Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

Æthelthryth the Texan

Hive, Esq. - I have some questions re: Jefferey Epstein

Recommended Posts

(I don't have a specific paper to link here. Google your preferred news source. I think everyone is covering this heavily and I don't want to get caught up on what is reliable or biased etc....)

Legally naive person here with some questions-- 

They arrested Epstein yesterday, who by my understanding is a convicted sex offender. Here's where I'm confused. My understanding is in 2008, Epstein struck a deal in FL to plead guilty to two state prostitution  charges which got him off the hook (somehow I don't exactly follow) of the looming Federal Charges which were potentially going to be a LOT more severe. That was arranged at the time under the sanction of the then US Attorney General, but then this year, a Federal judge ruled the DOJ broke the law by not conferring with victims about the agreement which potentially nullifies the deal? If I'm following, this apparently has opened a ton of doors and now that agreement might be invalidated on top of these new charges he's facing. 

Now, all things point to this guy being total scum. I'm not trying to defend him. I am wondering, however, how things like this don't run afoul of Double Jeopardy. I do understand that new charges can be brought. I understand there can be separate State and Federal charges for what seem similar but aren't and then that's not double jeopardy (sort of what could potentially happen to Jussie Smollet it sounded like at one time....) But for an old deal to be invalidated after a decade and prosecuted again, when he did actually serve time as part of that deal.......how exactly does that work? And doesn't that open some tenuous legal doors to where elected officials could potentially play games with this type of thing and put someone back though a trial/sentence for something that was already negotiated because they did't like a plea deal given to someone previously? How exactly does that work? I think I'm missing something. 

ETA- It seems like this could seriously undermine the integrity of prosecutors in general couldn't it? I am all for justice being served- to an extreme degree almost- but it seems like it would be better to move forward with new charges that stand alone, instead of invalidating the old deal, in order to open the door to have access to things to bring up the new charges. It reads as shady, but perhaps I'm misreading the situation. It seems like journalists aren't the best at explaining legal intricacies. 

Edited by Æthelthryth the Texan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Epstein has multiple counts to choose from, and additional women have come forward.  If they couldn’t make a charge stick on a state level because a previous state had already litigated it (which seems to depend on the state), they could just pick another few victims.  Seriously, he has been prolific and well known.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Epstein has multiple counts to choose from, and additional women have come forward.  If they couldn’t make a charge stick on a state level because a previous state had already litigated it (which seems to depend on the state), they could just pick another few victims.  Seriously, he has been prolific and well known.

Right, but there were some things with immunity on the previous deal.......this isn't just cut and dry they found new victims to come forward. My primary question is to do with the declaring the previous plea illegal and then getting fruit from that tree. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's a phrase directly from a previous Miami Herald article linked below that is the source of my confusion. How is it legal to backtrack on previous agreements, no matter how obviously shady they were. 

Quote

Acosta agreed to not prosecute Epstein federally, which means Epstein is not subject to double jeopardy. Instead, his plea agreement included unusual language that granted federal immunity — not only to Epstein, but to others who were never identified or named, leading many to suspect that the deal covered up a larger sex trafficking operation, possibly crossing international borders.

https://www.miamiherald.com/news/state/florida/article231916968.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I'm reading the original agreement was ruled unconstitutional but the DOJ has decided not to invalidate it.  So the current indictment is acting on the unconstitutional ruling.  If the agreement is invalidated then double jeopardy wouldn't be an issue since he was never prosecuted federally.  He would lose his immunity because of the unconstitutional ruling, which of course will be challenged.  His previous prison sentence would likely be taken into account during sentencing if it got that far.   This is just my understanding, I may be completely wrong.

Edited to add: after reading more I have no idea. US attorney Berman says that the agreement only binds the Southern District of Florida, not the Southern District of New York from prosecuting. I imagine that will be decided by a federal judge.

