Piers Morgan Uncensored - Piers Morgan Uncensored: Ghislaine Maxwell sentencing and new Jill Dando reports

Episode Date: June 28, 2022

On tonight's episode of Piers Morgan Uncensored, Piers is joined by Lady Victoria Hervey and Tom Bower to discuss the breaking news that Ghislaine Maxwell has been sentenced to 20 years in a US prison for helping disgraced former financier Jeffrey Epstein abuse young girls. Next, to examine the mystery murder of Jill Dando, Piers is joined by Peter Bleksley and Jill Dando's Crimewatch co-presenter Nick Ross who dismisses the reports that her murder in 1999 might have been a case of mistaken identity in a mafia mix-up. Watch Piers Morgan Uncensored at 8pm on TalkTV on Sky 526, Virgin Media 627, Freeview 237 and Freesat 217. Listen on DAB+ and app. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Well, good evening. This is Piers Morgan on censored breaking news in the last few minutes. Gilein Maxwell, the former girlfriend of billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, has been sentenced to 20 years in a US prison for helping Epstein abused four teenage girls. Incredibly, just before the sentencing was announced, Maxwell stood up in court and played the victim herself. She said, I empathised deeply with all the victims in this case. I acknowledged that I had been a victim of helping Jeffrey Epstein commit these crimes. an extraordinary thing to say.

Which is before the sentencing, damning impact statements were read out, including from Virginia Dufray, who's become one of the most well-known accusers of Geoffrey after settling a sexual assault case against Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, who denies her claims. In her statement, Geoffrey, accused Gilein Maxwell of opening the door to hell. Another victim, Sarah Ransom, broke down in tears and said she became, against her will, nothing more than a human sex toy with a heart-beaten soul for the entertainment of Epstein. Maxwell and others, and were subjected to sexual predation multiple times per day. She spoke out on her way into court.

I spent the last 17 years in my own prison for what she, Jeffrey, and all the conspirators did too. I was raped, I was raped three times a day sometimes. And I was not able to all in the island. There was a constant stream I thought it was a rate over and over and over again. and yes, Gile must die. Well, joining me now live from the courthouse in Lower Manhattan, New York, is Julia Jeney from Court TV.

Julia, a 20-year sentence for Gilein Maxwell. Already some victims coming out saying, this is way too lenient, it could have been a lot more, but the judge gave an indication before passing sentence that it was going to be in that 15 to 20 range. What is your reaction to this?

No, peers. we did know what the federal sentencing guidelines were going to be because the judge decided that before a short break. She believed it was going to be around 17 to 21. But putting it into perspective, these prosecutors were asking for 30 years, 255 years. So to hear that this number is 20 years, you can understand how those survivors would react to hearing it being so low compared to what prosecutors were asking for. But when you look at the guidelines, it does fall within that range. around the max of what she could have received under those federal sentencing guidelines. But the judge said herself, she is not bound by those guidelines and she would have been able

to enhance this beyond had she felt that this was warranted. But she did say that she believed that this is something that is not too great of a punishment to go beyond what is necessary, but she said that it is sufficient to punish her for these heinous acts and the pattern behavior that she found so objective. Thank you very much to do we're going to go live now to Bobby Sternheim who is the attorney actually for Gillane Maxwell who's talking outside court right now and the issues on appeal sir I thank you I think what she said in a moment just wrapping up there with the reporters outside the court but what we can tell you this is what Gillane Maxwell said in court before the sentencing was announced I think it's pretty extraordinary what she said She got up and she said, Your Honor, it's hard for me to address the court of listening to the pain and anguish expressed today.

The terrible impact on the lives of so many women is difficult to hear and even more difficult to absorb and its scale and its extent. I want to acknowledge their suffering. I empathize deeply with all of the victims in this case. I acknowledge with that I have been a victim of helping Jeffrey Epstein commit those crimes. His impact upon all those who are close to him has been devastating. Jeffrey Epstein fooled all of those in his orbit. Victims considered him to be a godfather, a mentor, a benefactor, a friend, a lover. It's absolutely unfathomable today to think that was how he was viewed contemporaneously. I'm sorry for the pain that you have experienced.

I hope this brings the women who have suffered some measure of peace and faintly to help you put those experiences as so many years ago in a place that allows you to look forward and not back. It's my sincerest wish to all those of Miss courtroom and all those outside of this courtroom that today brings a terrible chapter to an end. May this day help you travel through darkness into the light. Well, I'm joined now. This is the lawyer again, Bobby Stomis. You can pick this up.

You deserve to uncover it. Thank you so much, Mr. Hine. Okay, so I want to go now to the criminal defense attorney, Mark Garragos, and Tom Bowers, with me. He's a best-selling biographer of Gillane's father, Robert Maxwell, the newspaper publisher and media magnet. Let me start with you, Tom. an extraordinary statement

before the sentence was announced by Gilae Maxwell really putting herself as if she was another victim nothing to do with me, Gov, I'm with you in fact this line here I acknowledge that I have been a victim of helping Jeffrey Epstein commit those crimes how can accomplice be a victim well it's not only that but why didn't she say that

before the sentence before the verdict why didn't she say it in her in defence what was remarkable about the trial is that she promised the world she was going to demolish the prosecution and prove her innocence. And when the case came for the defence, it just collapsed. And this just shows she was seeking mitigation. But it's all a phony. It's all rubbish.

She knows very well what she did, and she was guilty. You have no doubt about that. Absolutely none at all. I think that the evidence was overwhelming. And I think that the only thing she didn't bring into that statement was blaming her father. And I think rightly so, because I really think that Bob Maxwell, as we all know, was an unbelievable bully theory.

and a dreadful man in many ways. The one thing he wasn't was a sexual pervert. And bizarrely, we still don't know why Gilein was that accomplice to that perversion. We know that she's guilty, very guilty. Mark Garagos, I suppose one of the reasons she might be continuing to profess her innocence and play the victim is she is appealing.

I guess if she made any admissions at this stage, that would obviously wreck her appeal. Will that be the thinking here? Yes, and that's exactly what I was going to say. stepped right on it. She's going to appeal, contrary to what your other guest says, she's got a very solid grounds for appeal. I mean, remember, it may have been forgotten, but one of the jurors brought in his own personal experiences and said that his experiences are what tipped the balance during jury deliberations in the favor of guilt. That's clearly something that would be prejudicial.

ruled those objections and denied the motion for a new trial. But that she's got a very good and live appeal, even though appeals are always a long shot in the federal system. It makes no sense for her. Because by the way, a 20-year sentence in federal court in America, you're going to do a lot of that time, if not 18 years or something along those lines. That's a substantial sentence, and well within the guidelines, as was indicated by your previous guest, and she's got a viable appeal. So that's clearly the explanation for why she made the statement that way. Can we read anything, Mark, into the fact that she got the lower end of the spectrum of centers?

It could have been up to 55, 60 years, but the judge made a point of saying it was going to be in a much lower range. Can we read anything into that? Does that indicate that the judge may herself have thought that was, perhaps some doubt here? Well, remember, once again, when it came for that motion for new trial, this judge specifically, and she's going to a higher court, this was her last trial in the district court, she specifically ordered the hearing here, the DOJ, the prosecutors were the ones who brought it to her attention immediately and asked for a hearing. There's a lot going on here. And clearly,

if she had gone way above the guidelines, that would have gotten the attention of the appellate court as well, even though that's not supposed to be the case. So I think there's quite a bit going on here. I would not be so sure that this case does not get overturned. I think there's a sufficient grounds to make a very credible appeal here. Okay. Well, different views from our two panelists here. Let me ask you, Tom, just on a wider issue, it obviously wasn't just Epstein and Gillane Maxwell committing crimes here. We know that they had a long client list

of rich, powerful, apparently some famous people on that list. We don't know who they are. Are we going to find out? Well, I think we do know who they are. I mean, there'd be lots of gossip and we won't mention the names here. But the point about it is that, in the essence, and this is where I disagree with your previous guest,

that Gilles-Maxwell, undoubtedly, for many, many years, was looking for girls to groom and to provide for Epstein. And I believe those girls, not because I believe victims per se, but because their evidence was irrefutable. And there were so many of them. Exactly, far too many. I think about the sentence, there's a life sentence for her. She's 60, she'll be 80.

I mean, you know, that's near to death. So I think that's why it's 20 years. But I think what's really important here is that Epstein, did, as you rightly say, have this huge circle of very, very influential friends, many of whom who saw what was happening and didn't raise the alarm. They must be utterly terrified that Gellane will finally do the dirt. Why hasn't she so far?

Because I think that would be self-incriminating. She doesn't want to say that she was part of that. I mean, let me bring in Mark Garagos again. Could she not Mark have done a deal? I've seen that many times in these kind of cases in America. If she said, look, I'll give you the names of all. these rich, powerful people who were involved in this, but I want a much-reduced sentence. Would she have got that if she'd played that card?

