Juliette Bryant on Jeffrey Epstein’s ‘Factory’ of Sex Crimes

Juliette Bryant on Jeffrey Epstein's Factory of Sex Crimes

JULIETTE BRYANT DETAILS how Jeffrey Epstein entrapped and exploited her for two years beginning in 2002. In an interview for the BBC2 docu-series, House of Maxwell, Bryant describes how the predator pedophile love bombed her into his notorious sex trafficking scheme. Bryant later filed a lawsuit against the Epstein estate in 2019. 

The “King of America”

Bryant claims that her initial point of contact with the billionaire pedophile was model Naja Hill. In her lawsuit, she alleges that Hill told her she had a friend who was the “King of America” with connections to Victoria’s Secret, who could help Bryant launch her modeling career.

Bryant Describes Epstein’s Love-Bombing Strategy

Bryant claims her first encounter with Epstein took place at a restaurant in Cape Town in 2002. According to the lawsuit, she met Epstein, a “former high-ranking U.S. Government official, a famous actor, and a well-known comedian.” 

New York magazine reports that Epstein visited South Africa in 2002 with actor Kevin Spacey, comedian Chris Tucker, and former US President Bill Clinton. 

Bryant claims that Epstein invited her to attend the former high-ranking politician’s speech the day after their first meeting. She also says Epstein boasted that he was friends with Z-brands impresario Leslie Wesner. She alleges that he instructed her to bring her modeling portfolio to a casting at his hotel after the politician’s speech.

Flattery and Future Faking

At the casting, Bryant claims that the billionaire pedophile flattered her ego, telling her that she “had the most beautiful figure [I have] ever seen in my life.” 

Epstein allegedly announced that he would sponsor Bryant’s work visa and a flight to New York so that she could embark on an international modeling career. 

The promises Bryant is describing are typical of a manipulation tactic called ‘future faking’ commonly used by highly narcissistic people.

“Future faking is when someone uses a detailed vision of the future to facilitate […] bonding and connection.” explains Greg Kushnick, PsyD.

Bryant claims that Epstein went as far as to personally offer reassurances to her mother. According to her lawsuit, Epstein had his assistant organize her trip from South Africa to the United States. 

Bryant Alleges She Was Isolated on Little Saint James

Shortly after she arrived in New York, Bryant alleges that Epstein flew her to his private island Little Saint James. She was led to believe that she was traveling there on a modeling assignment. Instead, her sex trafficking nightmare began.

Bryant recalls that there was a collection of disturbing images decorating the walls of Epstein’s island home, mainly nudes of girls and Ghislaine Maxwell. She also shared a photograph with the BBC showing a disturbing depiction of a giant walrus raping a woman.

This was a foreshadowing of what allegedly awaited Bryant on Little Saint James. The former model describes an incident when she was in Epstein’s private cinema with the billionaire and another girl. Bryant claims she witnessed the other girl performing a sex act on Epstein. She says the experience made her “absolutely petrified” as she had not been exposed to that kind of lewd behavior before.

It was then she says she realized that she was trapped on Little Saint James with no means of escape – a strategy typical of coercive control.

According to Bryant, “I was completely trapped, and there was nothing I could do.”

“He Fed Off The Terror”

Bryant alleges that she was raped by Jeffrey Epstein up to three times a day in his “ice-cold, pitch black” bedroom on Little Saint James.

“He fed off of the terror,” she recalls of the repeated sexual assault she allegedly suffered at the hands of the predator, “There was something about the energy of a girl being scared that he liked.”

She alleges that when Epstein raped her she would dissociate.

‘I just checked out of my body and let him do what he wanted because I didn’t know what else to do,’ Bryant explains, “I tried to escape in my mind, I tried to pretend it wasn’t happening.” 

She is describing a trauma response common to victim-survivors of sexual assault. When faced with an existential threat, the defense mechanisms that emerge are fight, flight, freeze or fawn behaviors.

Threats and Intimidation

To silence her, Bryant says that Epstein threatened her and her family. She claims the combination of being repeatedly raped and terrorized by Epstein destroyed her self-esteem, “I was so broken at that point, I just sort of went along with it. I never felt okay again after that, everything just fell to pieces.”

Bryant says that Epstein used intimidation to influence her decisions. He let Bryant know he was accused of rape by another woman and that he’d managed to have his accuser jailed by planting drugs in her apartment.

She recalls the absolute power Epstein wielded in his social circle which convinced her that he would make good on his threats to harm her and her loved ones.

“I just did as I was told,” Bryant explains, “I was petrified of him, who he was. I knew crossing him would be a very bad idea.”

In this way, she says, Epstein was able to coerce her into remaining in his environs. She recalls, “Nobody disobeyed Epstein.”

Describing the climate of fear he cultivated, Bryant says, “It was just like a factory. [Epstein] was running a machine, and Ghislaine Maxwell was the one operating it. Ghislaine was running the girls and would tell us when we needed to go to his bedroom, you couldn’t say no, there was just no option.”

Surviving Jeffrey Epstein

Bryant says the final straw came when Epstein compelled her to fly out to his ranch in New Mexico. There, she alleges, he attempted to traffick her to another “important government official,” and Bryant resisted.

After the incident, Epstein berated her for not being compliant. Finally, an opportunity came for Bryant to return to her South Africa and she seized it. She says she never saw Epstein or anyone in his cabal again but he continued to harass her. In an e-mail as recently as two months before his alleged suicide, Bryant claims the pedophile sent her a leering message ask her to send him nude photos of herself.

“I’m tired of feeling ashamed,” says Bryant of her torment by Epstein, “I know I’m one of the lucky ones. I know other people have had far worse, and that is who I want to speak for, for the people who can’t talk anymore.”

