Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

[RTH10260]

coverage by The Guardian

Jeffrey Epstein: documents linking associates to sex offender unsealed
Bill Clinton, Michael Jackson, David Copperfield and Prince Andrew among names contained in court documents

Victoria Bekiempis
Thu 4 Jan 2024 11.18 CET

Numerous court documents identifying associates of notorious sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were made public on Wednesday.

Some of the high-profile names in the court documents include Prince Andrew, the former US president Bill Clinton, Michael Jackson, and David Copperfield.

These associates’ just-unsealed names were contained in court documents filed as part of Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre’s lawsuit against Ghislaine Maxwell; the documents include excerpts of depositions and motions in this case. The British socialite was convicted in December 2021 of sex trafficking and similar charges for procuring teen girls for disgraced financier Epstein.

Prior to the unsealing, the names were listed in court papers as variants of J Doe. Many of the names are people who had been publicly identified as Epstein associates prior to this unsealing.

The inclusion of a name in this list does not mean that said associate has been accused of wrongdoing in relation to Epstein. Among the names are people mentioned in passing at legal proceedings

In a deposition, Maxwell appears to say that Andrew visited Epstein’s Island in the US Virgin Islands. Epstein has been accused of abusing numerous girls on this island.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... s-released

Who was Jeffrey Epstein and what are the court documents about?
Formerly redacted names of the financier and sex offender’s network were revealed in records unsealed on Wednesday

Guardian staff and Associated Press
Thu 4 Jan 2024 00.55 CET

Previously redacted names of disgraced financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s expansive network of friends and business associates have been revealed this week in the form of nearly 1,000 pages of court records, which were unsealed on Wednesday.

Many names of these associates and those in the inner circle of Epstein – who died in jail awaiting federal sex-trafficking charges in 2019 – had been formerly redacted from court documents.

In anticipation of these revelations, social media had been abuzz with speculation as to what they will yield. To help paint a clearer picture of why this matters, here’s what we know about the documents.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -explained

Jeffrey Epstein’s elite circle was huge. What was the source of his $580m fortune?
The 2024-page document released by a US judge is littered with names, but some secrets stay hidden

Edward Helmore
Thu 4 Jan 2024 04.36 CET

It has long been known that the disgraced sex offender Jeffrey Epstein operated at the center of a globe-spanning network of the rich, famous and powerful but the documents released Wednesday were nonetheless shocking in revealing the sheer magnitude of his elite circle.

Through the prism of a defamation lawsuit involving allegations against the Wall Street “estate planner” Epstein and British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, the scale of their social network came into harsh focus.

The 2024-page document released by the US judge Loretta Preska has been sought since 2016. It may be only the first to flesh out the extraordinary web Epstein and Maxwell spun as they hosted party after party at homes across the globe and as they created a horrifying sex-trafficking network that preyed on teen girls.

The names littered throughout the depositions and legal correspondence that came up in the lawsuit – filed by Prince Andrew accuser Victoria Giuffre in 2015 – range from former US president Bill Clinton, whom one Epstein victim claimed she was told by Epstein “likes them young”, to Britain’s Prince Andrew, singer Michael Jackson, French hairdresser Frédéric Fekkai, “model scout” Jean-Luc Brunel, magician David Copperfield and acclaimed physicist Stephen Hawking.

While many men so far named in the documents are not accused of any sexual misconduct, any social approximation to Epstein, who killed himself in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking conspiracy charges, or to Maxwell, currently serving 20 years in federal prison after being convicted on similar charges in 2021, is potentially a reputational black hole.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... -documents

[RTH10260]

The 943 page PDF document on Epstein as provided by The Guardian:


https://uploads.guim.co.uk/2024/01/04/F ... uments.pdf

[raison de arizona]

Puts this OpEd in a different light:

[Maybenaut]

Well, he’s right about “Statutory Rape” being “outdated.” These days we just call it “rape.”

[AndyinPA]

I know I could google it, but I'm curious about the date. Just not curious enough to look it up.

[raison de arizona]

I know I could google it, but I'm curious about the date. Just not curious enough to look it up.

Very old 1997.

[Sam the Centipede]

Well, he’s right about “Statutory Rape” being “outdated.” These days we just call it “rape.”