Look, the federal criminal system is predicated on the idea that you get that they indict somebody or they threaten to indict somebody and that the person then cooperates and gives you more or says that they're going to give you more regarding somebody else, usually going up the ladder, so to speak. So yes, that was clearly something she could have done. In her defense, I think that she feels like, and her lawyers have argued this all along, that she was being prosecuted by proxy,

that in fact, that because they didn't have Epstein, that a number of these things changed. And they made a pretty good case for that during the trial itself. They showed that a number of these witnesses did not say originally, when Epstein was alive, that she was the kind of prime mover of this, that they only changed or came to that recollection after he died. So I think maybe going into it, she had, and you know, I don't have any extraordinary insight into what she was doing, but it would not surprise me that she thought

she had a completely, or at least an arguably defensible case, that there was clearly some doubt in that jury deliberation room because the person who says that he was molested says that he, his own words, gave an interview and said, I convinced those who were on the fence that this kind of discrepancies that you see in the testimony is something that's standard operating procedure when you're victimized. Mark Garagos, thank you very much, as always, for your astute analysis of that. We appreciate you joining us. We can take a short break. Tom, you stay with me. We're going to be joined also by Lady Victoria Harvey next, who was a close friend of Gilein Maxwell.

Well, the breaking news tonight, socialite Gilein Maxwell, has been sentenced to 20 years in jail for child sex trafficking. We're joining me now, Lady Victoria Harvey, who is in the same social circles as Gilein Maxwell, and Robert Maxwell's biographer Tom Bauer is still with me. Well, thank you for racing in to talk about this. I mean, you knew Gilein Maxwell for a long time. You socialized with her.

What do you make of this? I mean, apart from anything else, It's an astonishing fall from grace. But what do you think of the sentence? It is. I think the sentencing is fairly predictable. I mean, this is what her lawyers did ask for. They asked for 20 years,

which is more lenient that what was being requested. But I think she will be obviously not happy, but she's probably happy that it's not more than 20. And I think the good behavior and things like that, the fact that she's already been in there for a couple years, that all come into play. And I think she'll end up being, it'll be a lot of less of sense.

Do you have any sympathy for her? I think, you know, knowing what I do a little bit, but not so much. I mean, the theory she wants us to believe, notwithstanding the conviction and everything else, she wants us to believe that Epstein was the monster, that he hoodwinked and conned everybody. She put it, she conned godfathers, mentals,

benefacted his friends, lovers. She was reportedly a lover. Well, the fact is, you know, he died and she's taken the wrap of it. And the fact that it doesn't mean she isn't deserved it. No, it doesn't mean that. But it means that the whole focus has always been on Galen because there's no Epstein to blame. So all the girls, everyone, the blame has just completely gone to her. And I think that is unfair in a way.

Obviously, she deserves, you know, to be in jail. But the fact that there's no one else to take the blame. Everyone else's dead. And she will be dead as well. I give it six months, she'll have a hit on her in the jail. Well, certainly after what happened to Epstein. Just like Epstein. Well, they'll be very careful, I'm sure, not let it happen.

Tom, you know, you've studied the Maxwell's for so long. It's an extraordinary dramatic roller coaster ride this family. One of her brothers came out only last week with a very sort of painful interview, as you'd expect from her, I guess. There's a pleading for mercy for her and insisting his sister is innocent. Is it possible that she would? was like everybody else apparently was with Epstein, conned by this guy. Absolutely not. She's a product of Bayel College. She's a highly intelligent woman.

She knew exactly what she was doing. All the people I've spoken to who were picked up by her or seduced by her in parks, jumping out of cars, asking them to come. For years on end, she was working for Epstein. And I think the relationship was unbelievably sordid and criminal. and I think Ian, who got away himself, was found not guilty of fraud in a trial which I thought would go the other way, but he was found innocent by thought that Gillain should have the same treatment, that Maxwell's never get convicted. But, you know, the whole point about Gillane is her defence was absolutely useless. She put up no defence whatsoever, having promised the public that she was going to defend herself.

And most important of all, didn't go into the witness box. That was the most self-incriminating part. Yeah. And whenever people don't do that, there is always a feeling, well, they must not want to risk including themselves, right? Right, yeah. The Prince Andrew aspect of this. So he has come to this settlement

with one of these victims, Virginia Juffrey, to the tune of millions. Well, we'll come to you in America, I know your view about. Are you the guy that wrote the book? Well, you wrote a book about Robert Maxwell, her father. But, you know, a multi-million dollar lawsuit,

reported up to $11 million. having said he only clear his name of fighting court, he then caved and gave her a check. Where does he, now, he's trying to make a comeback in public life that nobody's got much appetite for. How damaging is this conviction, do you think, to his chances have ever returned? Oh, I think hugely damaging. I think Andrew's finished. I think the public is sick to death of him, and I'm afraid his brother will be her problems too. I think, with all they're taking millions of euros in cash. So I think that the royal family, really needs to bury Andrew.

The photograph is absolutely genuine. Well, that photo is fake. Just so you know. Victoria, Victoria. You say it's fake. Look at the picture in front of me. You say this. But you don't know that picture's fake.

