Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 4699
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#1

Post by RVInit »

To my surprise, I couldn't find a topic on Jeffrey Epstein, so, here we go. I was inspired to start this because of the many very nice, encouraging, and thoughtful PMs I received in the last couple of days regarding certain postings. :lovestruck:

I own a copy of Julie K Brown's Perversion of Justice. I am debating about how much to share because I think people who write books, music, and other creative (even if non-fiction) works should be fairly paid for their work. But...I will share some of the highlights of what I have learned from her book, many of which will dispel some misinformation that is out there.

First, the contention that only one victim has asserted that she was passed around to other famous and not so famous men. Turns out to be absolutely 100% false. MANY of the victims reported they were coerced into sex not only with Epstein, but with various of Epstein's friends and acquaintances.

The lead detective and his supervisor both went on the record for Ms Brown's book and reporting. The lead detective shared the case files with Ms Brown, including the victim's statements. This is how we know that there is not just one victim that claims to have been passed around to other men, but many of them reported the exact same thing. According to the lead detective who directly took their statements and according to the words contained on those official police records.

The lead detective gave Ms Brown much information regarding how utterly and shockingly compromised the State Attorney's office was. I haven't gotten around to any discussion about the Federal prosecutor, but we know what happened there, and I won't be surprised if the detectives shared their experiences with Federal prosecutors as much as they shared their experiences with the State prosecutors. The details are pretty wild. Just for one example, Epstein and his lawyers were given all the details of the investigation (it's not difficult at all to tell WHO leaked them - the lead State Attorney, that's who), which girls talked, what they said, etc. Most of those girls promptly disappeared and refused to talk to the detective any further after they received phone calls from Epstein thugs who threatened them and their families, etc. There are some juicy details about Dershowitz involvement. I will share one quote from Detective Recarey (lead detective on the case). "Dershowitz flew down to Florida and met with Krischer (lead prosecutor) privately, and the shenanigans that happened afterwards I don't think I've ever seen or ever heard of anywhere else".

The threats from Epstein's hired thugs and Dershowitz are the reason we haven't and probably won't ever have any prosecutions of any of the other men (and women) who gained access to underage girls for purposes of sex due to the fact they were recruited for sex with Epstein and Epstein apparently liked to share the goods. Many of the girls were so scared they either changed their stories or just plain cut and run and refused to ever talk to anyone else about Epstein. One of the girls was so shaken because she knew the only two people who knew of her statement was Recarey and Kirscher, and she subsequently got a phone call from an Epstein associate who repeated to her, almost word for word, her statement. She was absolutely terrified. She was also willing to tell the detective that she was given two alternatives - help "Jeffrey" regarding the investigation and you will be rewarded, hurt him and you will be sorry. Then she exited stage left never to be heard from again regarding this case.

The bottom line is these girls/young women found out in a hurry that they were dealing with very powerful people and they were not going to come out on the winning side on this. Keep in mind it is appropriate to refer to them as "girls" at this point in the story, as many of them were still pretty young during the part of the investigation that I'm relating. Not only were the victims threatened, but in the early days there were reporters that started to work in this story who were also threatened. I don't recall their names, but they are also on the record, by name, in Ms Brown's book.

The story about how the State Attorney's office was so utterly compromised is both as old as dirt, with some interesting twists thrown in. Epstein was a major Democratic donor and Palm Beach County is the bluest of the blue to be found in Florida. But, he also had many Republican friends as well, and when it came to the Federal prosecution, well, that's where his proximity to Republicans helped him escape justice with Acosta, who had his eye on a seat on the Supreme Court (can you imagine :eek: :eek: I think we all knew that already though, but just in case some of you weren't aware of that scary detail).

Ok, that's enough to whet the appetite. I too tired tonight to post any more, but stay tuned, I will share some more of the juicy tidbits from time to time.

But I would also like to encourage anyone who is truly interested in the details of this case that come from probably the most reliable source - the very detectives that tried their best to bring this man to justice - BUY THIS BOOK if you haven't already. I am willing to share some stuff, but I think it's not appropriate or fair to Ms Brown for me to share too much. She is an excellent writer and this is quite the sordid tale. A great read though.
"It actually doesn't take much to be considered a difficult woman. That's why there are so many of us."

--Jane Goodall
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 4699
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

Re: Jeffrey Epstein

#2

Post by RVInit »

2nd posting regarding how Jeffrey Epstein and others escaped prosecution.

