Jeffrey Epstein arrested for child sex trafficking

[Information Analyst]

Complimentary flights to glamorous London to be raped

What rape? Also, the idea that London is "glamorous" is rather quaint.

 

[cullennz]

What rape? Also, the idea that London is "glamorous" is rather quaint.

Fair call re rape

When did this happen?

We know Andy is an idiot, but rape is a new one

 

[Arcade22]

What I find interesting about this is the mention up thread (I can't find the post to quote at present) that Epstein's mansion had CCTV to record activities, and there are also a number of photos emerging. This has an aura of being a blackmail scam. It appears that Epstein procured underage girls and encouraged them to have sex with famous / rich / powerful men. Now this may have been him just being friendly and a good host and assuming that all men were like him and would find teen age women attractive and want to have sex with them if the opportunity arose. However I suspect it gave Epstein a certain edge in negotiations, a certain ability to fix things. If I was a CT I would wonder if he had connections with any intelligence organisation.

I should note here that, main reason for why he got a plea bargain was a lack of objective proof of the allegations. No video of him having sex with underage girls or raping anyone was found. Instead they had to mostly rely on the witness testimony of the alleged victims and other circumstantial evidence.

Epstein getting off leniently because of his connections and ability to hire the services of expensive lawyers is one thing, but it's not like they didn't investigate him. Some of the more outrageous sensationalist tabloid allegations come off as highly unlikely, especially since the main person who supposedly recruited the "sex slaves" has yet to face any charges.

 

[Information Analyst]

Clearly whoever paid her to have sex with someone else committed a crime, (and I think this would be a crime in England whatever the age of the prostitute), but if the client had no knowledge that she was paid to consent, and she was over 16 and consented to sex I am not sure the sex act itself was criminal.

Prostitution in and of itself is not illegal in the UK. Soliciting in public, pimping, and brothel-keeping are. I think there are other quaint laws on the statute book, such as that a known working prostitute cannot be served in a pub except for the purposes of her own refreshment (or something along those lines).

 

[Lothian]

Any evidence there were 12-year-old girls other than claims by Virginia Roberts/Guiffre?

The same evidence as for your claim that the sex was fun for all involved.

 

[Arcade22]

What rape?

It's important to clarify here that if he is found to have sex with her, even in the absence of conclusive evidence, he is still not really in legal jeopardy.

Generally the prosecution would have to prove not just that they had sex, but that he also knew, or at should have suspected, that she was underage either with regards to the sex itself or paying for it.

Similarly they would have to prove that he knew that Epstein was paying her to have sex with him, rather than for example that she was doing it for the perks and benefits of taking part of his luxurious lifestyle. It's not a crime to be in sexual relationship with someone, without any direct monetary compensation, while lavish them with gift.

 

[Childlike Empress]

David Icke boasts about how he accused that Andrew character of being a pedophile for decades, the "coincidence" of him being both friends with Epstein and Savile, and expands into an epic rant about the "royal family". Fun even if you aren't into lizards:

 

[Arcade22]

David Icke boasts about how he accused that Andrew character of being a pedophile for decades, the "coincidence" of him being both friends with Epstein and Savile, and expands into an epic rant about the "royal family". Fun even if you aren't into lizards:

Edited by Agatha: 

Edited to remove personalisation

 

[Vixen]

David Icke boasts about how he accused that Andrew character of being a pedophile for decades, the "coincidence" of him being both friends with Epstein and Savile, and expands into an epic rant about the "royal family". Fun even if you aren't into lizards:

Er, you have noticed David Icke is stark raving barking mad...?

 

[Bob001]

I should note here that, main reason for why he got a plea bargain was a lack of objective proof of the allegations. No video of him having sex with underage girls or raping anyone was found. Instead they had to mostly rely on the witness testimony of the alleged victims and other circumstantial evidence.

Epstein getting off leniently because of his connections and ability to hire the services of expensive lawyers is one thing, but it's not like they didn't investigate him. Some of the more outrageous sensationalist tabloid allegations come off as highly unlikely, especially since the main person who supposedly recruited the "sex slaves" has yet to face any charges.

There was massive evidence against Epstein. There's no doubt that he got a sweetheart deal, particularly since it also let everyone associated with him off the hook too.

Federal prosecutors, under former Miami U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, broke the law when they concealed a plea agreement from more than 30 underage victims who had been sexually abused by wealthy New York hedge fund manager Jeffrey Epstein, a federal judge ruled Thursday.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article226577419.html

Here's how Epstein operated:

The suits say that when Mr. Epstein was luring teenagers into sexual exploitation in Florida, he was using a network of recruiters within New York City’s dance studios to procure aspiring performers into a similar scheme.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/03/...ogin=email&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article

It's astonishing, downright breathtaking to me that anyone could defend Epstein on any grounds. Here's the Miami Herald series that renewed interest in him.
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article220097825.html
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article214210674.html
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article219494920.html
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article221404845.html
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article221897990.html

 

[Bob001]

It's important to clarify here that if he is found to have sex with her, even in the absence of conclusive evidence, he is still not really in legal jeopardy.

Generally the prosecution would have to prove not just that they had sex, but that he also knew, or at should have suspected, that she was underage either with regards to the sex itself or paying for it.
.....

In the U.S. that would not be a defense. Claiming "I thought she was 18!" doesn't get you off the hook if she wasn't, even if she herself claimed she was.

 

[Delphic Oracle]

"Why didn't they run to the authorities?" ask the people who slut-shame the accuser while giving the rich, important people every benefit of the doubt.

 

[Arcade22]

There was massive evidence against Epstein. There's no doubt that he got a sweetheart deal, particularly since it also let everyone associated with him off the hook too.

A plea bargain is personal. There's nothing preventing charges being filed against anyone else known to have aided and abetted him, yet at no point has anyone else faced any charges whatsoever even-though the victims have specifically named at least one of persons who recruited the "sex slaves".

You seriously think they would let these people off the hook while the Billionaire goes to prison? That doesn't make any sense.

Here's how Epstein operated:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/03/...ogin=email&module=RelatedLinks&pgtype=Article

Once again you are taking the allegations made in a lawsuit for granted. Why is that? Why haven't the police arrested any of these people for their alleged crimes? Why is just Epstein sued for money?

It's astonishing, downright breathtaking to me that anyone could defend Epstein on any grounds.

And that's why no one dares to question even the most outrageous claims about him, such as calling him "one of the most prolific pedophiles in history".

 

[Bob001]

A plea bargain is personal. There's nothing preventing charges being filed against anyone else known to have aided and abetted him, yet at no point has anyone else faced any charges whatsoever even-though the victims have specifically named at least one of persons who recruited the "sex slaves".

You seriously think they would let these people off the hook while the Billionaire goes to prison? That doesn't make any sense.
....

If you read the links, you would find this:

In 2007, despite ample physical evidence and multiple witnesses corroborating the girls’ stories, federal prosecutors and Epstein’s lawyers quietly put together a remarkable deal for Epstein, then 54. He agreed to plead guilty to two felony prostitution charges in state court, and in exchange, he and his accomplices received immunity from federal sex-trafficking charges that could have sent him to prison for life.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/article214210674.html

You seem to be under the impression that if an act didn't result in a criminal conviction, it didn't happen, or at least wasn't a crime. Bless your heart.

 

[carlitos]

A plea bargain is personal. There's nothing preventing charges being filed against anyone else known to have aided and abetted him, yet at no point has anyone else faced any charges whatsoever even-though the victims have specifically named at least one of persons who recruited the "sex slaves".

If you're talking about 2007, that's a whole other thing. And yes that plea bargain (on edit - I believe it was a "non prosecution agreement") actually did prevent charges from being filed against those other people. It was part of the deal.

You seriously think they would let these people off the hook while the Billionaire goes to prison? That doesn't make any sense.

Again, if you are referring to 2007, that was literally part of the deal - his accomplices were let off the hook. That's one reason why the whole thing was a complete miscarriage of justice, to the point where the guy who cut the deal is not our current Labor Secretary.

The case is proceeding apace now that Epstein is dead. It's not at all a surprise that it has taken months to get the facts in order. Ghislaine Maxwell appears to be hiding anyway.

Once again you are taking the allegations made in a lawsuit for granted. Why is that? Why haven't the police arrested any of these people for their alleged crimes? Why is just Epstein sued for money?

You can file a lawsuit today if you want. The feds are busy collecting facts and they will not bring a case until it is ready. That's why.

ETA -

And that's why no one dares to question even the most outrageous claims about him, such as calling him "one of the most prolific pedophiles in history".

I searched this thread for "history" and you are the only one here who has called him that. Maybe you are thinking of another discussion. Personally, I would not use that word when referring to Epstein, let alone the worst in history.

 

[Arcade22]

If you're talking about 2007, that's a whole other thing. And yes that plea bargain (on edit - I believe it was a "non prosecution agreement") actually did prevent charges from being filed against those other people. It was part of the deal.

And yet they filed charges against him again:

Florida prosecutors had prepared a 53-page indictment accusing Mr. Epstein of being a sexual predator. But those charges were shelved in 2008 after an 11th-hour deal was reached between the United States attorney’s office in Miami and Mr. Epstein’s lawyers.

The agreement granted Mr. Epstein immunity from federal prosecution and let him plead guilty to two prostitution charges in state court. Federal prosecutors arranged for the plea deal to be kept secret from Mr. Epstein’s accusers until it was finalized in court.

The deal let Mr. Epstein avoid a possible life sentence in federal prison. Instead, he spent 13 months at a Palm Beach jail and was permitted to leave the facility six days a week for work. He was also required to register as a sex offender.

