detention on July 2, 2020.”
“Until July 2020, the defendant spent her entire life living in extraordinary luxury. Her childhood and adolescence were filled with wealth and privilege. That access to wealth continued into adulthood when the defendant found a benefactor in Epstein, who provided her with millions of dollars and invited her to share in his luxurious lifestyle of mansions, house staff, private chefs, and private planes.”
“After leaving that relationship, the defendant remained exceptionally wealthy, residing in palatial estates and owning multiple homes. It is no wonder, then, that she found jail jarring. Going from being waited on hand and foot to incarceration is undoubtedly a shocking and unpleasant experience.”
“The massive difference between the defendant’s prior life and the life of an inmate may feel extreme to the defendant, but when compared to the experiences of other pretrial detainees in this District, her experience is by no means so shocking as to merit a downward variance.”
“If anything, the defendant’s privilege remained intact while at the MDC, as demonstrated by the exceptional benefits she received. No other inmate received the kind of access to discovery and to counsel that the defendant did. The defendant had her own shower, her own television, her own desktop computer, her own laptop, and her own space to spend the day outside of her cell.”
“The defendant was able to get any concerns, no matter how small, immediately brought to the attention of MDC legal counsel through her attorneys. Comparing that treatment to SAMS is out of touch with reality.”
“In many respects, the defendant’s conditions of confinement were preferential and more beneficial than those experienced by other inmates… At bottom, the defendant does not like jail.”
“… Finally, it bears emphasizing that the defendant has told blatant lies about her conditions of confinement. She repeatedly claims to have suffered significant hair loss, but anyone who has seen the defendant in court can easily see that is not true.”
“She repeatedly claims to have lost an extreme amount of weight, but, as noted above, BOP medical records make clear that she has not. The defendant is perfectly healthy, with a full head of hair.”
Mr Williams is spot on and given that Ghislaine Maxwell remains remorseless for her many crimes, has been shown to be a deviant liar and has thus far refused to name the names of her co-collaborators and those she sex trafficked to, it is time for only one thing. On 28th June, it is time for Judge Alison J. Nathan to chuck the book at this truly rotten piece of toerag.
Elsewhere this morning, the DailyMail.com shared an image they declared “never-before-seen” image of the daughter of the world’s worst pension plunderer with her now estranged husband Scott Borgerson at a Christmas party at a nursing home in December 2017. The pair married on Christmas Day a year earlier – the very day of Ghislaine Maxwell’s 55th birthday.Mr Borgerson ditched his wife in what the DailyMail.com termed a “heated phone call whilst she was in solitary confinement” and has moved on with a yoga enthusiast with “an ass that could crack open a walnut” named Kris McGinn Straub.The United States Attorney’s Office Southern District of New York issued a statement on Tuesday 21st June 2022 calling on victims wishing to make a statement at Ghislaine Maxwell to contact them. In it they incorrectly stated the date of sentencing as the 29th June rather than the 28th June.
The Maxwell-Borgerson Assets
Of the lies Ghislaine Maxwell told about her assets, prosecutors remark: “After getting caught in her lie to Pretrial Services that her only asset was her London townhouse, the defendant provided a very different picture when seeking bail in December 2020. The breakdown of the defendant’s finances provided then demonstrated that the defendant is a remarkably wealthy woman.”
Amongst the assets of the couple are:
Manchester-by-the-Sea residence – The house Borgerson bought with Maxwell on 30th June 2016 for £1.802 million ($2.450 million, €2.164 million or درهم8.998 million) in Manchester-by-the-Sea, Massachusetts was placed for sale in February 2022 for a far more punchy £5.368 million ($7.295 million, €6.443 million or درهم26.791 million). Whether it has sold is unknown and how much of the proceeds from such she will receive has also yet to be disclosed.New Hampshire residence – The pair purchased Tuckedaway, 338 East Washington Road, Bradford, New Hampshire, NH 03221 for £787,953 ($1,070,750, €945,752 or درهم3.93 million) on 13th December 2019 via Jennifer Johnson and Margaret Weathers of Four Seasons Sotheby’s International Realty. The house had been listed at a price of £879,000 ($1.195 million, €1.055 million or درهم4.389 million) in March that year and sold previously for £773,000 ($1.050 million, €927,000 million or درهم3.856 million) on 15th December 2017. Its ownership is currently unknown, but likely remains in the joint possession of Mr and Mrs Borgerson.London residence – Ghislaine Maxwell paid £290,000 ($396,000, €347,000 or درهم5 million) for a three-storey leasehold mews house on 22nd January 1997. 44 Kinnerton Street, Belgravia, London, SW1X 8ES is situated at the heart of the Duke of Westminster’s Grosvenor Estate and she sold it for £1.75 million ($2.39 million, €2.09 million or درهم79 million) on 19th April 2021.