So, during the initial investigation, Detective Recarey got corroborating evidence about who was present at Epstein's mansion during various times the various victims reported the different people they had sex with. That corroborating evidence came primarily from one of Epsteins "housemen" who had the smarts to get call logs, flight logs, and memos and provide them to the detective. In addition, the detectives worked with the sanitation department to collect Epstein's garbage into a separate container on the garbage trucks, deliver that garbage to the police department where detectives sorted through it, finding more corroborating evidence in the form of notes, and other items.

One piece of information they got from the houseman is that Epstein decided to hide video cameras attached to computers to collect video of the goings on that were taking place at his house. His houseman said it was widely believed by the staff this was for blackmail purposes.

Recarey obtained a search warrant to collect the video evidence. When they showed up at the mansion to collect the evidence, Epstein himself was gone and all the video equipment had been hastily disconnected, cords dangling everywhere, computers opened with parts and cords scattered all over the place and not a hard drive in sight. So, Epstein again was tipped off that a search warrant was obtained and the tipoff was explicit enough that he knew to remove the hard drives where all his video surveillance of his own home were kept. They did manage to find other kinds of evidence.

Recarey detailed for Ms Brown that he had worked many times previously with the same prosecutors in previous cases and had never experienced anything like the pushback he got from prosecutors in this case. He details that the more evidence he collected and the stronger the case got, the more the prosecutors made up reasons they couldn't prosecute him, started referring to the victims as prostitutes and started threatening to prosecute them instead of prosecuting Epstein. Some of these girls where 13 and 14 at the time they were molested.

At one point a prosecutor that was known to beyond compromise was assigned to the case. Unfortunately, her husband was an attorney. He didn't have the experience that Epstein needed, but once again Epstein was tipped off on this development and he had the smarts to hire her husband and then she had to withdraw from the case. The detective at one point documented his belief that the lead prosecutor should remove himself from Epstein's case.

The detectives were so concerned about the State Attorney office being compromised in this case that they took a step they had never done before - they removed all their evidence from any server that was accessible to the State Attorney office and set up a private server accessible only to the lead detective and his supervisor. They continued collecting evidence in the hopes that eventually it could be turned over to someone that would actually prosecute. The detective describes that even in spite of the several times Epstein was tipped off about witnesses or search warrants he knew he had a powerful a case as any he had ever investigated.

Perversion of Justice, indeed.
"It actually doesn't take much to be considered a difficult woman. That's why there are so many of us."

--Jane Goodall
User avatar
Phoenix520
Posts: 4151
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:20 pm
Verified:

Re: Jeffrey Epstein

#3

Post by Phoenix520 »

Thanks RV. It’s in my Audible queue.
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 4699
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

Re: Jeffrey Epstein

#4

Post by RVInit »

Phoenix520 wrote: Sun Jan 02, 2022 2:02 pm Thanks RV. It’s in my Audible queue.
You are welcome. It's pretty clear that our friend Ghislaine does likely have loads of information and names. But unlike the girls/women who already attempted to tell their story and ended up fed to the lions and threatened by the perpetrators as well as by prosecutors, she is old enough to know better than to even bother.
"It actually doesn't take much to be considered a difficult woman. That's why there are so many of us."

--Jane Goodall
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 11278
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

Re: Jeffrey Epstein

#5

Post by Kendra »

Thanks also for starting this. I intend to read it, but keep forgetting :oldlady:
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 12484
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: Jeffrey Epstein

#6

Post by Volkonski »

“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 6894
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:25 pm

Re: Jeffrey Epstein

#7

Post by Suranis »

I'm sorry I don't buy that Maxwell has huge lists of all the pedos. If she had she would have used them by now, and honestly the idea that he had truckloads of really famous people in a network of Pedos is ludicrous. If he had, he wouldn't have been palling around with a D lister like Trump. Plus, the women who have come forward have not mentioned anyone hugely significant. Prince Andrew is a second rate royal at best.

Did Epstein curry favours? Sure. but the vast majority of people who were on his plane were just taking a lift, going from one place to another, not to the island. Sorry but I'm just not buying that vast conspiracy. Most men are just not into the crap Epstein was into.