I don't have a problem with the term "statutory rape" when it is used to indicate that the act in question was perfectly acceptable (no violence, coercion, dishonesty, full informed consent by mature individuals) other than contravening an arbitrary restriction in — yes — a statute. It is only the statute that makes it rape, it does not contravene the moral principles and societal conventions that the statute imperfectly codifies.

I dislike attempts to lump all rape crimes together into one undifferentiated blob. There is a world of difference between a violent man pinioning a screaming woman and a pair of teenagers joyfully fumbling and frolicking a day or two before their appropriate birthdays.

The term "statutory rape" is clear, meaningful and useful in a world that is rarely monochromatic.

[AndyinPA]

I know I could google it, but I'm curious about the date. Just not curious enough to look it up.

Very old 1997.

TY

[Maybenaut]

Well, he’s right about “Statutory Rape” being “outdated.” These days we just call it “rape.”

I don't have a problem with the term "statutory rape" when it is used to indicate that the act in question was perfectly acceptable (no violence, coercion, dishonesty, full informed consent by mature individuals) other than contravening an arbitrary restriction in — yes — a statute. It is only the statute that makes it rape, it does not contravene the moral principles and societal conventions that the statute imperfectly codifies.

I dislike attempts to lump all rape crimes together into one undifferentiated blob. There is a world of difference between a violent man pinioning a screaming woman and a pair of teenagers joyfully fumbling and frolicking a day or two before their appropriate birthdays.

The term "statutory rape" is clear, meaningful and useful in a world that is rarely monochromatic.

Every jurisdiction has its own definition of the age of consent. In many, but not all, the difference in age matters. Where I practiced (I’m now retired), the age of consent was 16, and there was a separate category of crimes where the victim has not yet turned 12. But our law made otherwise no allowance for age difference between the parties.

So a 12 and a half year old girl “consents” to sex with a 20-year-old because he is SO AWESOME and she is IN LOVE and he TOTALLY loves her too! Would you really call that statutory rape?

So where do you draw the definitional line? The legislature has determined that a person under a certain age is legally incapable of consent. So the fact of the consent isn’t really relevant.

[Flatpoint High]

When you look at the flight logs, TIST is the Cyril E. King Airport, Charlotte Amalie, St. James, US Virgin Islands.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyril_E._King_Airport

His island, Little St. James, is located 2 miles from the airport. a short boat ride or flight away.

[Greatgrey]

19 more documents just dropped.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/43 ... entry-1325

[RTH10260]

Second wave of court documents related to Jeffrey Epstein unsealed
More than 300 additional pages deepen the picture of Epstein’s elite orbit while resurfacing old claims

Victoria Bekiempis
Fri 5 Jan 2024 01.30 CET

A new batch of documents related to the disgraced financier Jeffery Epstein’s sexual abuse were released on Thursday.

The additional 19 documents, totaling around 300 pages, add to the more than 900 pages of documents already unsealed on Wednesday evening, the release of which prompted an online frenzy that crashed a website hosting the documents.

The unsealed papers do not appear to contain extensive additional information about Epstein’s trafficking of teen girls and women. They include some discussion of Epstein accuser Virginia Giuffre’s medical records and a portion of a deposition provided by a medical provider.

The documents also include an email exchange between Giuffre and the journalist Sharon Churcher, who had been assisting her pursuit of a book deal. In the 2011 exchange, Churcher tells Giuffre that she is correct to be concerned about “what side” Vanity Fair was taking in a story involving Epstein.



https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... s-unsealed

[noblepa]

Well, he’s right about “Statutory Rape” being “outdated.” These days we just call it “rape.”

I don't have a problem with the term "statutory rape" when it is used to indicate that the act in question was perfectly acceptable (no violence, coercion, dishonesty, full informed consent by mature individuals) other than contravening an arbitrary restriction in — yes — a statute. It is only the statute that makes it rape, it does not contravene the moral principles and societal conventions that the statute imperfectly codifies.

I dislike attempts to lump all rape crimes together into one undifferentiated blob. There is a world of difference between a violent man pinioning a screaming woman and a pair of teenagers joyfully fumbling and frolicking a day or two before their appropriate birthdays.

The term "statutory rape" is clear, meaningful and useful in a world that is rarely monochromatic.