As Ghislaine Maxwell faces 30 years in prison, her lawyers have ludicrously countered suggesting she should serve just a minimum 4 years; her few “remaining friends” and family laughably blub about the mucky madam being a “fundamentally good and decent person” who “still has much to contribute to the world if she is given a meaningful opportunity to do so”
“Remaining friends (most having cut ties due to fear of association and the lure of ‘cancel culture’) attest to Ghislaine [Maxwell]’s character; each offers a first-person narrative of some aspect of her life in sharp contrast to her characterisation as a villain, rich heiress, and vapid socialite” is a telling paragraph in Bobbi C. Sternhein, Christian R. Everdell and Jeffrey S. Pagliuca’s latest submission to the United States District Court Southern District of New York about their convicted sex offender client.
In a 77-page document accompanied by another of 29 pages, the word “victim” is very tellingly only referenced 4 times and not one of those mentions expresses any regret on behalf of the mucky madam Maxwell about what she has been deservedly convicted of doing to young women. They go as far to claim: “Probation essentially makes the sweeping assertion that a harsh sentence for Ms. Maxwell is necessary to deter rich people from exploiting poor people,” but ludicrously seek to blame “main offender” Jeffrey Epstein alone for this instead.
“Nor should she be sentenced as if she were Harvey Weinstein” is another laughable point made by the attorneys – Maxwell and the disgraced film mogul ironically partied together at the birthday party for Prince Andrew’s daughter on 15th July 2006 – in an attempt to bring down the “correct sentencing range” to a minimum of 51 months or 4.25 years “not the 292-365 month [30.5 years] range calculated by the U.S. Probation Office.”
A “whirlwind of emotional turmoil caused by the relentless demands of her father” and an absent mother who ignored her are also cited as factors in Jeffrey Epstein’s co-collaborator’s downfall and whilst he isn’t actually named, her estranged husband Scott Borgerson is referenced. Of him, the attorneys remark:
“In 2013, Ms. Maxwell began a new relationship with the man she would later marry. She was with her husband for over seven years and became a devoted stepmother to her husband’s two youngsters, who were ages three and four and a half at the start of the relationship. Sadly, the marriage could not survive the negative impact of this case nor a husband’s association with his dishonoured wife.”
Lauded as “warm hearted, generous, kind, funny, thoughtful and loving” by friends and relatives, here is a portrayal of someone quite at contrast with what a court found of her in December. This wicked wench might think she can pull the wool over the courts with this barrage of bilge, but we simply conclude: “Now, go and pull the other one; it is time for this wholeheartedly evil conniving ratbag to rot and to deservedly rot in hell.”
Ghislaine Maxwell will be sentenced on 28th June in New York. She deserves far more than the minimum asked for; in fact, she deserves to live out of the rest of her days in the clink to prevent her assisting in the abuse of a single further person.
The attorneys of the mucky madam seek to pin blame on the former socialite’s late parents Robert and Betty as an explanation for her antics in their 77-page submission. Of Ghislaine Maxwell’s mother, they remark: “At age three, she stood in front of her mother and said simply, ‘Mummy, I exist.’ On doctor’s orders exactly a year after Michael’s accident, her mother went on a long tour of India and Australia, leaving infant Ghislaine and her siblings not already in boarding school at home in the care of a nanny.” Of her as deviant as her father, they add: “Mr. Maxwell employed corporal punishment on his children. Ghislaine vividly recalls a time when, at age 13, she tacked a poster of a pony on the newly painted wall of her bedroom. Rather than mar the paint with tape, she carefully hammered a thin tack to mount the poster. This outraged her father, who took the hammer and banged on Ghislaine’s dominant hand, leaving it severely bruised and painful for weeks to come.”Of what came after the death of her father “under suspicious and unresolved circumstances and under a cloud of business impropriety,” the lawyers add, ‘The Bouncing Czech’s’ clear favourite child was “left to fend for herself.” They remark: “It was around this time that Ms. Maxwell met Jeffrey Epstein for the first time. As Ms. Maxwell plans to appeal her conviction, we will not comment on the events during this time period that were the subject of the trial” and thus avoid delving into what she and her evil co-collaborator did to the victims they sex trafficked and sexually abused. Effectively, the excuse is one monstrous man replaced another man.Since exposed as criminal sex abusers and predators including Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell attended Princess Beatrice’s 1888 themed 18th birthday party at Windsor Castle on 15th July 2006. The event cost a reported £400,000 – whether the Duke of York and his live-in ex-wife Sarah, Duchess of York contributed financially or instead got their rich friends to cough-up is, however, unknown – and other guests numbered more innocent sorts including Sir David Frost, Pixie Geldoff, Ashton Kutcher, Demi Moore and Kelly Osbourne. Curiously the convicted daughter of the Mirror pension pot plunderer is now seeking to distance herself from the former film mogul she was happy to be pictured with and does not want to be compared to someone convicted of what her lawyers term “forcible rape.”“Her work was a far cry from the ‘flippity-jibit socialite’ label that the media has decided to cast on her every time they reference her” claim sisters Christine Malina Maxwell and Isabel Maxwell in a letter that is included in the 77-page document. Such a comment fails in that here was a woman who spent her life hobnobbing with the likes of Calvin Klein and Aby Rosen (pictured) and others including Bernie Ecclestone, Kevin Spacey, Prince Andrew and Naomi Campbell.For many years a “secret husband,” Scott Borgerson has given up on his wicked wife and taken up with a yoga enthusiast with “an ass that could crack open a walnut” named Kris McGinn Straub. The house he bought with Maxwell in June 2016 in Manchester-by-the-Sea, Massachusetts was placed for sale in February 2022 for £5.368 million ($7.295 million, €6.443 million or درهم26.791 million). Whether it has sold is unknown.In other news yesterday, the ‘Miami Herald’ referenced that “ Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein “operated, using offshore companies to build, disguise and conceal their wealth” whilst other publications claimed that the mucky madam would be “naming names” – an allegation examined in the ‘Globe’ on 18th April 2022. At the time, they claimed “the disgraced British socialite is spilling her guts… in return for a get out of jail free card.”
