comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But there are actual accusations. The fack are you talking about? Also, this is a list of people who visited the islands at any one time, some have accusations, some do not. Nobody is denying that.
This is a normal conversation about the topic. For him to come in calling it gossip and accusing the site of turning into a women's magazine is ridiculous. What does he want people to do? Not talk about it? The only other possible conclusion is that he feels it's unfair that this is happening and the names are coming out. In which case, why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My understanding is that the documents have revealed very little at all. No further accusations. But I do expect that there will be more accusations revealed in the not too distant future.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But there are actual accusations. The fack are you talking about? Also, this is a list of people who visited the islands at any one time, some have accusations, some do not. Nobody is denying that.
This is a normal conversation about the topic. For him to come in calling it gossip and accusing the site of turning into a women's magazine is ridiculous. What does he want people to do? Not talk about it? The only other possible conclusion is that he feels it's unfair that this is happening and the names are coming out. In which case, why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The conversation began yesterday, before any lists.
I gave my opinion, I'm not a censor, people can and will talk about anything they want, but it seems to me to be done to death unless more, proven names and accusations come out.
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 26 seconds ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are claims against Prince Andrew, Michael Jackson, Stephen Hawking and Bill Clinton though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
At the island?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew and Stephen Hawking all have accusations against them at the island. This document proves that they were island. It has Epstein offering money for people to come forward to 'prove' the innocence of Clinton and Hawking.
Michael Jackson I'm not sure on, but there are so many on him elsewhere anyway that it is hardly a stretch. Same with Trump to be honest, who already has sexual assault accusations against him.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The accusation was made in 2015 but only came to light after the court unsealed docs yesterday. This is a new devolopment worthy of discussion. You two crack on defending the HRSexpest though.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You crack on talking about it then. Nobody stopping you.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What new evidence? We knew Prince Andrew had been to the island.
And the 'accuser' didn't sound to upset by the alledged groping. Has she attempted to bring charges?
“Prince Andrew was there and Ghislaine and a couple of other girls my age.” Were at the home, she told The Daily Mail, “Andrew was very charming. I didn’t know exactly who he was but felt that I knew him. She (Ghislaine) came down with a present for him – a latex puppet of him from Spitting Image.”
After Maxwell gave Prince Andrew the gift, they posed for a photo.
“Virginia, another girl there, sat on a chair and had the puppet on her lap. Andrew sat on another chair, I sat on his lap – and he put his hand on my breast. Ghislaine put the puppet’s hand on Virginia’s breast, then Andrew put his hand on mine. It was a great joke. Everybody laughed. Ghislaine made a lot of sexual jokes,” says Johanna. “She had a very dirty sense of humor.”
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The accusation was made in 2015 but only came to light after the court unsealed docs yesterday. This is a new devolopment worthy of discussion. You two crack on defending the HRSexpest though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strange then that there are published stories about the accusation dating back years.
And I'm not defending anyone other than 52, who I feel has been unfraily treated on here. I have no loved for Prince Andrew - he is an absolute plonker.
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You crack on talking about it then. Nobody stopping you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am talking about it.
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from?
Again from the Beeb article its quoted as this;
"Ms Sjoberg's statement, which had previously been partly revealed, describes an encounter in which she claims Prince Andrew touched her breast.
She recalls a scene in which Maxwell, who was later jailed for sextrafficking offences, had shown them a puppet of Prince Andrew, which was intended as a "great joke".
"And they decided to take a picture with it, in which Virginia and Andrew sat on a couch. They put the puppet on Virginia's lap and I sat on Andrew's lap, and they put the puppet's hand on Virginia's breast, and Andrew put his hand on my breast, and they took a photo," says Ms Sjoberg's deposition.
Pressed by lawyers on the seating arrangements, she said: "Whether we were on a couch or a chair, I just remember thebooBs part, the hand on thebooBs."
Ms Sjoberg, then aged 20, had been at college when she had been recruited by Maxwell, initially she believed as an assistant before finding that she was encouraged to deliver shexualmassages for Epstein, which she resisted."