IANAL, but, as I understand it, statutory rape is a crime because we, as a society, do not ascribe sufficient judgement to minors to allow them to make major life decisions on their own. We don't allow minors to marry without parental consent, we don't allow them to vote and we don't allow them to enter into binding contracts.

I don't think that two consenting sixteen year-olds should be subject to criminal prosecution for losing their virginity to each other. I do think that a 30 year old who has sex with a 16 year old should be.

It has been said that rape isn't about sex as much as it is about power and domination. When an older person has sex with a minor, there is a strong argument to be made that, despite any spoken consent, there is an element of implied coercion. That is where the crime lies, not in the sex act itself.

We had a case in my town, in which a high school boy, who had just passed his 18th birthday had sex with his girlfriend, who was a couple of months shy of hers. The difference in their ages is only a few months. They were in the same high school grade. Now he has to register as a sex offender wherever he goes.

I don't think that the concept of statutory rape is obsolete, but perhaps we need to revisit its application.

[Res Ipsa]

We had a case in my town, in which a high school boy, who had just passed his 18th birthday had sex with his girlfriend, who was a couple of months shy of hers. The difference in their ages is only a few months. They were in the same high school grade. Now he has to register as a sex offender wherever he goes.

Well, wherever that town might be, it certainly isn't in Ohio. In what state did this occur? Because I'm not aware of any states which do not have a moving age bracket - colloquially deemed a "Romeo and Juliet provision" - in their relevant statute.

If this story did take place in Ohio, it likely involved cell phone pictures. Because it has not been illegal for an 18 year old to have sex with a 17 year old in Ohio for a very long time if ever. It is not illegal for any adult in Ohio to have sex with a consenting 16 year old (provided there are not special circumstances like position of authority, etc.).

https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-cod ... on-2907.04

(A) No person who is eighteen years of age or older shall engage in sexual conduct with another, who is not the spouse of the offender, when the offender knows the other person is thirteen years of age or older but less than sixteen years of age, or the offender is reckless in that regard.

(B) Whoever violates this section is guilty of unlawful sexual conduct with a minor.

(1) Except as otherwise provided in divisions (B)(2), (3), and (4) of this section, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor is a felony of the fourth degree.

(2) Except as otherwise provided in division (B)(4) of this section, if the offender is less than four years older than the other person, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor is a misdemeanor of the first degree.

(3) Except as otherwise provided in division (B)(4) of this section, if the offender is ten or more years older than the other person, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor is a felony of the third degree.

(4) If the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of section 2907.02, 2907.03, or 2907.04 of the Revised Code or a violation of former section 2907.12 of the Revised Code, unlawful sexual conduct with a minor is a felony of the second degree.

[Greatgrey]

19 more documents just dropped.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/43 ... entry-1325

Here’s 44 more
https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/43 ... entry-1328

[Maybenaut]

We had a case in my town, in which a high school boy, who had just passed his 18th birthday had sex with his girlfriend, who was a couple of months shy of hers. The difference in their ages is only a few months. They were in the same high school grade. Now he has to register as a sex offender wherever he goes.

Well, wherever that town might be, it certainly isn't in Ohio. In what state did this occur? Because I'm not aware of any states which do not have a moving age bracket - colloquially deemed a "Romeo and Juliet provision" - in their relevant statute.

As I understand it, only 30 of the 50 states have Romeo and Juliet laws.

And they’re all over the map with respect to how they deal with it. In California, for example, where the age of consent is 18, the close-in-age only affects the sentence.

Virginia’s Romeo and Juliet provision allows sex between 15 to 17 year-olds, so long as both are under 18. So if one person is a month away from their 18th, but the other just turned 18, the older committed a crime.

And whether they have to register also varies by state.

I’m not suggesting that teenagers engaging in sex that they willingly agreed to need to be punished in every single case. But I think “statutory rape” is a misnomer because it suggests that the only reason the conduct is criminal is because there’s a statute against it, and it ignores the reason that the legislature chose to draw the line where it did. I’ve litigated an unfortunately high number of cases where the victim testified repeatedly that she wanted it, but she was too young - 13 or 14 in a system where the age of consent is 16.

[keith]

the victim testified repeatedly that she wanted it, but she was too young - 13 or 14 in a system where the age of consent is 16.

Yeah. The exact definition of "statutory" rape.