Mr. Berman made it clear that his office was not bound by the 2008 agreement that Mr. Acosta’s office had negotiated.
“That agreement, by its terms, only binds the Southern District of Florida,” Mr. Berman said.

Said deal did not prevent them from opening an investigation into his actions elsewhere. I also read nothing about it granting everyone else immunity.

Again, if you are referring to 2007, that was literally part of the deal - his accomplices were let off the hook. That's one reason why the whole thing was a complete miscarriage of justice, to the point where the guy who cut the deal is not our current Labor Secretary.

Again, there's nothing preventing the people who were "recruiting sex slaves" from facing charges for doing so.

The case is proceeding apace now that Epstein is dead. It's not at all a surprise that it has taken months to get the facts in order. Ghislaine Maxwell appears to be hiding anyway.

Isn't that why the cops usually detain suspects or witnesses who might disappear before they can be questioned? Again, I'm surprised that the police have yet to arrest a single other individual in this "child sex trafficking network" that apparently involved so many people.

You can file a lawsuit today if you want. The feds are busy collecting facts and they will not bring a case until it is ready. That's why.

So they aren't going to arrest anyone before then? Even-though one of them already has "gone into hiding"? Just brilliant.

ETA -

I searched this thread for "history" and you are the only one here who has called him that. Maybe you are thinking of another discussion. Personally, I would not use that word when referring to Epstein, let alone the worst in history.

I directly quoted one of the plaintiffs lawyers.

Los Angeles-based lawyer Lisa Bloom, who represents another five victims, told the Guardian that Andrew’s intervention fell far short of ending questions over his relationship with Epstein.

“Prince Andrew’s interview was deeply disappointing,” Bloom – who is Allred’s daughter – told the Guardian. “He is entitled to deny allegations and defend himself. But where is his apology for being so closely associated with one of history’s most prolific paedophiles?”

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...calls-for-royal-to-say-sorry-and-speak-to-fbi

For some strange reason i don't feel confident that someone who would so grossly exaggerate Epstein's alleged crimes while being interviewed by a widely read newspaper, to the point that he is ranked as among the worst child rapists in history, is somehow going to be entirely honest in their lawsuit. Maybe that's just me. People are free to treat their words as truth until they can be proven wrong by Epstein's ghost or something, i guess.

 

[kellyb]

And that's why no one dares to question even the most outrageous claims about him, such as calling him "one of the most prolific pedophiles in history".

Who would you say are the non-clergy most prolific pedophiles in history?

 

[Bob001]

......
For some strange reason i don't feel confident that someone who would so grossly exaggerate Epstein's alleged crimes while being interviewed by a widely read newspaper, to the point that he is ranked as among the worst child rapists in history, is somehow going to be entirely honest in their lawsuit.
.....

The issue isn't just the numbers, although that's a big factor. It's also the extent of his global web. He actually employed people to bring him fresh victims in Miami, New York, London, the Virgin Islands and elsewhere. He flew sex slaves to his private island. He used his vast wealth to manipulate people who might have held him to account, including law enforcement, and to bring celebrities into his net. When he was charged in Florida, he assembled an expensive team of household-name lawyers who clearly outgunned the local prosecutors. This is all way, way beyond the doings of the average priest or coach or scout leader.

His victims over his lifetime may number in the scores or more. By what measure do you claim he is NOT one of the most (NOT the most) prolific pedophiles in history?

Estimates of the total number of girls allegedly abused by Epstein varies, with accounts ranging from a few dozen to over 100. The recent indictment charges Epstein with sexually exploiting and abusing “dozens” of underage girls at his homes in Manhattan, Palm Beach, and other locations, with allegations dating back as far as 2002. However, it seems likely that the total number of victims is much higher.

https://www.thecut.com/2019/07/how-many-jeffrey-epstein-victims-are-there.html

 

[zooterkin]

The issue isn't just the numbers, although that's a big factor. It's also the extent of his global web. He actually employed people to bring him fresh victims in Miami, New York, London, the Virgin Islands and elsewhere. He flew sex slaves to his private island. He used his vast wealth to manipulate people who might have held him to account, including law enforcement, and to bring celebrities into his net. When he was charged in Florida, he assembled an expensive team of household-name lawyers who clearly outgunned the local prosecutors. This is all way, way beyond the doings of the average priest or coach or scout leader.

His victims over his lifetime may number in the scores or more. By what measure do you claim he is NOT one of the most (NOT the most) prolific pedophiles in history?

https://www.thecut.com/2019/07/how-many-jeffrey-epstein-victims-are-there.html

I suspect the answer hinges on the definition of paedophile.

 

[Matthew Best]

Yes, but if we're going to be ridiculous about definitions, then I will point out that even a paedophile who only ever abuses one child on one occasion, would be on the list of the most prolific paedophiles in history, albeit at the very bottom of the list.

So let's not go down that route.