House of Maxwell airs on BBC 2 on April 1 at 9 pm GMT.

Resources


Confidential support is available 24/7/365 to anyone experiencing abuse.
Book a one-on-one consultation or coaching session.


NAR’s Journalistic Standards and Practices
About NA
R • Report Typo or Error

Christopher Hitchens on Bill Clinton

Christopher Hitchens on Bill Clinton | Photo by Gage Skidmore

IN JAMES BALDWIN’S ACCOUNT of the Atlanta child murders of 1979-81, The Evidence of Things Not Seen, he recalls a dreadful earlier moment from 1964. The swamps and creeks of Mississippi were being dragged for the bodies of Schwerner, Chancy, and Goodman (done to death by the political ancestors of Bob Barr), and the search parties kept turning up corpses. Examinations proved that these were not the cadavers that the authorities were seeking. It took a while for the subject to change, or at least for it to change enough for someone to exclaim: Wait a minute! What are all these other bodies doing in the swamp?

It is one thing to say, with reasonable confidence, that the Oval Office is currently occupied by a war criminal, a rapist, and a pathological liar. It is another to ponder the full implications. If half of what one knows about Clinton’s business deals and date-rapes is half-true, then he has been going through political life for years, aware or quasi-aware that any or every telephone call might be the one he has been dreading. That’s more stress than most of us could take. Only a certain kind of personality could be expected to endure it. You can find this under the simpering liberal inertia of “Comeback Kid,” or you can check it in a taxonomy of an entirely different kind, where the key phrase is “Threat to self and others.”

Almost no allegation ever made by a woman and denied by him has proven to be untrue.

Christopher Hitchens

It seems to me morally feeble, as well as intellectually slack, to split the difference between Clinton and Broaddrick or to characterize her allegation as unprovable. The feeblest summary of this compromise is contained in the lazy phrase “he said, she said.” In the case of the “he,” we already know he is a hysterical, habitual liar. We also know that almost no allegation ever made by a woman and denied by him has proven to be untrue. And we know that ex-girlfriends have been subjected to extraordinary campaigns of defamation, amounting in some cases to intimidation, merely for speaking about “consensual” sex. What allegation could be more horrific than that of rape? And yet, “he” hadn’t said anything yet. If I were accused of rape and the woman making the charge was a lady of obvious integrity, I would want to do better than have a lawyer speak for me and make a routine disclaimer (especially a lawyer, in this case, the pathetic figure of David Kendall, who had not even met me at the time of the supposed crime). Asked by NBC to say where Clinton had been on the morning in question – a fact easily established in the life of a state attorney general – the White House declined cooperation. I would have wanted to do better than that, too.

A provisional but by no means unsafe induction, then, is that Broaddrick is speaking the truth.

Christopher Hitchens

So much for the “he said.” What of the “she”? If the allegation is false, then Broaddrick is not just getting her facts wrong. She is deliberately fabricating one of the most damning charges that any one person can make against another. She must be a wicked or deluded or malicious person. There seems no escaping this corollary conclusion. There also seems no reason at reaching for it. Where is the famous Clintonian rapid-response team? Has it no pride? Can it not find or produce any shadow of a doubt to cast on Broaddrick’s character? I think that if it could, we would know by now. Furthermore, a woman who groundlessly makes such a charge may be, and in my opinion ought to be, proceeded against for slander and wasting police and legal time. No hint of that.

A provisional but by no means unsafe induction, then, is that Broaddrick is speaking the truth. Questioned fairly closely by NBC’s Lisa Myers, she and her contemporaneous corroborative witnesses were easily able to answer the questions about silence and delay. The victim felt guilty for letting an unchaperoned man into her room, even if he was the attorney general. In a banana republic like Arkansas, allegations against powerful men were believed to have potentially unpleasant consequences. The victim was also having an extramarital affair with a man she hoped to marry. She did not want to be exposed, and she did not expect to be believed. Finally, and very importantly, she didn’t “go public.” She was made public. The feminist movement has taught us to recognize this pattern of response as a familiar and intelligible one. (How sad it was, by the way, to see Patricia Ireland changing her mind at this late stage. Doesn’t she know that she has lost something that she can’t ever hope to retrieve, and has lost it to Clinton?)

I also know of three other women who could, if they chose, lay a charge of assault against Clinton, which makes him a serial rapist.

Christopher Hitchens

Perhaps I won’t be taken as an authority on the moral credibility of the feminist leadership. But something ought to be said about the honor of the male sex in this business. It has been disgusting, all through the past year, to hear Clinton defended as homme moyen sensuel. “Everybody does it…all men lie about sex…a gentleman is expected to lie.” One reason a gentleman may be obliged to lie is to protect the reputation of the woman. Clinton has lied in order to trash them. I don’t have any male friends who say that it wasn’t “sex” because the woman got nothing out of it (the gallantry defense). I don’t have ay male friends who hump the help and then (with the assistance of paid slanderers) call them liars, golddiggers, sluts, and blackmailers. I don’t have any male friends who have been plausibly accused of rape, either, though I do know several women who have been sexually assaulted and decided not to go public. I also know of three other women who could, if they chose, lay a charge of assault against Clinton, which makes him a serial rapist. This puts him, in male terms, way outside the limit of what can be tolerated. I see him on television all the time, biting that fat lip of his, and now I have an additional reason for the powerful nausea I have always felt. I imagine his teeth in Juanita Broaddrick’s lips after he’s told her to lie still or he’ll bite her again. But hey, it’s time to move on. So forget it. Forget it if you can.

This article was originally published with the title ‘The Clinton Swamp’ by Christopher Hitchens in his column The Minority Repost at The Nation on March 29, 1999.

Photo by Gage Skidmore

Further reading