Mutually agreeable sexual contact where one partner is legally incapable of giving such consent.

No consent = rape.
Reason no consent = statutory.

I dislike the term "forcible" rape too, but there is a qualifiable difference in sex between agreeing partners who are unable to consent and non-consenting partners.

[bob]

I dislike the term "forcible" rape too, but there is a qualifiable difference in sex between agreeing partners who are unable to consent and non-consenting partners.

There are other forms of non-statutory, non-forcible rape, for example: rape by trickery/fraud; and rape accomplished by removing the ability to consent (e.g., alcohol, GHB, and other rape-enabling drugs).

[Suranis]

The law is pretty much a blunt instrument. It creates hard lines for things, and then people start arguing about situations where those lines don't suit as much as other lines to undermine the Law and push things towards anarchy. But that's why we have judges with sentencing discretion. Its not a perfect system but nothing is.

[Kriselda Gray]

IANAL, but, as I understand it, statutory rape is a crime because we, as a society, do not ascribe sufficient judgement to minors to allow them to make major life decisions on their own. We don't allow minors to marry without parental consent, we don't allow them to vote and we don't allow them to enter into binding contracts.

I don't think that two consenting sixteen year-olds should be subject to criminal prosecution for losing their virginity to each other. I do think that a 30 year old who has sex with a 16 year old should be.

It has been said that rape isn't about sex as much as it is about power and domination. When an older person has sex with a minor, there is a strong argument to be made that, despite any spoken consent, there is an element of implied coercion. That is where the crime lies, not in the sex act itself.

We had a case in my town, in which a high school boy, who had just passed his 18th birthday had sex with his girlfriend, who was a couple of months shy of hers. The difference in their ages is only a few months. They were in the same high school grade. Now he has to register as a sex offender wherever he goes.

I don't think that the concept of statutory rape is obsolete, but perhaps we need to revisit its application.

I was just about to say something very similar, but I think you put it better than I would.

[Res Ipsa]

Of course we didn't have sexting back in the day. If two teenagers who can otherwise engage in lawful sexual relations send each other selfies which meet the applicable definition of 'adult entertainment material' in the state in question, it's a separate kettle of fish.

[pipistrelle]

We had a case in my town, in which a high school boy, who had just passed his 18th birthday had sex with his girlfriend, who was a couple of months shy of hers. The difference in their ages is only a few months. They were in the same high school grade. Now he has to register as a sex offender wherever he goes.

This is ridiculous and a case where the law should not be applied absolutely, but with discretion and in context.

[Maybenaut]

Of course we didn't have sexting back in the day. If two teenagers who can otherwise engage in lawful sexual relations send each other selfies which meet the applicable definition of 'adult entertainment material' in the state in question, it's a separate kettle of fish.

Well, child pornography is also prohibited by federal law, which criminalizes images of a minor engaging in “sexually explicit conduct,” which is defined as (i) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital, oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or opposite sex; (ii) bestiality; (iii) masturbation; (iv) sadistic or masochistic abuse; or a (v) lascivious exhibition of the anus, genitals, or pubic area of any person.

That last one, the “lascivious exhibition,” is where most of the litigation happens in child pornography cases. Congress didn’t define it, so the Second Circuit came up with a list of factors, and most Circuits followed suit.

I don’t think it matters under federal law that the people in the images consented, or that it would be lawful had it been done by adults.

[RTH10260]

We had a case in my town, in which a high school boy, who had just passed his 18th birthday had sex with his girlfriend, who was a couple of months shy of hers. The difference in their ages is only a few months. They were in the same high school grade. Now he has to register as a sex offender wherever he goes.

This is ridiculous and a case where the law should not be applied absolutely, but with discretion and in context.

That reminds me of the ridiculous way the sex offender registry was started. DAs or court clerks dug up ancient cases to pick the then offenders and place them on the register. The one case that sticks to my mind was a guy well in his 40s. His sin: as teenagers he had kissed his girl friend, an offense back in those days

[Kendra]

Before his death, sex offender Jeffrey Epstein allegedly used his own private island to host scores of underage girls. Many things about Epstein are still mired in secrecy, including the activities that took place on the island. So whatever happened to the billionaire's Caribbean home?

Just my $.02, but I think the Dems could work the video of Epstein and tfg at the house party (clips in this video) on their campaign ads.