Edited by hjffkj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, hjffkj said:

From what I'm reading the original agreement was ruled unconstitutional but the DOJ has decided not to invalidate it.  So the current indictment is acting on the unconstitutional ruling.  If the agreement is invalidated then double jeopardy wouldn't be an issue since he was never prosecuted federally.  He would lose his immunity because of the unconstitutional ruling, which of course will be challenged.  His previous prison sentence would likely be taken into account during sentencing if it got that far.   This is just my understanding, I may be completely wrong.

Edited to add: after reading more I have no idea. US attorney Berman says that the agreement only binds the Southern District of Florida, not the Southern District of New York from prosecuting. I imagine that will be decided by a federal judge.

Ok - thanks! At least I feel justified in my confusion now, LOL. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may have it wrong, but my understanding is that the new charges are separate and apart from the previous charges and plea deal, and specifically that they happened in New York rather than Florida and with different victims not named in the other case. I wouldn’t think you could make a plea deal that ruled out other victims from ever having their day in court if they weren’t named in the case. I think that’s all separate from the issue of invalidating the sealing of the previous case’s records, which is being called illegal because the victims were not notified about that. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Jyhwkmama said:

And now there are photos....that he actually had labeled and indexed on cd-rom

That just seems.....beyond stupid.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Terabith said:

That just seems.....beyond stupid.  

Yep. For a Harvard grad he seems really dumb.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

re Epstein's college credentials

37 minutes ago, Jyhwkmama said:

Yep. For a Harvard grad he seems really dumb.

This surely ranks as one of the Top Ten Least Important Facts About Epstein, but he's not a Harvard grad.  (He has donated a boatload of money to Harvard, and is pals with some of their most prominent faculty.)  He never graduated from any college or university.  Bloomberg did an article today on the (rather murky) source of his fortune.

Quote

...Born in 1953 and raised in Brooklyn, Epstein dropped out of Cooper Union and NYU’s Courant Institute. He landed a gig teaching calculus and physics at Manhattan’s exclusive Dalton School between 1973 and 1975, according to a 2002 New York magazine profile, where his students included the son of Bear Stearns Chairman Alan Greenberg.

He joined Bear Stearns in 1976 as a lowly junior assistant to a floor trader. In a swift rise, trading options, he made partner four years later, with former Chief Executive Officer Jimmy Cayne praising his skills. He left in 1981 to set up J. Epstein & Co., but one bank executive said he remained close to Cayne and Greenberg and was a client until Bear Stearns’ demise.

Epstein’s money management business had an exclusive focus: It would serve only billionaires. Epstein reportedly made all the investment calls...

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jyhwkmama said:

Yep. For a Harvard grad he seems really dumb.

cocky little chit. 

When you have  loads of money and friends in high places you think you are immune.   Sadly, that is generally true.  I hope he goes down hard along with all his disgusting friends. 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jyhwkmama said:

Yep. For a Harvard grad he seems really dumb.

I don't think he's dumb by any stretch of the imagination.

Evil, cocky, arrogant, brazen . .  yeah. I suspect he's gotten away with it for so long and has so many friends in high places that he didn't feel like he was at any real risk. And if not for the stellar journalism by the Miami Herald he probably would have been right. 

  • Like 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I’m honestly wondering if he might fall over of a “heart attack” in prison before the trial. So many powerful people involved globally it sounds like..... 

I suspect the same thing.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you’re a fan of Ken White, aka Popehat, he has an article on Atlantic today that has a snippet on the jurisdiction immunity deal. 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/07/jeffrey-epstein-indictment-hes-out-luck/593512/

ETA- He also has some excellent threads on Twitter about it.

Edited by Æthelthryth the Texan
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding is they are not charging him again for the same charges he faced in Florida, at least, not the same incidents. He had federal immunity, but was not charged federally so not double jeproady to now be charged. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Pam in CT said:

re Epstein's college credentials

This surely ranks as one of the Top Ten Least Important Facts About Epstein, but he's not a Harvard grad.  (He has donated a boatload of money to Harvard, and is pals with some of their most prominent faculty.)  He never graduated from any college or university.  Bloomberg did an article today on the (rather murky) source of his fortune.

