Since Ghislaine Maxwell’s controversial transfer to a low-security prison camp this summer, her time at Texas’s FPC Bryan has prompted uproar over alleged favorable treatment – including claims this week that she was provided custom-made meals, access to a puppy and as much toilet paper as she wants.
Some of the recent accusations were in a 9 November letter thatJamie Raskin sent to Donald Trump. The Democratic representative’s letter, which cited whistleblower information, demanded answers about Maxwell’s conditions – including whether Trump directed anyone in his administration to give her special treatment.
Whistleblower disclosures, Raskin said, also revealed that Maxwell was working on a “commutation application” with Trump’s administration. Maxwell is currently serving a 20-year sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking of teen girls, a scandal that has dogged Trump for years and has recently hit a feverish pitch during his second term.
The special treatment and the alleged request for a commutation of her sentence has prompted feverish speculation as to why Maxwell is getting such treatment and whether or not Trump could pardon her. The disgraced socialite’s team on Friday denied that she was seeking clemency.
Though both Maxwell and Trump have denied the US president was involved in, or knew of, Epstein’s wrongdoing, the former British socialite remains at the center of the scandal. That was heightened this week when amid of trove of released emails there was a message between Epstein and Maxwell that referred to Trump as “the dog that hasn’t barked” and said he had spent considerable time with one of the victims.
Certainly, Maxwell’s treatment after she was transferred from Florida to her new, much more relaxed prison in Texas is eye-catching.
More perks allegedly afforded to Maxwell included a special area where she can receive visitors, replete with “an assortment of snacks and refreshments for her guests”, and treating the warden as “her personal secretary and administrative assistant”. CNN reported she could have unlimited toilet paper.
As for the aforementioned puppy? “An inmate who trains puppies to become service dogs was instructed to provide one to Maxwell for a time so she could play with the puppy, even though neither inmates nor staff are ordinarily allowed to pet the service dogs in training.
“The deference and servility to Ms Maxwell have reached such preposterous levels that one of the top officials at the facility has complained that he is ‘sick of having to be Maxwell’s bitch’,” Raskin also said.
This application, Raskin said, demonstrated “either that Ms Maxwell is herself requesting you release her from her 20-year prison sentence for her role as a coconspirator in Jeffrey Epstein’s international child sex-trafficking ring, or that this child sex predator now holds such tremendous sway in the second Trump administration that you and your DOJ will follow her clemency recommendations”.
While the White House has previously said “pardoning Ghislaine Maxwell is not something [Trump] has thought about”, legal veterans told the Guardian that this kind of alleged treatment is uncommon, and raises the specter of still more favorable developments for Maxwell.
“The government isn’t going to give an incarcerated prisoner all of these perks in exchange for nothing,” said Eric Faddis, founder of the Colorado law firm Varner Faddis and a former prosecutor. “What it tells me is that the government believes they received something of value from Ghislaine and this is sort of her reward.”
Faddis said that he had seen inmates improve their lot by cooperating with the government and providing information deemed “useful” but not to the extent alleged. “It seems like the government gave, perhaps special preference, to Ghislaine based on the ostensible weight of the information she provided and its value.”
Neama Rahmani, founder of West Coast Trial Lawyers and a former federal prosecutor, said “this is not typical”.
Sex trafficking and other sex-related crimes are considered crimes of violence. Inmates convicted of them are typically isolated from the general population because they are considered dangerous and “they’re also at increased risk of being attacked or killed by other inmates”.
“They’re segregated, they’re in administrative custody. They’re generally not in a low-security facility with the general population,” Rahani said. “The fact that she’s allegedly getting these special meals, visits, puppy access – that is not standard, that is not typical in these types of cases.”
If the allegations about special treatment were true, including seeming irregularity surrounding her placement, it could be a quid pro quo, such as a “we’re gonna give you benefits because you’re keeping your mouth shut and not implicating people in power or with money”.
That said, it could be some completely benign, such as “there’s not a whole lot of placements for female inmates in the federal system, and this is the best the BOP had”.