‘Missing’ Madeleine McCann £14 million investigation takes a bizarre new twist with still not charged supposed suspect Christian Brueckner set to have his thighs examined
It has been more than 15 years since Madeleine McCann was last seen alive in Praia da Luz, Portugal and in that time over £14 million of British taxpayers’ hard-earned cash has been lavished on an investigation that has led to, quite frankly, Sweet Fanny Adams, zilch, zero and utterly nothing.
That a child unusual in that she had a colomba of the iris that would make her stand out from any crowd literally vanished into thin air is beyond curious, but what is worse is that unlike with other missing person cases, the powers that be think it appropriate to continue their investigations is beyond acceptable.
Whilst the families of others who have disappeared – such as Martin Allen, Luke Durbin and Ben Needham – get little to no assistance in terms of resources and financing, that Gerry and Kate McCann, a couple who after all left their children unattended, continue to get such high levels of support and media attention is frankly wrong.
Now, at a time when the only remaining ‘live’ suspect in the case, German rapist Christian Brueckner, still has not been charged it is high time to end this charade and time also to reallocate resources to the search for missing people who could actually be found. That he is about to have his legs examined after in a development in an unrelated rape case is neither here nor there and if there was a prospect of him actually being convicted in the 2007 ‘disappearance,’ why haven’t the powers that be already charged him?
Pictured top – Angry-to-his-core man Gerry McCann and his supposedly ‘missing’ since 3rd May 2007 daughter, Madeleine.
Missing Madeleine – Questions STILL without Answers
Many questions about what happened on the evening of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann remain. Some that have been highlighted by the press and discussed online include:
Why did Kate McCann refuse to answer 48 questions put to her by the Portuguese police?
Why were certain records of phone calls on the evening of the disappearance “whoosh-clunked” from the memories of the phones of Mr and Mrs McCann and the ‘Tapas 7’?
Why did a British sniffer dog sense the smell of a corpse in a cupboard in the apartment from which Madeleine McCann disappeared?
Why did a sniffer dog also supposedly sense the smell of a corpse in a vehicle hired by the couple a month after the disappearance of their daughter?
Why did Mr and Mrs McCann go jogging and play tennis in the days after their daughter’s disappearance?
Was it acceptable for Mr and Mrs McCann’s mortgage to be paid by the fund established to search for their missing daughter?
