Jeffrey Epstein

Let's hope they keep an eye on her in gaol - we don't want her suffering an unfortunate (self-inflicted?) accident.
And make sure the CCTV doesn’t suddenly go on the blink, just in that area, for some unknown reason.


Lol Earlier this year Ms Maxwell sued Epstein's estate seeking reimbursement for legal fees and security costs. She "receives regular threats to her life and safety", court documents in that case said.

she’s certainly going to receive regular threats to her life and safety now! Surely she must have some sort of ‘insurance’ to be released to the press if she dies?
 
I would have thought she would have been in Israel by now.. Good to hear she has at least been arrested, there should be a flurry of action now as there will be a some worried about what she'll divulge.
Just seen that, maybe the dirt will come out.
 
an ex-girlfriend of convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein
Erm... was he ever convicted of paedophilia? His convictions were for procuring sex with a minor and also sex trafficking.

Can they say that?
 
Last edited:
For the TDS members of the forum who believe that somehow Barr is corrupt/Trump's lackey. The Indictment of Ghislaine by SDNY is signed by Audrey Strauss, who became acting US attorney 2 weeks ago after Bill Barr pushed her boss Geoffrey Berman out.
 
Erm... was he ever convicted of paedophilia? His convictions were for procuring seconds with a minor and also set trafficking.

Can they say that?

Not sure, but I noticed a lot in the documentary that he was being referred to as a paedophile by women, who were adults at the time of the said assault.
 
Erm... was he ever convicted of paedophilia? His convictions were for procuring seconds with a minor and also set trafficking.

Can they say that?

Come on - think about what you're asking here - what do you even mean by "convicted of paedophilia"?

Its like hearing someone was a convicted druggie and saying "Erm... was he ever convicted of drugs? His convictions were for possesion of controlled substances..."
 
Come on - think about what you're asking here - what do you even mean by "convicted of paedophilia"?

Its like hearing someone was a convicted druggie and saying "Erm... was he ever convicted of drugs? His convictions were for possesion of controlled substances..."
It's from the BBC article where you'd want accuracy and impartiality.

With your example the procurement of drugs for someone else would not make you a user of drugs.

On the actual topic, the procurement of an underage prostitute also does not make you a user of said underage prostitute, however the facilitation of such an act could only be performed (in my unenlightened mind) by someone with the same disregard and of the same disposition.

So in the publics eyes, not a biggy. But for a BBC article to libel based on either personal opinion or professional incompetence is something which the public should call them up on, lest our national station go to the dogs.
 
The Clinton's will be on the blower to their hitman as we speak, Bill Clinton practically had a season ticket for his private aeroplane/island and there was that painting on the wall of Epstein's mansion of him wearing suspenders. I bet Epstein had dirt on half of Washington DC and Hollywood, if he wasn't running a honeytrap scheme I'd be shocked.
 
For the TDS members of the forum who believe that somehow Barr is corrupt/Trump's lackey. The Indictment of Ghislaine by SDNY is signed by Audrey Strauss, who became acting US attorney 2 weeks ago after Bill Barr pushed her boss Geoffrey Berman out.
Say what? What does any of that mean?

I would have thought she would have been in Israel by now . . .
Rendition?
 
It's from the BBC article where you'd want accuracy and impartiality.

With your example the procurement of drugs for someone else would not make you a user of drugs.

On the actual topic, the procurement of an underage prostitute also does not make you a user of said underage prostitute, however the facilitation of such an act could only be performed (in my unenlightened mind) by someone with the same disregard and of the same disposition.

So in the publics eyes, not a biggy. But for a BBC article to libel based on either personal opinion or professional incompetence is something which the public should call them up on, lest our national station go to the dogs.

How have they done that? You’re posting as though those are the only facts we know... we know full well he made use of them himself.
 