I know because I'm in touch with the person that took those pictures and it's not Andrew in the picture. It's Epstein. I've seen the real picture. Well, if that picture is fake, why didn't he get a court in clear his name? Because I found the guy that took the pictures after he'd done the settlement. What's his name?

I'm not telling you. No one knows us yet. I see. Oh, you the fuck. Sorry. No, no, no, sorry. I'm not going to swear. I apologize for the language of this.

Sorry. But I am in touch with the person that took the photo. And interestingly enough, she did meet him in a park. You said about her picking up people on a park. But he is... Why did Prince Andrew give her $11 million if he's a completely innocent man? The proof that I had, I was in the middle of digging it all up, and the evidence I had when someone came to me,

which I, to be honest, I thought this guy was nuts when he first sent me a picture of this famous picture that was so used to seeing, but it had Epstein's head in it. I looked at it and I thought, but people can muck around with pictures these days. Honestly, I see, I have a sign... I have a signed affidavit with exactly how the story went down, and I've had police visit this guy, and I've had detectives.

So again, why would Andrew then, if that picture's... He'd already paid her. He'd paid her. Andrew wasn't even able to really deny that picture was real. Why didn't you know? It meant he'd been in that house. He'd been on that floor. Guys, Gellon photoshopped it.

She's the one that photoshopped it. So why did Andrew fight his case? Why give the woman... He'd already paid her. He'd settled as I was unraveling it. I didn't have the guy that took the pictures when he settled. This happened like a few weeks afterwards. Right.

Tom, the reality is that Andrew paid this check, having said he clear his name. I agree with you. I think it's very hard to see a way back, particularly given that he hasn't even tried to make any sort of atonement for it, right? Not only... Well, the real story will always come out. We've moved on. We have moved on. I don't think that the public has any appetite for Andrew's atonement. I think the royal family has so many problems now. The last thing they need is a resurrection of Andrew. And the most important thing now, I think, is for Andrew disappear, Gelaide to disdeme. disappear and this story finally reaches an end.

Well, no, because there's so much more to unravel. Well, we'll see if it unravels. You socialize with Epstein and Galang, right? You've been at dinner parties with them. So what was the deal with these dinner parties? What do you mean? What was the deal with these dinner parties? Who was there?

What were they doing? What was the atmosphere? It's the normal situation that you would see, like, in Santa Fe, you know, wealthy men with young girls. His crowd, you know, who you would see. I don't know. But there's a few of live pictures here. There's two of Gilein Maxwell's sisters outside the court.

We'll go to them if they do speak to the media waiting there. Yeah, I remember like the usual... But you say a normal thing. I mean, the truth is we now know... But we now know they were trafficking young girls for abuse. And then these traffickers became traffickers, didn't they? Like Virginia, she became a... These are allegations that have not been substantiated.

She's admitted it on television as being a recruiter. You have to be very careful about what you say about people who have not been convicted. of crimes, right? Right. This is, we're not in a call of public opinion right here when we are, but not where you can make defamatory allegations about people. I'm repeating things of people saying this. I'm curious, you were at these dinner parties.

You say it was like a sort of Santrapaid dinner party, but the truth is it was unbelievably malevolent what was going on. Yelaine Maxwell was sourcing these young, sometimes underage girls for the delectation of this paedophile billionaire, Jeffrey Epstein. I'm just curious. I met her for five minutes at a book launch. What did you think? I never met Epstein. Oh, she was perfectly charming to me, as you expect from everyone who's met her as told.

I didn't know anything about this side of her life, obviously. I never met Epstein. But I am curious, what was the hold this guy had on so many rich, famous, powerful people? Well, it was blackmail. So he enticed them in, and he got blackmail on all of them. So she would record, she would do her own recordings. So they would have a situation, get these girls, get them in political characters in situations with girls. Epstein would record it and Golan would tell the survivor girls I'm in touch with, she would get her own insurance.

She called it insurance and they would have the peepholes of hotels. There was a hotel in Canada. Epstein was operating in Canada before the US. But if you were there, if you were one of the girls at these parties, did you ever get introduced into joining in any of the activity or not? I mean, not that I can remember, no.

I mean, I didn't sleep with any of his friends. Right. Was I there to entice them in? Probably, you know. I had a title, and it was probably respectable having somebody like me there where the other girls wouldn't feel so nervous. So think, oh, this girl, Lady Victoria, okay, she's there. So I'm not going to be scared being around these men.

But what do you feel now that we know the truth about Epstein? Yeah. Gile and Maxwell to one side for a moment. But now we know what he was like, that he was this disgusting, depraved, predatory paed far. Yeah, he's like a serial killer. What do you feel about that? Well, I watched all his depositions that he did, the recorded ones.

And those are really freaky. It really brings out his character. There's this one video where he completely says, I have no recollection of Virginia. And he makes the guy spell out Virginia as in all the letters and says, what is that? And the guy has to spell out, V-I-R-E-I-R-E, you know what I mean? It's a complete psychopath.

