By Johan Palmstruch
When Judge Nathan informed the court of the jury’s verdict; apparent was a small sliver of hope that justice for multiple victims of Epstein and Maxwell’s child sex trafficking operation would be secured. These witnesses had weathered blatant verbal abuse from the defense and intense scrutiny alongside the court’s failure to protect their identities during such a pursuit of justice. Now, due to further failures in jury vetting, that prospect of justice is in serious jeopardy.
On December 29th, 2021, a juror who served in the Maxwell Trial disclosed to several journalists that he was a victim of sex abuse, and that his story specifically helped sway other members of the jury who questioned the credibility of Maxwell’s accusers. This juror has made himself known to the public as an employee of The Carlyle Group. The jurors’ actions are apparently suspect when further analyzing existing relationships between Maxwell, Epstein and David Rubenstein, Co-founder of the Carlyle Group.
The Carlyle Group is a publicly traded multinational private equity, alternative asset management and financial services corporation, specializing in real asset management and private credit facilities. Between 2010-2015 The Carlyle Group was the largest fundraising private equity corporation in the United States. They have established a reputation for pursuing war-profiteering; acquiring several corporations related to the defense industry. Present day Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell was previously employed as a Partner at The Carlyle Group between 1997-2005.
The Carlyle Group is a global finance behemoth. Frank Carlucci served as the Carlyle Group chairman from 1992-2003, he was also the Secretary of Defense in 1987 and Deputy Director of the CIA (under Director Bush) from 1978-1981. The Carlyle Group have employed several executives that previously worked in intelligence.
David Rubenstein is well known as titan of American business, but his past is not without its own skeletons. Rubenstein is a former member of The Trilateral Commission and served of its board during the same time as Jeffrey Epstein. This establishes a professional relationship between Rubenstein and Epstein.
Despite this revelation; as recent as March 2020, David Rubenstein is still benefiting from full page profile pieces in the New York Times. Rubenstein is still friendly with the New York Times, similar to Epstein before his death in 2019.
Despite further scrutiny of information that demonstrates Rubenstein’s ex-wife (divorced 2017) Alice Rogoff’s close working relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell (and her charity, The TerraMar Project), there has been little media coverage detailing this relationship. An article linked further below discusses the pairs specific interactions in Alaska (among other details); alongside the potential role that Maxwell’s husband Scott Borgensen and his company CargoMetrics may have played in Maxwell’s operation.
Throughout the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, multiple transgressions from the court, defense and prosecution have been observed, and subsequently criticized by The Free Press Report. However, none of them more egregious then allowing a juror possessing a blatant conflict of interest to stay standing on the jury. A serious risk of mistrial is present, which may act as a final crushing blow to any remaining public faith and trust in the U.S Justice System.
We have been critical of the disregard for witness safety displayed throughout the Maxwell Trial; The Free Press Report will continue to criticize failures of public officials that refuse to uphold their sworn duty. The prosecution’s failure to identify this juror’s present bias shatters the concept of fair representation in a court of law. Further reviewing conflicting relationships that prosecution attorneys hold with U.S intelligence organizations is enough to raise the eyebrows of even the most non-skeptical observer.
It’s clear that this trial never intended to expose the full extent of Maxwell and Epstein’s operation. At a certain point, one must question what processes qualify as incompetence, and what processes qualify as negligence. This writer sees a dog and pony show paraded about. As established Epstein Journalist Whitney Webb would say, an “unlimited hangout”.
Staying mindful of the high-profile nature of the Maxwell Trial, the implication of multiple intelligence agencies and established examples of regulatory capture within the system of law and government; you would be forgiven for suggesting the possibility of foul play from the Carlyle Group juror. After observing the relationships apparent between a former Carlyle Group Executive, his wife, Maxwell and Epstein; one must question the legitimacy of the jurors’ actions.
It would be unlikely that the Carlyle Group juror failed to understand the potential fallout following his actions and subsequent interviews. He has failed in his public duty as a juror to stay impartial and forthright with information that may have provided bias; and in turn may have greatly endangered a crucial opportunity to secure justice for the victims of Epstein and Maxwell. Considering the other observations apparent in this case; there is a possibility the Carlyle Group juror is a deliberate plant assisted by intelligence to remove the risk of further inquiry into Epstein and Maxwell’s global network of pedophiles spanning many of the most powerful individuals on earth.
Judge Nathan has stated she will review the Carlyle Group jurors’ comments before determining if this transgression would justify a mistrial. FPR will continue coverage as this case develops. Thank you for your continued readership. Expect wider coverage of political corruption, corporate malfeasance and high society crime throughout 2022.