Your inference that she 'didn't sound to upset' is pretty grim. Nothing like a bit of victim blaming eh.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What new evidence? We knew Prince Andrew had been to the island.
And the 'accuser' didn't sound to upset by the alledged groping. Has she attempted to bring charges?
“Prince Andrew was there and Ghislaine and a couple of other girls my age.” Were at the home, she told The Daily Mail, “Andrew was very charming. I didn’t know exactly who he was but felt that I knew him. She (Ghislaine) came down with a present for him – a latex puppet of him from Spitting Image.”
After Maxwell gave Prince Andrew the gift, they posed for a photo.
“Virginia, another girl there, sat on a chair and had the puppet on her lap. Andrew sat on another chair, I sat on his lap – and he put his hand on my breast. Ghislaine put the puppet’s hand on Virginia’s breast, then Andrew put his hand on mine. It was a great joke. Everybody laughed. Ghislaine made a lot of sexual jokes,” says Johanna. “She had a very dirty sense of humor.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that starts with 'didn't sound to upset by the alleged groping' is trying to downplay it immediately. To be expected from the mail really. Let's downplay sexual assault and trafficking to help out a royal and blame the victim.
There are also fresh testimonies from the lady whose breast he groped in the papers. She wasnt too happy about the situation there. She also states that she saw Virginia Guiffre and Prince Andrew together and that she believes he assaulted her. This is new and places him there involved in sexual activities with women who were victims of sextrafficking.
The more you read that excerpt from Elvis, the worse it gets. It literally paints Ghislaine Maxwell in a good light, as if she was fun and just a bit promiscuous. She's been found guilty of child sextrafficking.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 minute ago
The more you read that excerpt from Elvis, the worse it gets. It literally paints Ghislaine Maxwell in a good light, as if she was fun and just a bit promiscuous. She's been found guilty of child sextrafficking.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not defending Andrew though. Must be something in the water in Manchester.
Young people trying to cancel us in the past now as well. You were barely even born. What we did in ARE time is ARE business and not yours'. Also what happened to respecting your elders?
What next? Greenwood and Anthony is also just gossip?
In the extract from the report pasted below, it is thought Jane Doe #3 refers to Virginia Guiffre. Haven't read through the thread so may already have been discussed. Hopefully a full criminal investigation will be conducted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps even more important to her role in Epstein’s sexual abuse ring, Maxwell had direct connections to other powerful individuals with whom she could connect Epstein.
For instance, one such powerful individual Epstein forced Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with was a member of the British Royal Family, Prince Andrew (a/k/a Duke of York).
Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations: in London (at Ghislaine Maxwell’s apartment), in New York, and on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands (in an ŏrgy with numerous other under-aged girls).
Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse.
Maxwell facilitated Prince Andrew’s acts of sexual abuse by acting as a “madame” for Epstein, thereby assisting in internationally trafficking Jane Doe #3 (and numerous other young girls) for sexual purposes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
comment by Eagle Fang (U9028)
posted 3 minutes ago
In the extract from the report pasted below, it is thought Jane Doe #3 refers to Virginia Guiffre. Haven't read through the thread so may already have been discussed. Hopefully a full criminal investigation will be conducted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps even more important to her role in Epstein’s sexual abuse ring, Maxwell had direct connections to other powerful individuals with whom she could connect Epstein.
For instance, one such powerful individual Epstein forced Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with was a member of the British Royal Family, Prince Andrew (a/k/a Duke of York).
Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations: in London (at Ghislaine Maxwell’s apartment), in New York, and on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands (in an ŏrgy with numerous other under-aged girls).
Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse.
Maxwell facilitated Prince Andrew’s acts of sexual abuse by acting as a “madame” for Epstein, thereby assisting in internationally trafficking Jane Doe #3 (and numerous other young girls) for sexual purposes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But but but... Women's magazine stuff.
Rejoining this convo after a while but surely what MU52 and Elvis are stating is that names on a list isn't enough to presume guilt immediately. I do expect that to come in a bit in the fallout though as people rush to defend themselves by implicating others. It's not an automatic thing that everyone who is on the list is a wrong-un (they may well be of course) although I suspect that those who haven't broken any laws themselves have probably kept things quiet that they shouldn't have.