The Clinton's will be on the blower to their hitman as we speak, Bill Clinton practically had a season ticket for his private aeroplane/island and there was that painting on the wall of Epstein's mansion of him wearing suspenders. I bet Epstein had dirt on half of Washington DC and Hollywood, if he wasn't running a honeytrap scheme I'd be shocked.
Lol conspiracy nut jobs ahoy!
 
The Clinton's will be on the blower to their hitman as we speak, Bill Clinton practically had a season ticket for his private aeroplane/island and there was that painting on the wall of Epstein's mansion of him wearing suspenders. I bet Epstein had dirt on half of Washington DC and Hollywood, if he wasn't running a honeytrap scheme I'd be shocked.
This is why people with open minds (me, mostly) start closing down to rational arguments (most of you) when fantasists barge into the conversation (mmj, as normal).
 
How have they done that? You’re posting as though those are the only facts we know... we know full well he made use of them himself.
Well yes, I am posting as though those are the only facts we know because... those are the only facts we know.


They have stated "convicted paedophile". He has 1 conviction for procuring for prostitution a girl below age 18 - is your argument that the BBC should be allowed to provide incorrect information because there may be other "facts" out there that no one actually knows? You what?
 
Well yes, I am posting as though those are the only facts we know because... those are the only facts we know.

Eh? Are you playing some odd devils advocate game or something here with this notion that he might have only paid for sex with underage girls on behalf of someone else and never used them himself? Anyway we know that isn't true, plenty of facts here:

wiki said:
Jeffrey Edward Epstein (/ˈɛpstiːn/ EP-steen;[1] January 20, 1953 – August 10, 2019) was an American financier, socialite and convicted sex offender.[2][3] He began his professional life as a teacher but then switched to the banking and finance sector in various roles, working at Bear Stearns before forming his own firm. He developed an elite social circle and procured many women, including underage girls, who were then sexually abused by Epstein and some of his contacts.[3][4][5]

In 2005, police in Palm Beach, Florida, began investigating Epstein after a parent complained that he had sexually abused her 14-year-old daughter.[6] Epstein pleaded guilty and was convicted in 2008 by a Florida state court of procuring an underage girl for prostitution and of soliciting a prostitute.[7] He served almost 13 months in custody, but with extensive work release. He was convicted of only these two crimes as part of a plea deal; federal officials had identified 36 girls, some as young as 14 years old, whom Epstein had allegedly sexually abused.[8][9]

Epstein was arrested again on July 6, 2019, on federal charges for the sex trafficking of minors in Florida and New York.[10][11] He died in his jail cell on August 10, 2019.[12] The medical examiner ruled the death a suicide,[13] although Epstein's lawyers have disputed the ruling along with huge public skepticism about the true cause of his death.[14][15] Since his death eliminated the possibility of pursuing criminal charges, a judge dismissed all criminal charges on August 29, 2019.[16][17] Epstein had a decades-long association with Ghislaine Maxwell, who has faced persistent allegations of procuring and sexually trafficking underage girls for Epstein, which finally led to her arrest by the FBI on July 2, 2020.[18] [19] Epstein also maintained a years-long friendship with Prince Andrew, Duke of York, who resigned from royal duties over his ties to Epstein.[20]

They have stated "convicted paedophile". He has 1 conviction for procuring for prostitution a girl below age 18 - is your argument that the BBC should be allowed to provide incorrect information because there may be other "facts" out there that no one actually knows? You what?

What incorrect information have they provided? He is a convicted paedophile. We know he was a paedophile (in broad use of the word - i.e. someone into underaged girls, before someone gets into some "technically he's an ephebophile..." chat) and we know he was convicted of an offence in replation to that...

You might have an argument if, for example, he'd "only" been convicted of that one offence and it was apparent that he didn't realise the prostitute was under age... you might argue that no he's not a paedophile and it was a mistake etc.. but we know more than that, we know that he actively sought out these girls, that he was a paedophile and he's been convicted in relation to that... ergo he's quite accurately described as a "convicted paedophile".
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom