In the opulent world of Palm Beach’s elite, Mar-a-Lago stood as Donald Trump’s crown jewel, a luxurious club where the rich and powerful mingled amid palm trees and ocean views. But beneath the glamour, a disturbing pattern was unfolding in the early 2000s involving one of the club’s frequent visitors: Jeffrey Epstein. For years, the club’s spa had been sending young female employees – often teenagers or young women – to Epstein’s nearby mansion for private massages, manicures, and other services. Epstein wasn’t even a paying member, yet staff were instructed to treat him as one, with his companion Ghislaine Maxwell booking appointments on his account.
Former employees recall how these house calls became a quiet concern among the spa staff. Epstein was notorious for inappropriate behavior: making sexually suggestive comments, exposing himself during sessions, and creating an uncomfortable atmosphere. Young workers would warn each other before being dispatched to his home, sharing whispers of caution. Despite these red flags persisting for years, the practice continued – until one incident in 2003 changed everything.
An 18-year-old beautician, sent on a routine house call, returned to Mar-a-Lago visibly distraught. Breaking down in tears, she confided in her managers that Epstein had pressured her for sex during the appointment. This wasn’t just another whispered warning; it was a direct complaint that demanded action. The managers took it seriously, with one faxing a detailed letter to Trump himself, relaying the employee’s allegations and urging him to ban Epstein from the spa services.
Trump’s response was swift. Former staff recall him describing the letter as “good” and directing them to “kick him out.” Epstein and Maxwell were immediately barred from using the spa, ending the house calls that had facilitated Epstein’s access to young workers. This decision came three years after Maxwell had recruited another Mar-a-Lago employee, Virginia Giuffre – then just 16 – from the club to work for Epstein, leading to her allegations of abuse.
Yet, in a chilling revelation, no one at Mar-a-Lago reported the 18-year-old’s complaint to the police. Despite years of internal warnings about Epstein’s creepy advances and exposures, authorities were never alerted. Palm Beach police wouldn’t begin investigating Epstein until 2005, triggered by a separate report of him molesting a 14-year-old girl. Why the silence? Former employees suggest a mix of factors: the club’s preference for handling issues internally to protect its exclusive reputation, the power dynamics of serving high-profile guests, and perhaps a lack of full understanding of the broader pattern of Epstein’s predatory behavior at the time.
Even Trump’s then-wife, Marla Maples, had voiced unease about Epstein as early as the mid-1990s, telling staff something felt “off” about him. Concerns bubbled for years, including informal staff alerts and Maples’ warnings, but it took this one terrified teenager’s breakdown to force decisive action from the club.
The ban marked a clear rupture. Trump later described Epstein as a “creep” and emphasized that he cut ties upon learning of the inappropriate conduct. While some reports suggest Epstein may have lingered at the club until a later incident in 2007 involving a member’s daughter, the 2003 spa ban effectively severed the direct pipeline that had connected young Mar-a-Lago workers to Epstein’s home.
This episode raises profound questions: What hidden truths – from institutional blind spots to the deference given to the wealthy – allowed such warnings to go unheeded for so long? Why prioritize a private ban over involving law enforcement, potentially delaying justice for Epstein’s victims? In the end, one young woman’s courage exposed the rot, but the failure to escalate left authorities in the dark during critical years when Epstein’s crimes were escalating unchecked.
As Epstein’s scandal later exploded into public view, with his 2008 plea deal and eventual 2019 arrest, the Mar-a-Lago chapter serves as a stark reminder of how power and privilege can shield predators. Trump’s decisive ban stands as evidence of action taken when confronted directly, yet the broader silence underscores the complicity of systems that protect the elite at the expense of the vulnerable.
Leave a Reply