Epstein Friends To Be Named On Jan 1st.

[ECCOnoob]

27 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

So its a big fuss about nothing .

I suspect the media will be very cautious about what they are going to publish - if anything.

 

Ultimately, all there seems to be at the moment is a list of names. That could mean everything or mean nothing.  

 

Whilst I am sure it will get the public tongues wagging with lots of ill-informed judgements being made to damage someone's reputation....  ultimately, what is the crime that can be proven?  Unless there is categoric evidence of sexual acts with minors... photographs, video footage, history of payments, physical injuries, DNA proof, testimony from the actual victims, clear witness statements...   a list of names is all they have. Names on a piece of paper. That's it.

 

In theory, the late Prince Philip could have been found to have sexual relations with an 18 year-old Greta Thunberg round the back of Windsor Castle...  Of course, a scandal which probably will have brought down the royals, but legally will have been perfectly acceptable. No crime committed. 

 

That is a basic fact in English law and most jurisdictions around the world where age of consent is between 16 to 18.    

 

Fact is, regardless of the public perception and personal distaste, many of these parties and groups and high profile get togethers filled with  significantly older men chatting up significantly younger women, could be perfectly legal acts.   

 

Let's face it, well outside the billionaire circles, affairs, extra marital relations, one night stands, rich men getting their ego strokes by young lasses getting a nice freebie or some jewellery or some trip away happens all the time.  You only have to hang around some of the more pretentious bars and restaurants to see it happening. The girls know what they're doing just as much as the lecherous blokes do.  

 

Most people might not want to accept it, fact is if someone is over 16 or 18 and they're fully there on a consensual basis without any coercion, it's no one else's business.

 

It may well be disgusting or it may well be that the older person should know better or should have better standings....  But ultimately, if it's all consensual and the women involved are there by their own volition, what can be done.

Edited January 2 by ECCOnoob

[hackey lad]

3 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

I suspect the media will be very cautious about what they are going to publish - if anything.

 

Ultimately, all there seems to be at the moment is a list of names. That could mean everything or mean nothing.  

 

Whilst I am sure it will get the public tongues wagging with lots of ill-informed judgements being made to damage someone's reputation....  ultimately, what is the crime that can be proven?  Unless there is categoric evidence of sexual acts with minors... photographs, video footage, history of payments, physical injuries, DNA proof, testimony from the actual victims, clear witness statements...   a list of names is all they have. Names on a piece of paper. That's it.

 

In theory, the late Prince Philip could have been found to have sexual relations with an 18 year-old Greta Thunberg round the back of Windsor Castle...  Of course, a scandal which probably will have brought down the royals, but legally will have been perfectly acceptable. No crime committed. 

 

That is a basic fact in English law and most jurisdictions around the world where age of consent is between 16 to 18.    

 

Fact is, regardless of the public perception and personal distaste, many of these parties and groups and high profile get togethers filled with  significantly older men chatting up significantly younger women, could be perfectly legal acts.   

 

Let's face it, well outside the billionaire circles, affairs, at scrimmage. Still relations, one night stands, rich mang getting their ego strokes by young lasses. Getting a nice freebie or some jewellery or some trip away happens all the time.  You don't have to hang around some of the more pretentious bars and restaurants to see happening. The girls know what they're doing just as much as the lectures blokes do.  

 

Most people might not want to accept it, fact is if someone is over 16 or 18 and they fully there on a consensual basis without any coercion, it's no one else's business.

You know what ,  

[Prettytom]

5 minutes ago, HumbleNarrator said:

You forget one small  detail...the man at the centre of it all was convicted for human sex trafficking. ..👎

Without wishing to defend Epstein in any way, that is simply untrue.

[cressida]

I agree Ghislaine Maxwell is a bad woman but why was she given a life sentence,  she hasn't killed anyone.?

[abbeyedges]

56 minutes ago, cressida said:

I agree Ghislaine Maxwell is a bad woman but why was she given a life sentence,  she hasn't killed anyone.?

It's strange that this is all about men abusing young girls and yet the only person (alive) that is in prison is a woman.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, abbeyedges said:

It's strange that this is all about men abusing young girls and yet the only person (alive) that is in prison is a woman.

Because she was a willing partner in crime.

[hackey lad]

13 minutes ago, Organgrinder said:

Because she was a willing partner in crime.

You missed the point. 

[Guest]

53 minutes ago, hackey lad said:

You missed the point. 

Get them to do something about all the male pervs then.

I'm afraid I can't.

[PRESLEY]

3 hours ago, cressida said:

I agree Ghislaine Maxwell is a bad woman but why was she given a life sentence,  she hasn't killed anyone.?

You don't have to kill anyone to get a prison sentence, being part of a Sex Trafficking organisation is enough.

[hackey lad]

12 minutes ago, PRESLEY said:

You don't have to kill anyone to get a prison sentence, being part of a Sex Trafficking organisation is enough.

Another one who missed the point.