The latest twist in the investigation into whether the undoubtedly evil Christian Brueckner actually has any links to what occurred on 3rd May 2007 in Praia da Luz in the Algarve region of Portugal has attracted much commentary on social media and in the international press. It relates to another case involving the German and an accuser who is alleged to have been attacked by someone with “a cross-shaped scar on his right thigh” – something Brueckner’s lawyer, Friedrich Fuelscher, claims him not to have. Of this development, one Twitter user, @Karma_Kiss1, remarked: “It just gets more bizzare, examine his thighs to look for a scar. The victim stated the rapist had. Should rule CB out once and for all. How many more cases will they try to pin on him? #mccann #Madeleinemccann.” Mr Brueckner maintains he had no involvement in the 2007 ‘disappearance.’Another user, @maddiesvoice1, returned to an old theme and linked to an article about the Home Office keeping secret files on the case to avoid a diplomatic incident with Portugal and observed: “Files kept secret. An institution labelled as institutionally corrupt housing rapists abusers and murderers. Entrusted with the case of a missing/dead child spending £14 million and 15 years later proving nor finding a single thing. Cover up anyone? #McCann.”Kate McCann – a woman who went running, played tennis and dined on chicken and mushroom risotto and egg and watercress salads washed down with strawberry vodka with the paedophile Sir Clement Freud in the days after her daughter ‘disappeared’ – has a clear touch of the former Meghan Markle about her. Like ‘MeGain,’ whom banged on that “not many people have asked if I’m OK,” Mrs McCann said in 2011: “Officers walked past us as if we weren’t there. Nobody asked how we were doing, whether we were okay. Our child had been stolen and I felt as if I didn’t exist.”Living it Large – Gerry MccCann enjoying a round of golf (left); Kate McCann at Downing Street, London hobnobbing with Missing People CEO Martin Houghton-Brown, the Duchess of Gloucester and the then Home Secretary Theresa May on 23rd May 2012 (right).Amongst those to have supported the McCanns have been especially gobby attention seekers including job wrecker Sir Richard Branson, “Chanel-clad” charity begins at home tin banger Baroness (Catherine) Meyer and her pompous arsehole husband Sir Christopher and job wrecking grabber Sir Philip Green.
In December 2017, when £11 million of British taxpayers’ money had been spent towards the search for ‘missing’ Madeleine McCann, 86% of viewers of ITV1’s ‘Loose Women’ said the public purse should cease to fund the investigation. Now, in June 2022, with that sum now in excess of £14 million (aside from the millions in private money also), it is time to allocate resources to the search for missing people who actually can be found, we would suggest.
As sentencing approaches on 28th June, the end is nigh for Ghislaine Maxwell; elsewhere Elon Musk asks about her client list as the mucky madam’s pugnacious PR peddlers go crickets
Though members of the public keep banging on about the fact that the criminal trial of Ghislaine Maxwell wasn’t as transparently covered as the defamation case of Amber Heard v Johnny Depp – in doing so illustrating their lack of understanding of the differences between civil and criminal cases – it is now time to share the timeline of the former’s road to a likely and deserved remainder of her life rotting in the clink.
Set out in April by Judge Alison J. Nathan, the daughter of the pension pot plunderer to the tune of £500 million’s processing began on 24th May and will conclude with sentencing on 28th June.
There is no conspiracy in this matter and what is occurring, though it might be deemed slow by British standards, is being done in a perfectly thorough and absolutely fair fashion.
Elsewhere on Twitter, as is to be expected of a branch of social media where wack jobs share what Boris Johnson might call a “pyramid of piffle,” the rumour mill has been in overdrive. Amongst the ramblings last week, Elon Musk – himself photographed (supposedly without his permission, he claims) with Jeffrey Epstein’s mucky madam in March 2014 – tossed the baton to the Department of Justice over the fact that no co-conspirators of the pair have yet been charged in the US with a single offence.
In a subsequent tweet responding to one of those who highlighted the suggestion that Musk and Maxwell had themselves met, the businessman pointedly answered: “Ah yes, Maxwell photobombing me at a @VanityFair Oscars party – you should them why they invited her. The same people who push this photo say nothing about prominent people who actually went to his island a dozen times. Also very strange…”
Mr Musk is quite right to highlight this and what is also extremely telling is that the pugnacious PR peddlers who’ve repeatedly come out and attacked the victims of this evil, mendacious woman have now gone completely silent. Brian Basham, Jay Beecher, Ross Gower and Ian, Isabel and Kevin Maxwell – As a pissed-off-her-skull Delia Smith once raged: “Let’s be havin’ ya.”
Pictured top – An especially busty shot of Ghislaine Maxwell with the world’s richest man, Tesla founder Elon Musk. He claims that the daughter of ‘The Bouncing Czech’ Robert Maxwell “photobombed” him at ‘Vanity Fair’s’ March 2014 Oscar party in West Hollywood.
On 26th April, Judge Alison J. Nathan set out the order of the process of the sentencing of Jeffrey Epstein’s lover and co-conspirator in abusing and sex trafficking young women. Prior to the actual sentence being made on 26th June 2022, there are a number of key dates – including a PSR disclosure being due tomorrow.Billionaire Elon Musk threw petrol on the fire on 4th June when he accompanied a tweet that read: “Only thing more remarkable than DOJ not leaking the list is that no one in the media cares. Doesn’t that seem odd?” with an image captioned: “Things I’ll never see in my life.” The four images were of a dragon, a dinosaur, a unicorn and a box title: “The Epstein/Maxwell client list.”The ‘Mucky Madam’s’ primary PR peddlers – Bombastic busybody Brian Basham, jingoistic joker Jay Beecher and brazen brother Kevin Maxwell have all regularly gone out on the offensive on behalf of the convicted sex trafficker. Lately, however, not one of them has said a thing – most probably advised by counsel to keep schtum.In recent months Christopher Mason (left) – who wrote a raunchy poem about Jeffrey Epstein having “24-hour erections” at the behest of Ghislaine Maxwell – has commented widely on the conviction of a woman he has thrown under the bus in terming his “former friend.” Equally, the daughter of the pension pot plunderer’s one-time spokesman Ross Gow of Acuity Reputation (right) – who describes himself on Twitter as a “reputation counsel” and “whippet fancier” who “enjoys ancient Land Rovers and aged Mercedes, drinkable wine, fieldsports and woodsmoke” – seemingly has stopped spinning for her and gone remarkably quiet.