In short I'm not buying the conspiracy. And Epstein committed suicide. End of.
Hic sunt dracones
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 17320
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:16 am
Location: Switzerland, near the Alps
Verified: ✔️ Eurobot

Re: Jeffrey Epstein

#8

Post by RTH10260 »

Suranis wrote: Mon Jan 03, 2022 4:26 am I'm sorry I don't buy that Maxwell has huge lists of all the pedos. If she had she would have used them by now, and honestly the idea that he had truckloads of really famous people in a network of Pedos is ludicrous. If he had, he wouldn't have been palling around with a D lister like Trump. Plus, the women who have come forward have not mentioned anyone hugely significant. Prince Andrew is a second rate royal at best.

Did Epstein curry favours? Sure. but the vast majority of people who were on his plane were just taking a lift, going from one place to another, not to the island. Sorry but I'm just not buying that vast conspiracy. Most men are just not into the crap Epstein was into.

In short I'm not buying the conspiracy. And Epstein committed suicide. End of.
IIRC it was never alleged that Maxwell acted as a madame to procure for all celebrities. She picked up young females for her friend Epstein. From all I have read it was Epstein who sometimes gave his near friends the opportunity to meet up with one of the girls. I don't believe she always knew who the girls would meet.
User avatar
Suranis
Posts: 6894
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 5:25 pm

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#9

Post by Suranis »

Ya, that's fair.
Hic sunt dracones
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 12484
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#10

Post by Volkonski »

“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
Uninformed
Posts: 2278
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:13 pm
Location: England

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#11

Post by Uninformed »

“Prince Andrew: Decision soon on dismissing case - judge”:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59865102

“At a virtual hearing in Manhattan on Tuesday, Judge Kaplan said he appreciated the "arguments and the passion" over the 2009 agreement.
He said he would give a decision on dismissing the case "pretty soon" but declined to say exactly when.”

“Judge Kaplan used Tuesday's hearing to closely questioned lawyers for both sides as to whether the Epstein-Giuffre damages settlement could be used at all by Andrew to stop the case.
The 2009 deal shows that both Epstein and Virginia Giuffre agreed that neither of them would disclose the deal to other parties - unless ordered to do so by a court.
Secondly, both of them accepted that the agreement could not be used in any other court case that was not directly related to enforcing its terms.
Judge Kaplan said that the wording could mean that both Epstein and Ms Giuffre had to jointly agree to whether or not the settlement could be used to release other potential defendants from facing court.
He said: "If someone got sued and Jeffrey Epstein said this person was within the release, and it was okay with Ms Giuffre, then [the deal] could be made available and Epstein could enforce it - but not otherwise."
Andrew's lawyer Andrew B Brettler objected - saying that US law made clear that a third party - such as his client - had rights to rely on the settlement to prevent them being unfairly taken to court.”
If you can't lie to yourself, who can you lie to?
Uninformed
Posts: 2278
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:13 pm
Location: England

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#12

Post by Uninformed »

If you can't lie to yourself, who can you lie to?
User avatar
filly
Posts: 1724
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:02 am

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#13

Post by filly »

This is why I hate when jurors blab to reporters. Props to the US Attorney for bringing this to the court's attention and suggesting a hearing.
User avatar
LM K
Posts: 3144
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:44 pm
Location: Oregon
Occupation: Professor Shrinky Lady, brainwashing young adults daily!
Contact:

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#14

Post by LM K »

*Moved*
"The jungle is no place for a cellist."
From "Take the Money and Run"
User avatar
LM K
Posts: 3144
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 7:44 pm
Location: Oregon
Occupation: Professor Shrinky Lady, brainwashing young adults daily!
Contact:

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#15

Post by LM K »

Anything related to the Maxwell trial is best posted in the "Ghislaine Maxwell Trial" forum topic.
"The jungle is no place for a cellist."
From "Take the Money and Run"
User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 2914
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:07 am
Location: Maybelot
Verified: ✅✅

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#16

Post by Maybenaut »

Thanks, RV, for the recommendation. I didn't know much about this case. Given the nature of my work (often defending those convicted of child sexual abuse), I have a hard time adding more of this into my life. So I didn't follow the Epstein or Maxwell cases very much. But the focus of this story is more on corruption in the justice process, and the importance of journalism in shedding light on that. I mean, she talks about the victims and tells their stories in a compelling way. But the real story is less about the victimization by Epstein, and more about re-victimization by the people charged with the pursuit of justice.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
Phoenix520
Posts: 4151
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 1:20 pm
Verified:

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#17

Post by Phoenix520 »

Many of the Amazon reviews talk about how annoying it is that Brown talks about herself so much but through my lens, at least at the beginning, she’s simply establishing her journalistic bona fides.

