Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York • Hacker News Board

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#251

Post by dragonwriter » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:19 AM UTC

draw_down wrote: post #143

joshgel wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not a lawyer, but @klasfeldreports on twitter quotes an unnamed legal source who says: "Background: An important note after Epstein's death: no one else will have standing to challenge the search warrant on his house. Everything will be admissible against any other defendant without possibility of a motion to suppress." So maybe this will be a net good for justice?

But his death also ends the criminal case against him, no one else was charged in the indictment. Why act on a warrant for a case that has ended? I’m definitely not an expert in criminal justice proceedings though.

> But his death also ends the criminal case against him, no one else was charged in the indictment.

If there were related parallel investigations, they could either still be before a grand jury, not yet have been submitted to a grand jury, or already had indictments issued but under seal. The fact that no one else was charged in the Epstein indictment does not mean there is no one else in a related matter against whom an investigation and/or (sealed) charges exist, which, if from no other source, the public coverage of all the investigations around Trump should have made everyone familiar with recently.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#252

Post by ryacko » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:23 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #250

mc32 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe. One hopes this can be salvaged. I guess we may never know who was behind it all pulling the levers. Mr Epstein can’t have been at the top.

Epstein was quite plausibly the chief procurer; he no doubt had a wife array of powerful clients, but there's not a lot of reason to think there was a higher-level mastermind behind Epstein in the procurement operation.

Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#253

Post by dragonwriter » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:28 AM UTC

ryacko wrote: post #252

dragonwriter wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Epstein was quite plausibly the chief procurer; he no doubt had a wife array of powerful clients, but there's not a lot of reason to think there was a higher-level mastermind behind Epstein in the procurement operation.

Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal.

> Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal.

That Epstein had politically powerful clients and friends is not in serious dispute (which were clients and which were merely friends unconnected to his child rape business is somewhat less clear), and explains the sweetheart plea deal without resort to some behind-Epstein mastermind.

It's not impossible, but there is nothing that is explained more easily by such a mastermind than by the Epstein being the master of his own sex trade operation which garnered him influence (simply heading that operation means he has powerful blackmail material on powerful people.)

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#254

Post by flycaliguy » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:40 AM UTC

aiyodev wrote: post #235

Nasrudith wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who says that they actually knew about it? If they just went around telling literally everyone that sounds like a way to get busted even as a low level drug dealer - let alone as a comparative nobody vs a big name - especially with secret service protection. From the perspective of a criminal blackmailer it would make far more sense to probe interests first before getting into it.

If they visited Epstein's island, they knew. You might assume “Pedophile Island” is some cheeky name that the press came up with. But, no, that’s actually it’s name. The people who lived there called it that. If someone went to the island, they had to know.

Clinton and Trump never visited the island. This man was a bullshitter and no doubt he exaggerated the scale of powerful friendships he had.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#255

Post by ryacko » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 1:41 AM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #253

ryacko wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal.

> Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal. That Epstein had politically powerful clients and friends is not in serious dispute (which were clients and which were merely friends unconnected to his child rape business is somewhat less clear), and explains the sweetheart plea deal without reso…

I suggest reading the book October Surprise by Gary Sick. Intelligence agencies don’t use competent people.

Your understanding of the situation is incorrect, and is leading you to incorrect conclusions.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#256

Post by ada1981 » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:01 AM UTC

ada1981 wrote: post #202

kurthr wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a well known creep with a $B doesn't already explain it? Instead we postulate an extra hundred horrible people all keeping a terrible secret... that also have terrible OpSec so they pay people off all the time. Or the "underage girls" were actually fembots designed in an underground lair by radio controlled sharks?

This perspective was reached after a discussion with a top adviser of Trump, Clinton, Obama and other world leaders.

Its very HN to get downvoted for sharing a perspective and how one arrived at it.

Acosta said the reason he didn’t give him a harsher sentence back in 2007 was because he “belonged to intelligence”.

>> He’d cut the non-prosecution deal with one of Epstein’s attorneys because he had “been told” to back off, that Epstein was above his pay grade. “I was told Epstein ‘belonged to intelligence’ and to leave it alone,” he told his interviewers in the Trump transition, who evidently thought that was a sufficient answer and went ahead and hired Acosta. https://observer.com/2019/07/jeffrey-epstein-spy-intelligenc...

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#257

Post by dragonwriter » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:05 AM UTC

ryacko wrote: post #255

dragonwriter wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal. That Epstein had politically powerful clients and friends is not in serious dispute (which were clients and which were merely friends unconnected to his child rape business is somewhat less clear), and explains the sweetheart plea deal without reso…

I suggest reading the book October Surprise by Gary Sick. Intelligence agencies don’t use competent people. Your understanding of the situation is incorrect, and is leading you to incorrect conclusions.

> I suggest reading the book October Surprise by Gary Sick. Intelligence agencies don’t use competent people.

They use incompetent people who can be manipulated into believing they have common interests and competent people who believe in their own that they have common interests, but, yes, they often use incompetent people. The relevance of this observation is unclear, as it still presents no existing phenomenon that requires a shady superior to Epstein to explain.

> Your understanding of the situation is incorrect.

You have as yet provided no way in which my understanding is incorrect.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#258

Post by 13of40 » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:23 AM UTC

NikkiA wrote: post #234

13of40 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I say "right", I don't mean what's currently granted to him by our Rube Goldberg justice system, I mean the inalienable rights of any sentient being. I've met people who think you should be able to punch out any time regardless of your situation, people who think you're responsible to get your affairs in order first, people who think it's a sin regardless, etc. This guy was in a unique situation because his esta…

> inalienable rights Which is such a stupid phrase because most other 'inalienable rights are removed when you're incarcerated, thus they clearly aren't inalienable.

By that logic, people in concentration camps don't have basic human rights.

"Inalienable" means it can't be removed. That's different from whether or not someone respects the right.

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#259

Post by lonelappde » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:50 AM UTC

Supermancho wrote: post #111

DanBC wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I don't think suicidal people much care about the legal or moral judgements of others. This is untrue. From what we can tell suicidal people care deeply about what other people think.

Morally and legally? From what we can tell suicidal individuals often care "what other people think" in the vein of social acceptability. He ran with a crowd that flaunted a disregard for legality and moral compunction. In this case, I would not believe his suicidal attempt (not attempts) had any consideration for moral or legal ramification.

Which of his two attempts are you denying?

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Financier 'found dead in cell' in New York

#260

Post by Fjolsvith » Sun, Aug 11, 2019, 2:59 AM UTC

belltaco wrote: post #75

s9w wrote: post #18

This makes me so angry. Such an important case, so much on the line. And then this. And if you question the official narrative of "suicide", you will probably soon be labeled a conspiracy theorist. Oh an just by the way, this news broke first on 4chan (thread 222518349). That just on the matter of what the value of these sites are. edit: and already there are [dead] comments who question this

The problem, in my experience, is that for one legit fact usually there is a lot of actual fake news thrown in, along with context free facts, in those communities. This causes a lot of people believe false things and keep repeating it to others. A form of brainwashing. Also people who assume someone's guilt and then work backwards towards showing it, while ignoring other signs.

This is the way I would have explained the main stream media.