Tom, it's a horrible heinous crime, both by Epstein and Gillane Maxwell. Potentially others were involved. We don't know if we're going to find out who they were or what they may have done or what they saw. But when you look at the Maxwell story, you wrote this extraordinary book about Robert Maxwell. Could you ever have imagined that this would happen with Gillane?

No, and I knew her first of all when she was a very small girl when I first met Maxwell in 1973, and she was just a tiny little girl and sweet little girl. I next saw her actually in Santa Pei when I was in a party, a British property developer's party, and she was pretty sinister by then. I mean, I don't think Robert Maxwell never imagined. Robert Maxwell was a tyrant, and he bullied her. And undoubtedly she was attracted to Epstein because he was powerful and rich, and she was perverted. I mean, that is in the end, the truth.

Well, it is the truth because tonight she's been sentenced to 20 years in prison for helping Jeffrey Epstein, traffic and abuse, young girls. It's a despicable crime. And she is appealing, and we'll see what happens with that appeal. But if she fails the appeal, she'll probably spend the rest of her life in prison. Thank you both. Thank you, Victoria. Thank you, Tom, for coming and appreciate it. Well, let's hear of the next another crime story.

Was BBC TV host Jill Dando murdered by mistake by a Russian mafia assassin, a former Crime-Watch co-host, Nick Ross, and former undercover hitman and detective Peter Blexler, Former hitman pretending to be a hitman, I should add. Peter Blexley, investigate the new revelations from the next. Well, Jodanda was one of the biggest names in British television beamed into homes around the country as the face of BBC News. And with her co-host Nick Ross, even helping to solve crimes

as the two presented BBC's Crime Watch programme. People all over the country are joining together once again to solve some of Britain's most difficult and serious crimes. Don't have nightmares, do sleep well. Good night. Good night. Well, her shocking murder. remains an unsolved mystery, but this week in an unrelated case, a French court heard another possible sensational theory

that she'd been killed by a hitman in a case of mistaken identity. In a moment, I'll be joined by her former friend and co-host Nick Ross, plus former Scotland Yard detective Peter Bexley. But first, let's remind ourselves of that horrific day. A massive police hunt is underway tonight in West London for the killer of Jill Dando, who was murdered earlier today outside her terraced home in Fulham. The news stunned the nation. Nobody could understand how and why it happened.

In the midst of a media frenzy, the police investigation grapple with little to no hard evidence. Finally, a particle of firearm discharge residue was alleged to being discovered on the clothing of a local man, Barry George. This led to his conviction and sentencing to life imprisonment. But years later, in 2008, George was acquitted and released an innocent man. Juldando's killer was never found, but over 20 years on, the case remains... unsolved. Well, this week, a French court heard she may have been killed by a hitman in a case of mistaken identity. Will we ever know the truth? Well, in that dramatic fresh twist this week, documents submitted to a French court suggested Jill may have been murdered by Russian mafia hitman in a case of mistaken identity.

The hitman possibly hired to kill another BBC journalist. Lawyers argue that the killer may have mistaken Jill for Lisa Brinkworth, pictured here next to Jill, because of similarities in their appearance and occupants. and they happen to live in the same area of West London. In fact, Jill's doctor was Alan Farthing, who was Jill Dando's fiancé. It's an extraordinary series of coincidences. Court papers submitted in the trial of French fashion tycoon, Gerald Marie, claimed he has recruited a hitman

to murder Lisa Brickworth after she went undercover to expose his agency. Marie, the former boss of elite model agency, is being investigated of their alleged sexual assault and rape involving at least 11 women. Well, joining me now is Jill Dando's former TV co, host and friend Nick Ross and former Scotland Yard detective and undercover hitman, although obviously he was pretending to be that at the time.

Peter Blexley, welcome to both of you. Nick Ross, great to talk to you. I imagine every time you see this kind of headline in the media, it takes you back to that horrific day when your great friend, your great colleague, Jill, was murdered. I remember it so while I was a newspaper at us at the time, had to cover the story. It was a genuinely horrific and shocking story and, of course, remains unsolved. When you've seen the details of what came out of Miss French court, does it have any plausibility to you?

It takes me back to that day, Pierce, but it also takes me back to my first day as a national journalist for the BBC on the World at One. Many, many years ago, when I took up a story from the press, I was sent out to do a radio feature for it for the World at One on Radio 4, and it didn't stand up. And when I got back, I said, I'm sorry, the story isn't true. And I remember the deputy editor saying to me, well, Nick, we'll send you on another story tomorrow.

