What did Virginia Giuffre (Virginia Roberts) testify in her 2016 deposition about Ghislaine Maxwell?
Executive summary
Virginia Giuffre’s 2016 sworn deposition in the defamation suit against Ghislaine Maxwell presents Giuffre’s account that Maxwell recruited her as a teenager, directed her to have sex with Jeffrey Epstein and other men (naming at least one high-profile figure), and participated in transporting her on Epstein’s planes and to his island; those claims are contained in the unsealed deposition and related exhibits [1] [2] [3]. Maxwell, who repeatedly denied Giuffre’s allegations in her own 2016 deposition and fought to keep transcripts sealed, has been accused by prosecutors of perjury arising from those denials, making the deposition central and contested evidence [4] [5] [6].
1. What Giuffre said about recruitment and Maxwell’s role
Giuffre testified that Ghislaine Maxwell recruited her to work as a “masseuse” for Jeffrey Epstein when Giuffre was a teenager and that Maxwell was involved in seeking girls to perform sexual massages for Epstein and his associates, a characterization Giuffre used to describe Maxwell as an active recruiter and participant in the alleged trafficking scheme [7] [8] [2].
2. Allegations that Maxwell “directed” sex with men, including Prince Andrew
In her deposition Giuffre said Maxwell instructed or “directed” her to have sex with various men under the euphemism of “massage,” and in questioning she identified—though parts of the transcript are redacted—high-profile names, including an allegation that she was told to have sex with Prince Andrew, which Giuffre explicitly stated in the publicly released excerpts [2] [3].
3. Travel claims: jets, helicopters, and Epstein’s island
Giuffre described being transported on Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet—often called the “Lolita Express”—and asserted that Maxwell accompanied Epstein on many flights; Giuffre also testified she rode in a helicopter Maxwell piloted to Epstein’s private Caribbean island “plenty of times,” and recounted Maxwell’s statements about flying other prominent figures to the island, material that appears in the deposition excerpts and contemporaneous reporting [9] [2] [3].
4. How Giuffre described the sexual encounters and the word “massage”
Giuffre explained under oath that when Epstein and associates used the term “massage,” they meant sexual activity; she said Maxwell told her to give men “massages” that were in fact sexual, and she indicated other witnesses could corroborate what “massage” entailed in that circle [2] [7].
5. Maxwell’s denials and the defensive posture in the transcripts
Ghislaine Maxwell, deposed a month earlier, denied witnessing underage sexual activity and characterized Giuffre as a liar and an “awful fantasist”; Maxwell repeatedly refused to concede many of the flight- and contact-related assertions and fought in court to keep deposition records sealed—arguments that later fed into contentious litigation over public access and into criminal perjury allegations [4] [10] [5].
6. Legal context, unsealing fights, and evidentiary stakes
The depositions arose in a 2015 defamation suit and were subject to protective orders and sealing litigation; beginning in 2019–2020, courts and media outlets pushed to unseal many documents, with judges and appeals courts noting the public interest because Maxwell later faced criminal charges including perjury tied to her 2016 testimony, making Giuffre’s deposition both central and politically charged evidence [11] [12] [6].
7. Disputed content, redactions, and limits of the public record
Large portions of the transcripts and exhibits remain redacted or were subject to sealing fights, so while Giuffre’s core allegations—recruitment, direction to have sex, travel on Epstein’s planes and island—are plainly recorded in the released pages, many names and details are blacked out in the public record and therefore cannot be independently verified from the materials currently available [1] [3] [7].
8. Competing narratives and implicit agendas
Reporting and court filings show a starkly adversarial framing: Giuffre’s testimony is presented as detailed victim testimony documenting a trafficking ring, while Maxwell’s camp framed Giuffre as dishonest and pursued legal strategies to limit public access to depositions—moves that protect trial rights but also raise questions about transparency and the political stakes of revealing allegations involving powerful people [5] [8] [10].