In February 2005, Delia Smith CH CBE took to the pitch of Norwich Football Club – which she is the majority shareholder in – and raged: “A message for the best football supporters in the world: we need a 12th man here. Where are you? Where are you? Let’s be ‘avin’ you! Come on!” The same can now be said of the co-conspirators of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. It is jolly well time they were charged.
As rumours swirl about whether they are still actually living together, Boris Johnson and his puppet mistress Carrie unsurprisingly got booed at Jubilee Service of Thanksgiving
When she’s not lavishing £840 a roll of other peoples’ money on chintzy Lulu Lytle wallpaper or munching on fancy nosh gifted in Lady Bamford’s £1,000 a pop “colossal Daylesford hampers,” Carrie Johnson enjoys chucking no doubt very expensive red wine on sofas, abusing staff at Chequers and dancing to ABBA with the lads she nicknames “the gays.”
Still allegedly a senior advisor to the ocean conservation charity Oceana – which was for many years funded in part by the convicted mucky madam sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell – and also head of communications for the controversial Aspinall Foundation, the missing for some months now baby mama to the PM finally reappeared together on Friday in London.
Unsurprisingly booed on arrival and departure from St Paul’s Cathedral by many and jeered at by others, the public subsequently suggested on social media that yesterday’s show of unity was nothing but to keep the press and public’s speculations at bay.
With more likely having done so without declaring their hands, we now have a Prime Minister in both personal and political turmoil. He is not a steady captain for the ship that is Great Britain and once the fun and festivities are over on Monday, it is time for ration and reason. It is now time to start the process of getting this country back to dignified political leadership as we move into Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II’s 71st year at the helm.
Pictured top – Yesterday, satirical site @Mockeree shared on Twitter: “Boris and Carrie Johnson appear together at the #PlatinumJubilee thanksgiving service, quashing rumours of a rift.”
LBC radio jockey James O’Brien suggested that the Prime Minister’s wife wore a “hat that shields her husband from her sight” whilst others argued the jeering at St Paul’s to be “judged best international PR move by [the] British public since 2016.”Others, amongst them Saif Islam, suggested the reaction was “not isolated” and added this was a “roar of rage from Middle of England.” Here is a premier who is truly loathed and detested and frankly here is a wazzock who should just have stayed at home.
As the Conservative leader and his current wife arrived at St Paul’s Cathedral on Friday, they were most certainly met with anything but adulation. Here instead the modern-day Marie Antoinette and her bumbling buffoon husband found themselves hearing the wrath of a public sick to their stomachs with a government that governs only for the benefit of themselves.
As the couple left the event, they were again met with jeering. It illustrated how hated they truly are and it is most certainly indication that it is time for them to go. With polls predicting a “very heavy loss” in the Wakefield by-election and the likelihood of the 54-letter threshold being reached on Monday, here is a leader on the verge of being toppled and here is one that the public most certainly will not miss. It is time for this national disgrace to do the decent thing on the final day of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II’s Jubilee and it is time for him to finally resign. Decent, true people everywhere would most certainly say cheers to that.
Members of the public cited the current government’s policies on Brexit and the Partygate scandal as amongst the reasons they jeered the current Conservative Prime Minister and his puppet mistress wife. They did not harbor dislike for the Queen, but they do harbour hatred for this country’s rotten government.
As it is revealed Carrie Johnson has been abusive to staff at Chequers, perhaps it is time for her to be told: “Carrie Shouldn’t Live Here Anymore;” this demanding wench along with her hapless husband deserve kicking out of all of their grace-and-favour residences ASAP
Situated 40 miles north-west of Central London at the foot of the Chiltern Hills, Chequers is an Elizabethan style residence that has been the official country residence of serving British Prime Ministers since 1921.
Listed Grade I and standing on an expansive plot of 1,500 acres, here is an especially tony crib that costs at least £916,000 a year to maintain. Now, though gifted originally primarily as a place for the incumbent PM to entertain visiting dignitaries, it seems that Boris Johnson’s self-entitled wife has decided that instead this is a place where she and her ABBA loving chums Henry Newman and Josh Grimstone are entitled to just frolic and fool around.