 


Thanks for the info!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2019 at 5:14 AM, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I’m honestly wondering if he might fall over of a “heart attack” in prison before the trial. So many powerful people involved globally it sounds like..... 

So it wasn’t a heart attack. At least yet. According to papers (so far) it was either a “suicide attempt” or an “Injury by another inmate.” That narrows it down. I’d have thought someone like Epstein would’ve been in a more secure environment. Now I’m sounding conspiracy theorist,  but in this case I think it’s merited. 

Unconfirmed reports on some twitter news feeds are saying he’s much worse off than earlier reports stated. Guess we’ll find out sooner or later. 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

So it wasn’t a heart attack. At least yet. According to papers (so far) it was either a “suicide attempt” or an “Injury by another inmate.” That narrows it down. I’d have thought someone like Epstein would’ve been in a more secure environment. Now I’m sounding conspiracy theorist,  but in this case I think it’s merited. 

Unconfirmed reports on some twitter news feeds are saying he’s much worse off than earlier reports stated. Guess we’ll find out sooner or later. 

saw that too and thought about this thread.  Definitely makes me wonder.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

So it wasn’t a heart attack. At least yet. According to papers (so far) it was either a “suicide attempt” or an “Injury by another inmate.” That narrows it down. I’d have thought someone like Epstein would’ve been in a more secure environment. Now I’m sounding conspiracy theorist,  but in this case I think it’s merited. 

I'm sure it's no secret that there are LOTS of wealthy powerful men who would love to see this guy dead. Yet instead of putting him in protective custody, they not only put him in a regular cell, they paired him with a corrupt cop who murdered four people over money, who was caught with an illicit cell phone while in prison, and who now claims he has no idea how Epstein ended up injured and barely conscious. 🤔

  • Like 4
  • Confused 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I usually am very big on human rights, etc...but man I'm having a hard time caring much about this man. Not good for my soul, I know. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My concern is less for Epstein himself, and more for the victims. They need him to face justice of a less vigilante sort. Also, I think we all need to know who else is implicated in his crimes.

  • Like 13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

I usually am very big on human rights, etc...but man I'm having a hard time caring much about this man. Not good for my soul, I know. 

The reason you should be caring about his well-being is because there are other child-predators that he knows the names of.  These are high-level slimes that almost always get away with it because they have money.  It's his connections I want to see in chains.  

 

  • Like 18

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, PrincessMommy said:

The reason you should be caring about his well-being is because there are other child-predators that he knows the names of.  These are high-level slimes that almost always get away with it because they have money.  It's his connections I want to see in chains.  

 

Yes, exactly!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a hard time believing Epstein will give up any names without requiring full immunity.  While I'd love for his connections to be in chains, it can't mean he gets to walk.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He might if it gets him to a more comfortable prison.  Maybe not all of the names, but a good number.  He doesn't strike me as someone who would enjoy a minimalist setting.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I think he might because he could be angry that he's in there while they walk free.

But on the other hand, he knows he won't be in forever. He might rather keep those favors.

And he might do a little of both - target some people who he'd like to throw under the bus while keeping a few other names in his pocket for a rainy day or so that someone owes him big one day.

I guess we'll see.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Farrar said:

Also, I think he might because he could be angry that he's in there while they walk free.

But on the other hand, he knows he won't be in forever. He might rather keep those favors.

And he might do a little of both - target some people who he'd like to throw under the bus while keeping a few other names in his pocket for a rainy day or so that someone owes him big one day.

I guess we'll see.

If they can get a few others who would also talk there might be a domino effect.  They may not need Epstein to get all the names they're looking for.   Plus, we don't know how stupid he was with his personal computers.  It may be there's a trove of information there, or not.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Farrar said:

But on the other hand, he knows he won't be in forever. He might rather keep those favors.