Listening as I can. I love Julia Whelan’s narration and Brown’s writing.
User avatar
Maybenaut
Posts: 2914
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 10:07 am
Location: Maybelot
Verified: ✅✅

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#18

Post by Maybenaut »

Phoenix520 wrote: Wed Jan 05, 2022 4:15 pm Many of the Amazon reviews talk about how annoying it is that Brown talks about herself so much but through my lens, at least at the beginning, she’s simply establishing her journalistic bona fides.

Listening as I can. I love Julia Whelan’s narration and Brown’s writing.
Yeah, she does talk about herself a lot throughout the book, and sometimes seems bitter about how she was passed over - for promotions and accolades. But she does point out that had she been promoted, she likely wouldn't have worked on the project, and the Epstein deals might not have come to light because no one else was working on it.
"Hey! We left this England place because it was bogus, and if we don't get some cool rules ourselves, pronto, we'll just be bogus too!" -- Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 4699
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#19

Post by RVInit »

I have finished reading through all the discussion about the federal case. OMG. Perversion of Justice hardly describes how utterly and completely corrupted were the prosecutors, both State and Federal. I'm really glad the detectives were both retired by the time Ms Brown finally gained their trust - they were not afraid to go on the record and name names. Although the lead detective, Recarey, passed away before the book was published and before the Miami Herald featured an article Ms Brown wrote based on all the research she did on this case.

I have another thing or two I'm thinking about sharing, but I think I will finish the book entirely first and then pick out something else to share. I just don't want to give away her entire book because that just isn't fair to her. But if you are truly interested in the real story, Ms Brown's book is the closest I believe we will ever get, given that she gained the trust of the detectives, who know every piece of evidence that exists, and those detectives became so disgusted at the corruption that prevented Epstein and others from being prosecuted and were willing to go on the record and were willing to name names of the prosecutors who protected Epstein (and others) from anything coming close to being held accountable.
"It actually doesn't take much to be considered a difficult woman. That's why there are so many of us."

--Jane Goodall
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 4699
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:48 am

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#20

Post by RVInit »

Today's entry regarding the work Julie Brown did to expose the travesty of justice regarding Jeffrey Epstein and others.

It's very clear why the prosecution was undermined by the Democratic prosecutor in Palm Beach County. Epstein was a huge Democratic donor and this is how the game of politics is played. Many of us are Democrats and it probably doesn't feel good to many of us to have to admit that this took place. I think I detailed already how Epstein was tipped off before the detectives were able to execute the warrant to pick up his video equipment and hard drives where video from bedrooms and other rooms were stored.

So, why didn't the Republican prosecutor jump on this case? The detectives turned over all their evidence, including any notes they made about the case to the FBI and then it came under Alex Acosta's jurisdiction. Acosta was in the running for a possible Supreme Court seat at this time. This would have been a great opportunity for a Republican prosecutor during the George W Bush administration to make Democrats look really bad by taking down Epstein.

Detectives describe even worse and more widespread corruption when the case came under Acosta's control. Emails and other communications show that Villefana, the "official" prosecutor, actually did intend to prosecute the case. But her supervisors thwarted and undermined her the entire way. Email messages showed that her career was threatened if she didn't play ball, i.e. agree to bury the case. While earlier of her own emails and letters showed she intended to prosecute, her later emails to various people showed that she agreed to bury and undermine and possible prosecution. Even though the federal prosecutors knew of the existence of the videos that were the subject of a search warrant, they never made any effort at all to get those videos. Presumably they ended up in the hands of Epstein's lawyers (or one of them) and I don't think anyone knows where they are or if they have been destroyed at this point. Just a reminder, I mentioned in an earlier posting that Epstein's employees believed Epstein made those tapes in case he ever needed them for blackmail purposes. At least this is what the "houseman" told the detectives when he gave them the information that was used for the search warrant.