Former court jester to the modern-day Antoinette and one of those she supposedly nickname’s “The Gays,” Newman was so important to clearly tone deaf Mrs Johnson that she enabled him to celebrate his 38th birthday – hardly a milestone of any note – with a lavish bash at the estate in the summer of 2021. “It turned out to be a very high-spirited affair,” the Daily Mail’s Andrew Pierce reported in February, with “Housing Secretary Michael Gove riding pillion as Boris Johnson took him on a joy-ride on his second-hand Yamaha motorcycle around the grounds. Gove clasped his hands around Boris’s ample waist as they nudged speeds of 55mph, while Newman – clutching a flute of champagne – laughed and cheered.”
Exposing the misuse of this “retreat” further on Tuesday, The Times’s Simon Walters shared that Mr and Mrs Johnson began creating “tensions” at the Buckinghamshire residence before he even became Prime Minister. Aside from being “accused of failing to give enough notice before arriving,” the pair “were even trying to arrange to get into Chequers before [Philip and Theresa May] had gone. When he knew he was going to take over, they were trying to book ahead.”
Of their behaviour, a source shared: “It was chaos” and added that even when “they were told they couldn’t [come] because there were no staff,” they reversed – at no cost to themselves – David Cameron’s “austerity era” cuts and brought in at least four extra employees.
Now, after one now former employee who had supposedly “clashed with Carrie,” a housekeeper named Charlotte Vine MBE, received a payoff after denying accusations that she had the “inappropriate handling of a personal item” belonging to Johnson in his Chequers bathroom, it is time for a spring clean. Just like occurred with the squatting, property pest and “Nasty NestSeeker” Jonathan Davis, whose antics we reported on June 2020, the day when “Carrie Doesn’t Live Here Anymore” is played at Chequers is thankfully growing increasingly ever closer.
Kenya’s President Uhuru Kenyatta with Britain’s Prime Minister at the Buckinghamshire pad in July 2021.Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel with Johnson at the mansion in July 2021.The current PM’s latest baby mama with her beloved party loving chum Henry Newman toadily following along and fawning behind her. He got his just rewards with a big bash in the country in the summer of 2021.Of 16th century origin, the house has served has the British Prime Minister’s country residence since 1921 after being gifted to the nation by Sir Arthur Lee (later The Right Honourable The Viscount Lee of Fareham GCB GCSI GBE PC) by a Deed of Settlement.Another view of this expansive residence. In the building is a stained glass window that reads: “This house of peace and ancient memories was given to England as a thank-offering for her deliverance in the great war of 1914 – 1918 as a place of rest and recreation for her Prime Ministers forever.” It is a great pity that the self-centred, self-serving woman formerly known as Carrie Symonds has decided to take it upon herself to misuse this generous gift.On Twitter, of the latest scandal to follow ‘Partygate,’ columnist turned ‘Bloody Difficult Women’ playwright Tim Walker opined: “The Johnsons never got that Chequers and Downing Street aren’t five-star hotels that tolerated Wayne and Waynetta Slob behaviour.”Another user, Louis Henwood added: “No wonder they call her Carrie Antoinette. She comes across as a self-obsessed prima donna, who treats employees as servants and then tries to get people she doesn’t like fired. Her only skill seems to be getting the rich and powerful to indulge her whims.”
The creepy Christian crooner Sir Cliff Richard’s 1979 song should be played as they likely, hopefully soon drum the most disgraceful Prime Minister and his equally ghastly puppet mistress out of their grace-and-favour residences. It’ll be chants of “good riddance” that come on that day from the vast majority.
Both blubbing bed sh*tter Amber Heard and boring botherer the Duchess of Sussex should be heard less and ignored more; it is time to cancel these woke wazzocks
Audacious and awful Amber Heard is an actress and so used to be the wicked wench formerly known as Meghan Markle. Here, indeed, is a pair who are very similar and in both of them this week we’ve seen yet more shameless attention seeking.
Whilst Johnny Depp’s clearly crackers ex blubbed in court and was made an utter berk of by Kate Moss over her clear lies, that the Duchess of Sussex decided to visit a town in Texas she has utterly no connection with is just plain wrong.
The grieving families of those so disgustingly shot by a deranged madman do not need or require a visit from a woman who forced her husband to quit his royal duties to seek privacy. Her presence, instead, was nothing but wrong in all senses and that she turned up to profiteer with her camera crew in tow was beyond reprehensible.
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex might believe Netflix’s cash to be their future; it will soon be their deserved undoing. Shame on them and shame on bed sh*tter Amber Heard also.
Why did the Duchess of Sussex – the wicked wench formerly known as Meghan Markle – go to a memorial for the victims of a school shooting in Texas when she has no connection to it in any way, shape or form?