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are ... (U1282)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Eagle Fang (U9028)
posted 3 minutes ago
In the extract from the report pasted below, it is thought Jane Doe #3 refers to Virginia Guiffre. Haven't read through the thread so may already have been discussed. Hopefully a full criminal investigation will be conducted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps even more important to her role in Epstein’s sexual abuse ring, Maxwell had direct connections to other powerful individuals with whom she could connect Epstein.
For instance, one such powerful individual Epstein forced Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with was a member of the British Royal Family, Prince Andrew (a/k/a Duke of York).
Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations: in London (at Ghislaine Maxwell’s apartment), in New York, and on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands (in an ŏrgy with numerous other under-aged girls).
Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse.
Maxwell facilitated Prince Andrew’s acts of sexual abuse by acting as a “madame” for Epstein, thereby assisting in internationally trafficking Jane Doe #3 (and numerous other young girls) for sexual purposes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But but but... Women's magazine stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some folk prefer "Men's" magazines.
I think we call them something that rhymes with anchors.
There's been nothing new to the story really. I don't really truth that the authorities have the want or will to really punish people for their crimes, they're too influential.
When you look at Epstein unaliving himself, after he quite plainly said he wouldn't do so, whilst in a high security prison and all over national news, I think it's fair to say there are people who want to keep this under wraps.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 (U2462)
posted 7 minutes ago
Rejoining this convo after a while but surely what MU52 and Elvis are stating is that names on a list isn't enough to presume guilt immediately. I do expect that to come in a bit in the fallout though as people rush to defend themselves by implicating others. It's not an automatic thing that everyone who is on the list is a wrong-un (they may well be of course) although I suspect that those who haven't broken any laws themselves have probably kept things quiet that they shouldn't have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If they just said that, then that would be fine. Everyone knows that not everyone will be guilty on the list.
Fact is that the list also includes people with accusations against them and they are taking exception at people talking about them. The last link from Elvis in particular plays into victim blaming and also paints Ghislaine Maxwell in a good light, despite the fact she has been found guilty of child sextrafficking. It isn't really a good look.
" It's not an automatic thing that everyone who is on the list is a wrong-un (they may well be of course) although I suspect that those who haven't broken any laws themselves have probably kept things quiet that they shouldn't have."
Epstein was a well respected trader and financial consultant, especially in the field of complex products and clients (like most of the names listed in these documents).
I am sure there were clients of his who were introduced for obvious reasons, but he also had to run a legitimate business operation, just like almost anybody trading illegal "products".
I think it's unfair to assume anybody who used Epsteins financial services is also a nonse. Apart from Trump, he's definitely guilty.
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 (U2462)
posted 15 minutes ago
Rejoining this convo after a while but surely what MU52 and Elvis are stating is that names on a list isn't enough to presume guilt immediately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why? Nobody said it does and nobody needed to because that's obvious, isn't it?
In any case, it would have been better if that's all 52 said, but that's not all he said, is it? He also called it gossip and made reference to the site turning into a women's magazine. What do you think he's implying there?
Sign in if you want to comment
Epstein List to be released
Page 6 of 24
7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But there are actual accusations. The fack are you talking about? Also, this is a list of people who visited the islands at any one time, some have accusations, some do not. Nobody is denying that.
This is a normal conversation about the topic. For him to come in calling it gossip and accusing the site of turning into a women's magazine is ridiculous. What does he want people to do? Not talk about it? The only other possible conclusion is that he feels it's unfair that this is happening and the names are coming out. In which case, why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My understanding is that the documents have revealed very little at all. No further accusations. But I do expect that there will be more accusations revealed in the not too distant future.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But there are actual accusations. The fack are you talking about? Also, this is a list of people who visited the islands at any one time, some have accusations, some do not. Nobody is denying that.
This is a normal conversation about the topic. For him to come in calling it gossip and accusing the site of turning into a women's magazine is ridiculous. What does he want people to do? Not talk about it? The only other possible conclusion is that he feels it's unfair that this is happening and the names are coming out. In which case, why?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The conversation began yesterday, before any lists.