Somehow, on the day the plea deal (federal) was going to be presented to the judge, a different judge was assigned at the last minute. The original judge thinks she remembers being sick that day and opined that may have been the reason she did not oversee that hearing. So, the judge that was assigned to hear and sign off on the plea deal did not know any of the details of the case. Villefana suggested to the prosecutors that they not mention how many victims were involved and not mention that they were underage. That is part of how he got the sweet plea deal he ended up with - the judge that signed off on the deal was a stand-in who was deliberately given very little information about the case at the direction of the prosecutor under Acosta that was assigned the case. She saved her career by helping to bury the case against Epstein. Which seems like it should have presented a huge win for Republicans to bring down a Democrat "pedophile".
"It actually doesn't take much to be considered a difficult woman. That's why there are so many of us."

--Jane Goodall
User avatar
Volkonski
Posts: 12484
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 11:06 am
Location: Texoma and North Fork of Long Island
Occupation: Retired mechanical engineer
Verified:

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#21

Post by Volkonski »

Prince Andrew to face civil sex assault case after US ruling

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-59871514?xt ... st+type%5D
Prince Andrew has failed in his bid to get a civil case which alleges he sexually assaulted Virginia Giuffre dismissed by a US judge.

Ms Giuffre is suing the prince claiming he abused her when she was 17.

His lawyers said the case should be thrown out, citing a 2009 deal she signed with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But a New York judge ruled that the claim could be heard.

Prince Andrew has consistently denied the allegations.

The motion to dismiss the lawsuit was outlined in a 46-page decision by Judge Lewis A Kaplan of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Uninformed wrote: Tue Jan 04, 2022 1:21 pm “Prince Andrew: Decision soon on dismissing case - judge”:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59865102

“At a virtual hearing in Manhattan on Tuesday, Judge Kaplan said he appreciated the "arguments and the passion" over the 2009 agreement.
He said he would give a decision on dismissing the case "pretty soon" but declined to say exactly when.”

“Judge Kaplan used Tuesday's hearing to closely questioned lawyers for both sides as to whether the Epstein-Giuffre damages settlement could be used at all by Andrew to stop the case.
The 2009 deal shows that both Epstein and Virginia Giuffre agreed that neither of them would disclose the deal to other parties - unless ordered to do so by a court.
Secondly, both of them accepted that the agreement could not be used in any other court case that was not directly related to enforcing its terms.
Judge Kaplan said that the wording could mean that both Epstein and Ms Giuffre had to jointly agree to whether or not the settlement could be used to release other potential defendants from facing court.
He said: "If someone got sued and Jeffrey Epstein said this person was within the release, and it was okay with Ms Giuffre, then [the deal] could be made available and Epstein could enforce it - but not otherwise."
Andrew's lawyer Andrew B Brettler objected - saying that US law made clear that a third party - such as his client - had rights to rely on the settlement to prevent them being unfairly taken to court.”
“If everyone fought for their own convictions there would be no war.” ― Leo Tolstoy, War and Peace
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 11278
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#22

Post by Kendra »


This is DEVELOPING story, and the ruling is embedded at the bottom.

Judge Kaplan makes a point to emphasize that he must assume the allegations to be true on a motion to dismiss.

Factual determination comes later in the process.
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 11421
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: grumpy ol' geezer

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#23

Post by Foggy »

Ol' Wifehorn is following this case assiduously, and is loving it. At least three times in recent weeks, I've heard her say, "Whoa, Prince Andrew is in REAL TROUBLE."

But I'm one who thinks royalty is uninteresting on its best days. :bored:
User avatar
Kendra
Posts: 11278
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2021 10:17 am

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#24

Post by Kendra »

I think I read somewhere that the queen isn't paying his legal bills for this one. He's got a ski chalet somewhere that he's trying to unload to raise money. That was a couple of weeks ago, so sorry, no linky.
User avatar
Foggy
Dick Tater
Posts: 11421
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:45 am
Location: Fogbow HQ
Occupation: Dick Tater/Space Cadet
Verified: grumpy ol' geezer

Re: Jeffrey Epstein: Perversion of Justice

#25

Post by Foggy »

Yeah, ol' Wifehorn confirms the Queen is not paying his legal bills (and will not pay any adverse judgment). She's pretty sure he sold the Swiss chalet, but not certain. That's just to pay the lawyers, of course.

Ol' Wifehorn says he offered $5 million to settle, but Ms. Giuffre would prefer to publicly humiliate him and I think that's an admirable point of view.
Post Reply

Return to “Law and Lawsuits”