The deranged diva’s decision to use a tragedy for her own PR purposes was rightly slammed on social media. That she stood looking over photographers sums up how self-serving this dreadful toerag truly is.If the Duchess of Sussex had wished to support the families of the victims of the Uvalde shootings, she could have sent a donation. Instead, she used this tragedy for her very own benefit. Shame on her.Meanwhile elsewhere in the Fairfax County Courthouse in Virginia, Johnny Depp looked on as his ex-lover Kate Moss proved Amber Heard nothing but a loopy liar yesterday.
Of her claiming having got married the day before she actually did, Mr Markle stated: “Lying about the archbishop? How can you say: ‘We’ve been married three days before we got married’? Her lies are so obvious, I don’t know why she says them.”
Her very own half-sister, Samantha, has called her out as a liar on multiple occasions also. It has been proven that the duchess’s claim that she hasn’t seen her sibling in over 20 years was proven untrue when a photo of the pair 13 years ago emerged.
Her very own half-brother, Thomas Jr., said of her: “I told Prince Harry, I think she’s going to ruin your life. She’s very shallow… She’s a phony, a bully, a jaded, shallow, conceited woman.”
The former Meghan Markle has been called out on multiple occasions for spinning stories against other members of the royal family, most especially the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
Staff who’ve worked for her have complained that she is a bully and investigations into this remain ongoing.
The Duchess of Sussex is a known manipulator of the press and paparazzis and it has been claimed that she’ll “twist the truth” to get any headline she wants.
Questions remain as to how many times she’s actually been married in total. Some say twice, some say thrice.
SCOOP: Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, traveled to Uvalde, Texas, where she donated food to a community blood drive center and visited a memorial for the victims of the deadly school shooting. https://t.co/QgVGCznO4G
‘Buzzfeed’ botherer Ellie Hall claimed a “scoop” on the story of the mendacious meddling minx that is the decided drip Prince Harry’s wicked wastrel wife visiting the scene of a massacre. She announced: “SCOOP: Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, traveled to Uvalde, Texas, where she donated food to a community blood drive center and visited a memorial for the victims of the deadly school shooting.”
BREAKING: Meghan Markle has been photographed laying flowers at a memorial for the Texas shooting victims.
As PR peddler for the ‘House of Montecito’ Omid Scobie again “rants” about the royals, all this one-time mate of the not so glamorous glamour model Jodie Marsh does is show himself up
“Whether you are a royalist or not, Her Majesty deserves better than this” droned the pugnaciously predictable PR-peddler-not-a-credible-journalist Omid Scobie in what has been branded an “800-word rant” by The Daily Express’s Jon King.
Peppered with quotes from unnamed sources – who could, quite frankly, very easily be invented – the mendacious minx formerly known as Meghan Markle’s personal scribbler and ‘friend,’ as always, referenced himself to be something of an expert on the royal “beat” in a feature for the decidedly out-of-date Yahoo! News. He made out that those making a “fuss” about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex not appearing on Buckingham Palace’s balcony during next month’s Platinum Jubilee have got it wrong and suggested the real reason is to “keep a certain disgraced royal [Prince Andrew] at bay.”
“Makes sense to me” added Scobie – who also remarked of “pot-stirring polls” about people threatening to boo the drip that is Prince Harry and his ‘Modern Day Mrs Simpson’ wife and pointedly stated: “I suppose his recent multi-million settlement with a woman accusing him of sexually assaulting her at 17 years old is nothing compared to the audacity of two people who moved abroad” – before he declared: “It’s the sections of media hellbent on joyriding the focus towards soap opera-style drama and embellished tales.”
Perhaps, instead, this one-time sidekick of the not so glamorous glamour model Jodie Marsh – a plastic not fantastic creosoted creature who once declared she wanted to get married in a fetish ceremony in a dungeon – should take a look in the mirror. It is his tittle-tattling tome, Finding Freedom, that is the book that will go down in history as nothing but “embellished tales” and it is avoiding the damage that the nonsense he spins that the Queen “deserves better than this” of instead.
Pictured top (from left to right) – The Duchess of Sussex back in her days as a lowbrow actress in ‘Suits’ in a clinch with ‘co-star’ Patrick J. Adams; boob exposing ‘glamour model’ Jodie Marsh and PR peddling pillock Omid Scobie.
