The Daily Cartoon and Live Briefing: Friday, May 16, 2025

Notebook: On April 27, the New York Times reported on the death of Virginia Giuffre, one of the women who, when she was younger, when she was a teen, had been coerced into Jeffrey Epstein’s harem. She was 41. She died by suicide. The article, by Sam Roberts, is straightforward. The illustrations are not. There are four of them, five if you count the picture-in-picture Giuffre is holding in one of them. I could reproduce them here: they were all in the federal court file. But I wouldn’t want to reproduce what the Times did. It turned the half-obituary article into an exercise in voyeurism. The top illustration is a standard portrait of the still-striking Giuffre in 2019, a Reuters picture by Shannon Stapleton (a man). The next is a Miami Herald picture of Giuffre in 2023. Giuffre is holding a picture of herself when she was a minor, with what looks like a cockatoo on her shoulder. There’s nothing suggestive about the picture in the picture. But the fact that it is Giuffre as a minor is a little odd. The fact that Giuffre is showing the picture neutralizes the oddity somewhat. What comes next does not. Note the disclaiming opening words of the Times caption: “A widely published photograph showed Prince Andrew with his hand around Ms. Giuffre’s waist; he said he had no memory of the occasion. Ghislaine Maxwell, Mr. Epstein’s co-conspirator, stood at the right. Credit…Agence France-Presse, via Us District Court — Southern District.” The “Southern District” credit is supposed to indemnify the Times, as is that opening line, as if running the picture of Giuffre getting pawed by the real whore in the shot (the alleged prince) was merely intended to document reality as opposed to give readers a titillating look at her midriffed bellybutton and the man’s paw on her waist, before or after a presumed statutory rape. Not content with that much prurience, the Times decided to run yet one more shot, “Ms. Giuffre in an undated photo that was released in 2021, the year she sued Prince Andrew, accusing him of sexual assault.” That one shows her with a sea-like background, it cuts off at her shoulder, but she’s obviously naked, or if she is wearing anything, the clothes don’t begin to appear, and she is not much older than in the previous “minor” picture. There’s a rule in court that prevents one side or the other from stacking photo after photo in front of the jury, when a single photo can make the point. For example, you can’t show a dead body from 16 different angles when a single angle showing the entry wound might do, especially when your intention is to prejudice the jury. The Times wasn’t worried about that sort of ethic. It stacked. In Giuffre’s obituary. It was exploitative. It was crude. It was one more rape by cheaper means. 

—P.T.