I gave my opinion, I'm not a censor, people can and will talk about anything they want, but it seems to me to be done to death unless more, proven names and accusations come out.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 26 seconds ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There are claims against Prince Andrew, Michael Jackson, Stephen Hawking and Bill Clinton though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
At the island?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah. Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew and Stephen Hawking all have accusations against them at the island. This document proves that they were island. It has Epstein offering money for people to come forward to 'prove' the innocence of Clinton and Hawking.
Michael Jackson I'm not sure on, but there are so many on him elsewhere anyway that it is hardly a stretch. Same with Trump to be honest, who already has sexual assault accusations against him.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The accusation was made in 2015 but only came to light after the court unsealed docs yesterday. This is a new devolopment worthy of discussion. You two crack on defending the HRSexpest though.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You crack on talking about it then. Nobody stopping you.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What new evidence? We knew Prince Andrew had been to the island.
And the 'accuser' didn't sound to upset by the alledged groping. Has she attempted to bring charges?
“Prince Andrew was there and Ghislaine and a couple of other girls my age.” Were at the home, she told The Daily Mail, “Andrew was very charming. I didn’t know exactly who he was but felt that I knew him. She (Ghislaine) came down with a present for him – a latex puppet of him from Spitting Image.”
After Maxwell gave Prince Andrew the gift, they posed for a photo.
“Virginia, another girl there, sat on a chair and had the puppet on her lap. Andrew sat on another chair, I sat on his lap – and he put his hand on my breast. Ghislaine put the puppet’s hand on Virginia’s breast, then Andrew put his hand on mine. It was a great joke. Everybody laughed. Ghislaine made a lot of sexual jokes,” says Johanna. “She had a very dirty sense of humor.”
posted on 4/1/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 32 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The accusation was made in 2015 but only came to light after the court unsealed docs yesterday. This is a new devolopment worthy of discussion. You two crack on defending the HRSexpest though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Strange then that there are published stories about the accusation dating back years.
And I'm not defending anyone other than 52, who I feel has been unfraily treated on here. I have no loved for Prince Andrew - he is an absolute plonker.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by manusince52 (U9692)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You crack on talking about it then. Nobody stopping you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I am talking about it.
posted on 4/1/24
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from?
Again from the Beeb article its quoted as this;
"Ms Sjoberg's statement, which had previously been partly revealed, describes an encounter in which she claims Prince Andrew touched her breast.
She recalls a scene in which Maxwell, who was later jailed for sextrafficking offences, had shown them a puppet of Prince Andrew, which was intended as a "great joke".
"And they decided to take a picture with it, in which Virginia and Andrew sat on a couch. They put the puppet on Virginia's lap and I sat on Andrew's lap, and they put the puppet's hand on Virginia's breast, and Andrew put his hand on my breast, and they took a photo," says Ms Sjoberg's deposition.
Pressed by lawyers on the seating arrangements, she said: "Whether we were on a couch or a chair, I just remember thebooBs part, the hand on thebooBs."
Ms Sjoberg, then aged 20, had been at college when she had been recruited by Maxwell, initially she believed as an assistant before finding that she was encouraged to deliver shexualmassages for Epstein, which she resisted."
Your inference that she 'didn't sound to upset' is pretty grim. Nothing like a bit of victim blaming eh.
posted on 4/1/24
Ah the Daily Mail FFS
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are in your favour, you argue the facts. When facts are not in your favour you argue the process." (U1282)
posted 14 minutes ago
And that's not all 52 said. He even accused the site of turning into a women's magazine because of discussing this issue and being pleased that the list should be made public. You're making out like everything he said is normal, which is weird.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nah, what is weird is twisting someone else's words to make out like they are a peeado sympathiser.
Without actual accusations against those people listed to have visited the island, the list means nothing. You are just gossiping about them. Like a woman's magazine.
Although I expect accusations will likely come later.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Duke of York has been named in unsealed US court documents about people linked to the paedophile financier, Jeffrey Epstein.