John Day, a former prosecutor in New Mexico who founded the John Day Law Office, voiced similar sentiments about the alleged perks.
“Even if it’s 50% exaggerated, it’s still outrageous – and it indicates some type of favorable treatment that no one else could get unless you were connected in the right ways,” he said.
“These are the kind of privileges that are given to someone who has done something in return,” Day continued. This is not normal treatment for the crime she was convicted of, and it raises all sorts of questions about the propriety of it, and who’s behind it, and what the motive is.”
Larry Levine, founder of Wall Street Prison Consultants and a former federal inmate, was skeptical of the whistleblower allegations. With special meal claims, for example, Levine said inmates figure out how to prepare and eat bespoke meals, including by pilfering food from the kitchen.
“I used to have omelets and chicken breast and veal parmesandelivered to my cell that was made by an inmate,” he said. “It was ‘special’ food because no one else had it.”
Levine said it was “possible” BOP staff were preparing food for Maxwell but thought it very unlikely. “That would cause big, big, big problems with the inmates … Why is she getting this and we have to eat this crap here?” he said. “It would cause civil unrest in there.”
He also wasn’t shocked by the claim that Maxwell received visitors in a cordoned-off area.
In a visiting room, where there are many inmates and visitors, “everyone’s going to be gawking at her”, and officials might determine that keeping her separate fosters safety and security. “I’ve seen that happen before.”
Levine was emphatic, however, that Maxwell’s move to the Texas prison was “unprecedented”. Under Bureau of Prisons guidelines, sex offenders present safety concerns that do not permit their incarceration at low-security institutions such as Bryan. “There’s your big special privilege.”
It is unclear what these alleged privileges mean for Maxwell’s future, if anything. Levine noted that thousands seek commutations and that the process is backed up. “So could she ask? Sure, but I don’t think she’s going to get it.” That said, “with Trump, everything’s in the air.”
Rahmani said he believed that Maxwell was seeking a commutation, especially given that the US supreme court declined to hear her appeal. “There’s no doubt in my mind that Maxwell and her team are lobbying the president. I would be shocked if the president were actually to do this, but you never know when it comes to Trump.”
He pointed to Maxwell’s sit-down with Todd Blanche, the deputy attorney general who previously served as Trump’s personal lawyer.
“It is pretty rare for someone with his title and position in the DoJ to handle a case personally,” he said. “So you know, she does have some access that most folks do not.”
Given the cumulative circumstances, Day said, “You take it all together, nobody should be surprised if the next step is a commutation or a pardon.
“That seems to be where all the arrows are pointing and if you follow all the breadcrumbs.”
Maxwell’s team insisted that she was taking steps outside of seeking clemency, claiming that she will soon be filing a habeas petition in Manhattan federal court to challenge her conviction. “In the four years since the verdict new evidence has indeed come to light – and is continuing to do so,” Leah Saffian, counsel to Maxwell, said in a statement.
“Habeas petitions are distinct from petitions to the supreme court, in that they relate to prisoners’ rights and conviction challenges,” the statement said at another point. “Prior to any such [pardon] application a prisoner needs to demonstrate that all possible avenues of appeal have been exhausted.”
The Guardian has reached out to the White House and the Department of Justice for comment. The White House pointed to comments from Karoline Leavitt, the press secretary, earlier this week when a reported asked about whether Trump was considering a pardon for Maxwell. “He’s answered this repeatedly. It’s not something he’s talking about or even thinking about at this moment in time. I can assure you of that,” she said.
The justice department referred the Guardian to the Bureau of Prisons.
The Bureau of Prisons said in a statement that “allegations of misconduct, including any suggestion of preferential treatment, are taken seriously and thoroughly investigated” through internal processes. It added that violations of this policy can result in disciplinary action that can include firing and prosecution.
The BOP’s standards of employee conduct “explicitly prohibits all staff from providing preferential treatment to any inmate”, the agency said.