He’s facing forty years from what I’ve read, so there’s a good chance he will be in forever. I think that’s why he’s such a suicide risk. I hope he spills everything in exchange for something, as long as he’s still in there at least until he’s an old, old man. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you think his death could be faked as a suicide and he goes free to live in some remote area? I wonder if they could pull that off? Some powerful people are connected to him and I doubt that they want his to bring their names up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, PrincessMommy said:

If they can get a few others who would also talk there might be a domino effect.  They may not need Epstein to get all the names they're looking for.   Plus, we don't know how stupid he was with his personal computers.  It may be there's a trove of information there, or not.  

If he was dumb enough to have disks labeled "nude" in his safe, I'd be surprised if his computer was much better! We'll find out I bet! 

I know this is not a nice way to think, but I am surprised by the suicide attempt angle simple because it seems like a guy with an ego that size wouldn't be a prime risk on that front. But I guess you can never tell. One theory is he did it to get nicer prison accommodations. That seems sort of crazy too. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BeachGal said:

Do you think his death could be faked as a suicide and he goes free to live in some remote area? I wonder if they could pull that off? Some powerful people are connected to him and I doubt that they want his to bring their names up.

I saw so many qanon tweets on this type of thing today, I'm definitely not one to say they couldn't! They have me convinced. My general readings of the integrity of the NY prison system/justice department did not exactly impart a lot of confidence in any way, shape, or form. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

I saw so many qanon tweets on this type of thing today, I'm definitely not one to say they couldn't! They have me convinced. My general readings of the integrity of the NY prison system/justice department did not exactly impart a lot of confidence in any way, shape, or form. 

 

I think he has the goods on others, like videos, etc. and I'd bet he has copies elsewhere that could be release if anything happens to him. And supposedly the home in NYC might have secret tunnels. (I've been reading too much CDAN!)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BeachGal said:

 

I think he has the goods on others, like videos, etc. and I'd bet he has copies elsewhere that could be release if anything happens to him. And supposedly the home in NYC might have secret tunnels. (I've been reading too much CDAN!)

Oh wow. I forgot about CDAN! Now I gotta go catch up! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Epstein docs unsealed this week. Not looking good for Bill and George. Also Ghislane Maxwell, Epstein’s partner in crime, is sure being linked to some interesting people as well. I’m not linking or naming more names, because I can’t tell on the boards anymore what is deemed political and what is not. But if you haven’t looked lately, might want to google on what’s come out on the latest doc release.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On his keeping documentation of things that happened.     Even before his first conviction, people wondered where he got all his money from.  They knew how he made some of his money.  But, he seemed to have orders of magnitude more than people could account for.  Now it seems obvious.   

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's being posted elsewhere, though I think ABC is still the source. It doesn't surprise me. Well, a little since he was on suicide watch, I guess. But in general.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

ABC is reporting he succeeded the second time.  So far no other outlets have corroborated.

Or someone succeeded. That is COMPLETELY on the prison officials that they didn’t prevent whatever happened. And what a travesty for his victims. No justice now. This really pisses me off. 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Æthelthryth the Texan said:

Epstein docs unsealed this week. Not looking good for Bill and George. Also Ghislane Maxwell, Epstein’s partner in crime, is sure being linked to some interesting people as well. I’m not linking or naming more names, because I can’t tell on the boards anymore what is deemed political and what is not. But if you haven’t looked lately, might want to google on what’s come out on the latest doc release.

or prince Andrew.

 

eta: there's a reason he was known as "randy andy".

 

Edited by gardenmom5
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm worried for those women who came forward. If I were in their shoes I'd be terrified right now. Their odds of having "accidents, heart attacks, or succumbing to the stress and committing suicide" as well seem to have increased exponentially. 

  • Like 4
  • Sad 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...