Like his puppet mistress the Duchess of Sussex, the ‘Finding Freedom’ co-author is not keen for anyone to know his past. His days hanging around in lowbrow nightclubs with glamour models will, however, forever haunt this anything but a genuine journalist. Instead this peddler of poison about good people, such as Sadie Quinlan (AKA ‘Yankee Wally’), are what Omid Scobie will rightly be remembered for. Shame on him.‘Finding Freedom’ will not be remembered for its accuracy. It will, instead, be listed as a bargain bucket bag of bilge that represented nothing but a clear attack on the actual hardworking, dedicated members of the royal family.Whilst Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II will forever be lauded as a wonderful lady of style, substance and service, the Duchess of Sussex will simply be remembered as a ‘Modern Day Mrs Simpson’ who cares only about money, fame and power. This decidedly deviant diva has turned her pathetic husband into a drip and she has made herself nothing but an international laughing stock. Her treatment of others –most especially her father and siblings – has been nothing but shocking and her audacity has been simply beyond the pale.
The fact that people make videos titled “Omid Scobie freaks me out!” about says it all of this tedious tittle-tattling twerp. Here is a megamouth-not-a-man who does not follow the journalistic code of citing stories with evidence. Here instead is a feckless fool who likes to reference sources unnamed and in doing so just thus proves himself to be nothing but a galavanting gossiper. If anyone truly deserves “cancelling,” here is the very finest example available currently.
Mother of God! Law firm give notice that the Duchess of Sussex’s pugnacious PR peddler Omid Scobie has been sent a cease and desist letter and reported to the Metropolitan Police regarding “the harassment, threats and stalking of Sadie Quinlan”
Legal action is being taken to attempt to end “the harassment, threats and stalking of Sadie Quinlan [AKA ‘Yankee Wally’]” by the Duchess of Sussex’s pugnacious PR peddler Omid Scobie.
In a very brief 0:31-minute segment shared on Monday by the ‘Montecito Royale’ channel on YouTube, a notice from a firm named GW Law International was shared. It announced:
“We have now taken the first steps to end the harassment, threats and stalking of Sadie Quinlan.”
“An extensive police report to the Metropolitan Police has been filed by our firm on behalf of Sadie Quinlan regarding the malicious actions of Omid William Scobie.”
“This will now be follow-up by a cease and desist letter.”
“We will take legal action if Mr. Scobie does not comply.”
“Best regards, The staff of GW Law International.”
‘Montecito Royale’ accompanied the segment – which has already been watched over 7,400 times and liked by 1,100 YouTube accounts – with the caption:
“This is an announcement regarding preparations for legal proceedings.”
“I personally advice [sic] Mr. Scobie to take note of this public notice. It is not a good look to be globally known for harassing elderly little ladies… It kind of kills your career. The court of public opinion can be very cruel.”
“Omid William Scobie has sat there in his little poncy seat like his s**t doesn’t smell. That’s basically how he’s gone about this, but behind the scenes, he’s been the dirtiest, lowlife scumbag ever and he’s been getting orders from Meghan and Harry – what to do about ‘Yankee Wally’ and this is why, everywhere I go now, I’ve been shutdown, I’ve been de-platformed and his goal is to get me off Rumble and then his job is complete.”
“He makes money by removing me, by complaining about me. Empty threats, empty complaints, I beg your pardon, with no substance, but of course the algorithms, so many of them, so many of them pick up these complaints without looking into them to see if it really is a human being complaining.”
“And I get 100 complaints because Scobie is bossing, telling Chris Bouzy what to do, so there’s money in it. There’s money travelling from Harry and Meghan to Omid Scobie to Chris Bouzy and then out to the Sussex Squad.”
“Omid Scobie is the one behind all of this. Christopher Bouzy’s still there, but he’s taking orders from Omid William Scobie and that is why he’s had the cease and desist and the police have had a big report on him.”
“So, let’s see how he behaves tomorrow. Let’s see how Christopher Bouzy behaves tomorrow. Let’s see their reactions when this gets back to them and it will.”
Today we salute Sadie Quinlan and her supporters for standing up to the cowardly Finding Freedom ‘author’ and paraphrasing Superintendent Hastings from the BBC’s hit drama series Line of Duty conclude: “Mother of God! …. Jesus, Mary and Joseph and the wee donkey, can we just move this thing Scobie along before it drives us all round the bloody bend?”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2-amDpI8O0
The ‘Finding Freedom’ author clearly ain’t having the best of months. Exposed first for the fact that he hasn’t been running an exactly ship-shape company, the mendacious minx formerly known as Meghan Markle’s PR peddler now finds himself in decidedly boiling hot water in the legal arena also.Prone to trying to erase his own past – and wouldn’t anyone want to if they could only boast of having worked at the trash-mag that is ‘Heat’ and hung out with the decidedly lowbrow lush that is Jodie Marsh – Scobie likes to give out the schtick, but he is incapable of taking it back.Sadie Quinlan is not alone in being targeted by ‘MeGain’s’ “cheerleader.” The ‘Daily Mail’s’ Richard Eden finds himself regularly targeted both by the “anti-monarchist agitator” and his tawdry associates, the extremely tedious twerps that are the ‘Sussex Squaddies.’