I hope that stands up because otherwise on Wednesday we'll send somebody else. This is the reality, Piers, you've edited a national paper. You know the importance for journalists of getting a story out, never research a story too far until it falls over. This story today is rubbish. It's complete nonsense. It goes on the back of any number of conspiracy theories that have been pushed right from the start. the Metropolitan Police wasted a year on silly conspiracy theories. I spent a quarter of a century working with the police.

They constantly went on to conspiracy theories when there were much more simple explanations. This time, I mean, we had Slobodon Milosevic, the leader of the Serbs, was supposed to have killed her. We've had Arkand, some mysterious assassin from Serbia. We've had a warlord, I think we've called. We've had a hitman from a bar. I think it was called Joe in Spain, I think.

We've had the whole of the London underworld turn over, the Liverpool underworld. We've had theories it was a paedophar. I mean, this is just saloon bar gossip. In this case, you have a case going through the French courts where they're trying desperately to overturn a statute of limitations. They're looking for anything they can. I don't think Lisa Brinkworth herself thinks this is remotely true. This is something her lawyers have dredged up.

It's absolute nonsense. I'm really sorry we're giving it this publicity. It's depressing. Well, listen, I have no reason to doubt what you're saying. I don't think we know the truth about this, and there have been so many theories, as you say, Lisa Brinkworth, I think you're right. I think she does not believe this has credence.

What she did say, though, which is very interesting, is that it turns out the BBC were given a warning based on this threat. There have been a conversation over her that a Russian mafia hitman had been hired by this model agency boss to kill her, Lisa Brinkworth, And the BBC were told about that, but she was never herself told of the threat. Her security was increased, but that threat information was not passed her.

What do you think of that? Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I've had threats against myself. They don't come from... There's no relationship with the killing of Gildando. The killing of Gildander, and it isn't, as you keep saying, an unsolved mystery. I mean, I think pretty much everything is out there. We know pretty much everything.

is to know about that. There is no ongoing investigation. Her family don't want another investigation. Those of us on crime, which were really close and were forensically following the investigation, don't think there's anything unsolved now that needs to be resolved. But there is a hunger out there for a story, for a story, for a story. There's a hunger out there for some sort of conspiracy. And that's what we're feeding that. And honestly, it's unfair to Jill. It's so depressing. She was a wonderful reporter. She was the most popular television presenter. of her age. She was a real pathfinder for women in television.

And I just think it's all rather depressing this. When you say that it's not unsolved, what do you mean? Do you believe you know what happened? Look, if you read firstly about the first court, remember, we have somebody who was convicted by a court, a jury. That then then went to a court of appeal. The three learned judges were absolutely. clear. They thought the person convicted was rightly convicted. Eight years later, because of a piece of

evidence that in my opinion should never be offered in the first place was withdrawn, it went to another trial. Now eight years later, witnesses couldn't remember. It was a whole different, different experience altogether. This person was acquitted. Now, do I think we should reopen the inquiry? No, I don't. Do I think we should now follow, go back on all this silly conspiracy, theories, no, I don't. Nick Ross, it's good to talk to you. As I say, like I said at the start, it must always bring back incredibly

raw emotions for you, and I completely understand why you feel the ways you do. But, Pierce, don't write them as raw emotions because what I'm saying must be biased because she was my colleague. No, no, I don't mean that at all. You know, I was not romantically inclined

with her, associated with her anything else. In fact, what I learned from 23 years on Crime Watch is that you have to be evidence-based. It's evidential, evidential, evidential, evidential. In this case, as in so many others, the evidence doesn't stack up, whereas the evidence that we had in the first court and in the Court of Appeal, and indeed, much of which was heard in the subsequent appeal, was very, very powerful. There were five or six reasons why it clearly wasn't a conspiracy. It wasn't a hitman. Very, very clear. I rang colleagues at Quantico and the FBI,

They were absolutely clear it wasn't a hitman. This was very much like the murder of John Lennon. The forensic psychologist on the case was very clear. Right from the start, this was going to be somebody who was a personality disorder person. So I don't think there's any great mystery here, any great mystery that still needs to be solved. I guess the mystery is that you can read between the lines what you're alluding to, but the person you're alluding to is a free man and did win an appeal. And that's, I guess, why this...

And was acquitted. Honestly, if I'd been on the jury in that last court case, I would have acquitted him as well on the evidence that I heard. I understand. But that doesn't mean that the case should be reopened. No, well, listen, you're absolutely more than most people entitled to your firm opinion about that. And I have no agenda about this at all.

Simply, it's in all the papers today based on this French court report. And it's fascinating to get your take on it. And I really appreciate you joining me tonight. Thank you, Nick. Thank you. Peter Bexley, we heard from Nick there. He used to run Crime Watch with Jill Dando. Obviously, he feels strongly about this.