The court papers include a detailed witness statement from a woman who claimed Prince Andrew groped her at Epstein's house in New York."
From the BBC
It's just gossip though. A member of the royal family being accused of sexualassault, again, isn't worth talking about apparently.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An accusation that was made 4 years ago. Its nothing new.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, probably should ignore any old accusations and not consider them in the context when new evidence is released.
It's a travesty that they managed to get Rolf Harris given how old the accusations were.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What new evidence? We knew Prince Andrew had been to the island.
And the 'accuser' didn't sound to upset by the alledged groping. Has she attempted to bring charges?
“Prince Andrew was there and Ghislaine and a couple of other girls my age.” Were at the home, she told The Daily Mail, “Andrew was very charming. I didn’t know exactly who he was but felt that I knew him. She (Ghislaine) came down with a present for him – a latex puppet of him from Spitting Image.”
After Maxwell gave Prince Andrew the gift, they posed for a photo.
“Virginia, another girl there, sat on a chair and had the puppet on her lap. Andrew sat on another chair, I sat on his lap – and he put his hand on my breast. Ghislaine put the puppet’s hand on Virginia’s breast, then Andrew put his hand on mine. It was a great joke. Everybody laughed. Ghislaine made a lot of sexual jokes,” says Johanna. “She had a very dirty sense of humor.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that starts with 'didn't sound to upset by the alleged groping' is trying to downplay it immediately. To be expected from the mail really. Let's downplay sexual assault and trafficking to help out a royal and blame the victim.
There are also fresh testimonies from the lady whose breast he groped in the papers. She wasnt too happy about the situation there. She also states that she saw Virginia Guiffre and Prince Andrew together and that she believes he assaulted her. This is new and places him there involved in sexual activities with women who were victims of sextrafficking.
posted on 4/1/24
The more you read that excerpt from Elvis, the worse it gets. It literally paints Ghislaine Maxwell in a good light, as if she was fun and just a bit promiscuous. She's been found guilty of child sextrafficking.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 1 minute ago
The more you read that excerpt from Elvis, the worse it gets. It literally paints Ghislaine Maxwell in a good light, as if she was fun and just a bit promiscuous. She's been found guilty of child sextrafficking.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
He's not defending Andrew though. Must be something in the water in Manchester.
posted on 4/1/24
Young people trying to cancel us in the past now as well. You were barely even born. What we did in ARE time is ARE business and not yours'. Also what happened to respecting your elders?
posted on 4/1/24
What next? Greenwood and Anthony is also just gossip?
posted on 4/1/24
In the extract from the report pasted below, it is thought Jane Doe #3 refers to Virginia Guiffre. Haven't read through the thread so may already have been discussed. Hopefully a full criminal investigation will be conducted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps even more important to her role in Epstein’s sexual abuse ring, Maxwell had direct connections to other powerful individuals with whom she could connect Epstein.
For instance, one such powerful individual Epstein forced Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with was a member of the British Royal Family, Prince Andrew (a/k/a Duke of York).
Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations: in London (at Ghislaine Maxwell’s apartment), in New York, and on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands (in an ŏrgy with numerous other under-aged girls).
Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse.
Maxwell facilitated Prince Andrew’s acts of sexual abuse by acting as a “madame” for Epstein, thereby assisting in internationally trafficking Jane Doe #3 (and numerous other young girls) for sexual purposes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Eagle Fang (U9028)
posted 3 minutes ago
In the extract from the report pasted below, it is thought Jane Doe #3 refers to Virginia Guiffre. Haven't read through the thread so may already have been discussed. Hopefully a full criminal investigation will be conducted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps even more important to her role in Epstein’s sexual abuse ring, Maxwell had direct connections to other powerful individuals with whom she could connect Epstein.
For instance, one such powerful individual Epstein forced Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with was a member of the British Royal Family, Prince Andrew (a/k/a Duke of York).
Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations: in London (at Ghislaine Maxwell’s apartment), in New York, and on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands (in an ŏrgy with numerous other under-aged girls).
Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse.
