Ghislaine trial witness…

Later, after the guilty verdict is reached, the question is raised again when Osborne-Crowley secures an interview with one of the jurors, who tells her about his own childhood abuse – an experience he had not previously disclosed but had shared in the jury room and which threatens to derail the outcome for weeks as the defence files a motion for a retrial.

Osborne-Crowley devotes a chapter to interviews with selected legal and psychological experts to determine whether there is any reason to believe that survivors of abuse are less likely to be honest or impartial jurors in similar cases. If one study suggests that survivors of abuse are more empathetic towards victims, then the converse must also be true: people who don’t have that experience are less likely to empathize, proving the author’s point about bias. Another expert tells her, “The truth is that we apply a distinct set of rules and standards to survivors of sexual violence throughout the criminal justice process.”

Maxwell’s trial took place in late 2021 in New York, and journalists had only four seats available in the press gallery. Throughout the trial, Osborne-Crowley woke up at 1:30 a.m. to get in line for court to open to ensure one of those seats would be hers; for almost five weeks she sat “a foot away” from Maxwell while her victims were interrogated. Despite this closeness, Maxwell exists as a mysterious figure in sections of the courtroom, a constant presence that is also a noticeable absence. She does not speak until the verdict, and statements attributed to her during the abuse come from the women’s testimonies.

In this approach, Osborne-Crowley is on the right track. It interweaves the 2021 narrative, an eyewitness account, with chapters set in the 1990s and 1900s that partially dramatize the stories told by four women: Jane, Annie, Kate, and Carolyn. This can be understood as a choice by the author: the author wants the reader to see scared and defenseless teenagers forced into situations from which they had no means to escape. But the very act of reconstructing scenes that the author did not witness makes these episodes seem a step away from reportage and closer to a crime drama.

Reliability of memory is crucial to the trial, and in an exciting section later in the book, Osborne-Crowley argues persuasively that any case of this nature should be based on unbiased evidence from experts in the field of advances in neuroscience in the understanding of PTSD and trauma memory, so that a victim’s failure to recall precise details may be better understood as evidence of trauma than evidence of lying. He also advocates ending the statute of limitations on childhood abuse cases and changing the laws surrounding defamation lawsuits, which are increasingly used to intimidate victims and reporters into remaining silent.

Permanent damage It’s a painful read, and she’s honest about the personal toll this process has taken on her – two stints in trauma clinics, where immersing herself in the details of Jeffrey Epstein’s and Maxwell’s crimes triggered her own memories. She’s clear about the purpose of her work – she quotes investigative journalist Julie K Brown as saying that “journalism is about giving a voice to the powerless”, and Osborne-Crowley has done a great job of that. The fact that none of Epstein’s associates have yet been brought to justice suggests he still has a long way to go.

• Lasting Harm: Witnessing the Trial of Ghislaine Maxwell Lucia Osborne-Crowley is published by 4th Estate (£22). To support Guardian AND Observer order your copy at guardianbookshop.com. Shipping charges may apply