He thinks it's a load of conspiracy theory nonsense. There have been endless theories. It's pretty obvious who he thinks did this, but that person, in the end, was freed and innocent man. Yes, and I completely understand Mr. Ross's frustration and the hurt he must feel over losing his great friend and the fact that there is nobody in prison at the bottom. moment for that crime.

That, of course, is frustrating for many, many people. I certainly would like to see the person who did that crime sentence and serving a term of imprisonment. But it's not to be. I also was very much taken by what Mr. Ross said in terms of evidence, evidence, evidence. Well, in that, we're, like, joined at the hip because, of course, I'm a former detective.

So what do you make of this stuff that's come out of this French court? I mean, on the face of it, it's a plausible theory in the sense that you've got another top television female journalist who lives in the same area as Jill Dando, who had actually her doctor was Jill Dando's fiancé, which is just a coincidence. But she was investigating this very nasty model agency boss. He was overheard talking about this mafia hitman he'd hired to deal with her.

That thread apparently was then relayed back to the BBC, but not to her, but they up to her security. You put it all together, and you come from, forward to now and you think, well, is there any credence to this? Well, clearly the Metropolitan Police will be all over this today, because as you say, it's been so widely discussed throughout the media. What should now happen is that letters of cooperation between the French authorities and the Met should be exchanged, the necessary permissions granted, and that information should

be sent to the Met so that it can be tested to see whether it has any credence whatsoever. Nick, I think you're still with us and you wanted to come back in on that. Yeah, I mean, so much of this reporting is just wrong, Pierce. And I don't blame you, because you're going with whatever is in the papers at the moment. One of the claims to be made is that this, it was that Lisa Brinkworth lived near Jill's fiancé. But that's not where Jill was murdered. Jill was murdered her own home in Gowan Avenue, which she very rarely visited, incidentally, and she wasn't followed there, which shows why this wasn't a professional.

It's one of the many reasons this wasn't a professional hit. and now this is all being conflated that she lived near Jill Dando where the murder took place. That's not true. She was living with Alan farthing her boyfriend at the time. And many of these other things that are being published at the moment just don't fit. To be honest, Nick, I think it's incredibly helpful

to have you talk us through this because no one will know more about this case than you and you clearly, you know, when I talked about the emotions you have, I meant really about having to go through it all again when these things blow up like this. And it must be, just on a human level, it must be painful for you. That's what I meant by that.

Well, yes, you're right. And for everybody who was associated with her, I mean, one of the great things that came out, if anything good can come out of her death, was Jill's legacy, which is the Jill Dando Institute at University College London, which is now the biggest crime science institute in the world. One of the things, you know,

where Peter Blexley says, we're joined at the hip on is evidence, evidence, evidence, opinions are to a penny. Anybody can come up with a theory. It's whether you can actually pin it to evidence, evidence, evidence. And in this case, for those out there of your viewers who still believe this was a conspiracy, I mentioned there were so many things against it.

It wasn't her right home. Anybody professional would have known where she was. This person was hanging around for four hours, three or four hours, was seen by four witnesses there, all of whom picked up somebody, very, very similar in appearance and one of whom picked out somebody in an identity parade. The person

used an amateur gun, not a real gun. They had no escape vehicle. This Gowan Avenue is a straight road. After the murder, they had to walk away in full view of everybody else. That's not professional. Jill had a key in the door. Instead of her pushing her in and killing her inside,

they did it in plain view. That's not professional. They held the gun firmly against her temple. That's only something you do in a crime of passion or when you're a real amateur because you get all the forensic blowback on you. There were so many reasons. This was not a professional hit. It's so clear on the evidence.

But Nick, given... And there is so much evidence... Given that you clearly feel the person who was originally convicted and then acquitted in the second trial is walking free, how do you feel about that? There were times on Crime Watch peers where I really got so upset on the victims behalf. I wanted to take a skewer and put it in somebody's eyes who'd caused them this pain.

but I also used to then go to prisons and meet offenders. And that really, it's a different issue. I don't wish somebody was in prison about this, to be honest. I don't think that would reduce the crime rate. One of the things I have learned paradoxically, and through the Gildendom Institute of Crime Science and through working with the police, is that you can't arrest your way out of crime

and you can't imprison your way out of crime. In Texas, they imprisoned, incarcerated infinitely more people than in Denmark, but their crime rates peaked at the same time and went down at the same time and they're pretty much the same ways. So, no, I don't feel so bad that nobody's in prison over this. I just feel, thank God, great relief

that whoever did it doesn't appear to have done it again. Yeah. Nick Ross, thank you again for joining me. I really do appreciate it. And Peter, thank you for your expert analysis as well. We're getting much more reaction on the breaking news at Socialite Gillain Maxwell. It's been jailed for 20 years next.