Maxwell facilitated Prince Andrew’s acts of sexual abuse by acting as a “madame” for Epstein, thereby assisting in internationally trafficking Jane Doe #3 (and numerous other young girls) for sexual purposes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But but but... Women's magazine stuff.
posted on 4/1/24
Rejoining this convo after a while but surely what MU52 and Elvis are stating is that names on a list isn't enough to presume guilt immediately. I do expect that to come in a bit in the fallout though as people rush to defend themselves by implicating others. It's not an automatic thing that everyone who is on the list is a wrong-un (they may well be of course) although I suspect that those who haven't broken any laws themselves have probably kept things quiet that they shouldn't have.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - "When the facts are ... (U1282)
posted 4 seconds ago
comment by Eagle Fang (U9028)
posted 3 minutes ago
In the extract from the report pasted below, it is thought Jane Doe #3 refers to Virginia Guiffre. Haven't read through the thread so may already have been discussed. Hopefully a full criminal investigation will be conducted.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps even more important to her role in Epstein’s sexual abuse ring, Maxwell had direct connections to other powerful individuals with whom she could connect Epstein.
For instance, one such powerful individual Epstein forced Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with was a member of the British Royal Family, Prince Andrew (a/k/a Duke of York).
Jane Doe #3 was forced to have sexual relations with this Prince when she was a minor in three separate geographical locations: in London (at Ghislaine Maxwell’s apartment), in New York, and on Epstein’s private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands (in an ŏrgy with numerous other under-aged girls).
Epstein instructed Jane Doe #3 that she was to give the Prince whatever he demanded and required Jane Doe #3 to report back to him on the details of the sexual abuse.
Maxwell facilitated Prince Andrew’s acts of sexual abuse by acting as a “madame” for Epstein, thereby assisting in internationally trafficking Jane Doe #3 (and numerous other young girls) for sexual purposes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But but but... Women's magazine stuff.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Some folk prefer "Men's" magazines.
I think we call them something that rhymes with anchors.
posted on 4/1/24
There's been nothing new to the story really. I don't really truth that the authorities have the want or will to really punish people for their crimes, they're too influential.
When you look at Epstein unaliving himself, after he quite plainly said he wouldn't do so, whilst in a high security prison and all over national news, I think it's fair to say there are people who want to keep this under wraps.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 (U2462)
posted 7 minutes ago
Rejoining this convo after a while but surely what MU52 and Elvis are stating is that names on a list isn't enough to presume guilt immediately. I do expect that to come in a bit in the fallout though as people rush to defend themselves by implicating others. It's not an automatic thing that everyone who is on the list is a wrong-un (they may well be of course) although I suspect that those who haven't broken any laws themselves have probably kept things quiet that they shouldn't have.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If they just said that, then that would be fine. Everyone knows that not everyone will be guilty on the list.
Fact is that the list also includes people with accusations against them and they are taking exception at people talking about them. The last link from Elvis in particular plays into victim blaming and also paints Ghislaine Maxwell in a good light, despite the fact she has been found guilty of child sextrafficking. It isn't really a good look.
posted on 4/1/24
" It's not an automatic thing that everyone who is on the list is a wrong-un (they may well be of course) although I suspect that those who haven't broken any laws themselves have probably kept things quiet that they shouldn't have."
Epstein was a well respected trader and financial consultant, especially in the field of complex products and clients (like most of the names listed in these documents).
I am sure there were clients of his who were introduced for obvious reasons, but he also had to run a legitimate business operation, just like almost anybody trading illegal "products".
I think it's unfair to assume anybody who used Epsteins financial services is also a nonse. Apart from Trump, he's definitely guilty.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Diafol Coch 77 🏴 (U2462)
posted 15 minutes ago
Rejoining this convo after a while but surely what MU52 and Elvis are stating is that names on a list isn't enough to presume guilt immediately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why? Nobody said it does and nobody needed to because that's obvious, isn't it?
In any case, it would have been better if that's all 52 said, but that's not all he said, is it? He also called it gossip and made reference to the site turning into a women's magazine. What do you think he's implying there?
Page 6 of 24
7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11