And I'll be joined by my Peers Pack. We'll be watching on this great. interest. Just to recap on the breaking news tonight, that Gillane Maxwell has been jailed for child sex trafficking with the billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. I'm joined up by tonight's Pierce Pack, Talk TV presenter, leader of Reform UK, Richard Tyson, political journalist Ava Santina. Welcome to both of you. Got to talk about Gillane Maxwell. That's all. Eva, I mean, as a woman, I don't know why that should make any difference, really, but as a woman, what do you make of this? I think it's just. Do you know what? Your guest

earlier, Lady Victoria, was the perfect example of how this all came about. I could not believe, after all of this, she's still coming on here and alleging that that photo of Prince Andrew isn't true. Like, that's the best defence, so that's going to get Galane off in any sense of the world. I mean, it was actually an indictment of the royal family, what she had to say. And she shows you, she just perfectly exemplifies how the entire, that society, those level of aristocrats just boiled together. They all, you know, protect each other. And for What is she gained? Galane's going in for 20 years.

I'm very pleased with it. I mean, there is this sort of shocking sense of entitlement that was going on with Epstein, with Gilein Maxwell, with Prince Andrew and all these other rich, famous, powerful people, all getting together with these young girls running around. Andrew obviously denies any impropriety, but he gave one of these victims, $11 million, it's reported, to make a court case go away.

What do you make of the whole thing? I think, look, the sentence, actually, I'm surprised it was so light. I thought it might be much longer. I don't think it could be any shorter. And who knows how much of it she will serve. But I think, as you say, that sense of entitlement, it is extraordinary also that no other names.

We know there are obviously lots of other, rich, powerful, successful, business people, celebrities. It's remarkable that no names have come out whatsoever, that in a way, Gilein Maxwell hasn't done any fault. Well, that's the most extraordinary thing. It really is. Because she had this black book with everybody's names and details in it. And it contains some of the most powerful people in the world.

It's one of the theories why Jeffrey Epstein may or may not have killed himself. Is that somebody powerful with lots of money got to people to make sure that he didn't survive? Well, she still thinks she's in the club, right? Right. It's like she probably thinks that she can come out of this and paint herself in glory. That's why she doesn't want to take anyone else down. And that sense of a club that you heard earlier from Lady Herbie that this was. It was an entitled club.

And it was almost as though it was normal that rich, successful people could go to San Jacerpe with young girls. Actually, just ever more shocking, the more you hear about it, ever more horrific. Talking of shocking things, some amazing testimony coming out tonight also in these January the 6th hearings at America about the riots at the Capitol, which obviously were fueled by Donald Trump's incendiary rhetoric. This is Cassie Hutchinson, who is one of the White House staff at the time. She's been giving this evidence tonight, which is really quite staggering.

Listen to this. The president said something to the effect of, I'm the effing president. Take me up to the Capitol now. To which Bobby responded, sir, we have to go back to the West Wing. The president reached up towards the front of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr. Engel grabbed his arm. Said, sir, you need to take your hand off the steering wheel.

will. We're going back to the West Wing. We're not going to the Capitol. Mr. Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby Angle. And when Mr. Renato had recounted this story to me, he had motion towards his clavicles. This, Ava, is this a White House staffer talking about the president of the United States, manhandling his secret service agent as he was driving the beast to force him to drive into the middle of the mob, attacking the capital to try and thwart American democracy. Staggering, right? I mean, it's quite a good metaphor for what he did to America, I would argue.

I'm also so surprised that Casey appears to be so normal. I can't believe that anyone would be complicit in that regime and be that normal. She seems quite compisementous, actually. Richard, does this disqualify Trump from running again? Can you have an American president who, while in office, is wrestling secret service agents to join a mob that is attacking the capital

to stop a free and fair democratic election result being ratified. But it was a horrific day, and I suspect that the purpose of these hearings is exactly as you suggest, to try and provide enough evidence that actually he should be disqualified from running again. My hunches that if he decides to run again, he will run again, regardless of whatever,

comes out of these hearings, unless there is a legal procedure that actually does lawfully stop him. Very quickly, there's this ridiculous story in the papers today. There was a school where they are allowing boys, teenage boys, to wear skirts to school, but not shorts. Hey, very quickly, your response. Okay, the argument was about shorts. It was parents getting upset they couldn't wear shorts. Why can they not wear shorts when they're told they can wear skirts?

Because those are rules. You like rules, don't you, peers? I hate rules. Richard? The whole thing's hypothetical. I mean, it's great PR for the school. The reality is, boys of 11 or 12 or 13 do not want to wear shorts or skirts because they'll get the Mickey taken out of them by old boys. But if they're given the choice, I don't wear shorts for going to say.

We don't want boys in skirts and schools. Do we? Maybe it's me. Maybe I'm just too old. Whatever it is, keep me down sensitive. Good night.