Jeffrey Epstein: A Generous Benefactor To Hide His Evil Ways – A Difficult Case

Harvard, a recipient of many gifts from Epstein, has been asked about them: “Former University President Derek C. Bok, then serving as Harvard’s interim president, stood by his longstanding assertion that the University should not “have an obligation to investigate each donor and impose detailed moral standards.” University spokespeople said in 2006 that Harvard had no plans to return any money it had received from Epstein.” I suppose it won’t have any problems taking money from Mohammed bin Salman the Saudi Arabian butcher.  

I assume when you have the type of money that Jeffrey Epstein had there are very many who bow and scrape looking for scraps from his table. Harvard has received a gift from the Jeffrey Epstein VI Foundation of 30 million dollars to study the evolution of molecular biology. It is said the Foundation gives out 200 million dollars in gifts every year to scientists. The Foundation “has helped fund NeuroTV, the largest online network devoted to academic interviews on everything neuroscience.”  Through his generosity and Foundation Epstein has done much good and built many contacts. He has been a member of the Trilateral Commission and Council on Foreign Relations.

Imagine with all that money and all those contacts the pressure Jeffrey Epstein is going to bring down on the prosecutors and the courts to let him walk free again. His case will truly be a measure of whether the justice system is for sale. Although perhaps I could be wrong because having read the indictment I had expected more so I cannot tell how strong the case against him is.

Here is a copy of his indictment. It has one count of sex trafficking conspiracy and one of sex trafficking. The allegations stem back to the 2002 to 2005  period. Hmmm? Seems strange. Are we to believe he did none of those things involving young girls since that time? Has no one been investigating him since. I had the feeling that the FBI would have been all over his case since he walked away back in 2008 – what happened that it wasn’t?

Which brings me to the concept in criminal law known as staleness. That means when getting a search warrant you have to establish probable cause to believe the stuff you are looking for is at the location at that time. If a reliable informant tells the FBI a guy had a kilo of cocaine in his house in November 2018 and there is no proof of anything more recent then there is no probability he still has it there. If Epstein’s last known acts involving sexually molesting the young girls was in 2005 where is there anything that would show that in 2019 he has evidence relating to those assaults presently in his house. How is it possible for the FBI to get search warrant for his house, in the photo shown above FBI agents are gaining entrance into it, for what happened 14 years ago?

The prosecutors have made a case to hold Epstein in jail pending trial. He’s filthy rich. He can escape the country very easily. He can buy off witnesses or if he wishes have them eliminated. He won’t want to stand trial, etc.

As much as I abhor Epstein for his destruction of the lives of so many young girls and thought the decision on bail would be an indication of how powerful men can twist the system for their own benefit I don’t think that is the case now. I am wondering how a judge or magistrate can hold a guy without bail who is accused of crimes dating back 14 or more years ago, who got a sweetheart deal for those crime back then because the U.S. Attorney in Florida thought so little of them that he dismissed them after indictment, and the guy went to jail in 2008 for activities related to them.

Let’s see how the case proceeds. Let’s see what his connections can do for him. Let’s wait before making judgment.

 

 

 

14 thoughts on “Jeffrey Epstein: A Generous Benefactor To Hide His Evil Ways – A Difficult Case

  1. Dershowitz was wearing Hillary’s underwear. The ones she used as a tax deduction. You know how cheap those academics are.

  2. Hello Abe, didn’t Dershowitz state several years ago that during his massages from Epstein’s teenage Asian Girls that he kept his underwater shorts on? Wouldn’t that modest act be considered as mitigating circumstances in his behalf?

    1. Circumstances? Circumcision? What’s the difference once that jailers door slams shut? KERCHUNG!!!!!

  3. I love to see those politically correct institutions under pressure to return millions in “dirty money.” In Tom Lehrer’s happy phrase, “like a Christian Scientist with appendicitis.” Of course, it’s fungible. Once it changes hands, it’s as clean as anybody’s.

  4. Matt: The indictment appears to be largely based on a series of stories in the Miami Herald. The reporter found a number of women who hadn’t spoken up previously. There’s also speculation that the madam who procured many of the girls for Epstein has flipped. That said, I share the reservations that you expressed. This case has a lot of moving parts!

    1. “This case has a lot of moving parts!”

      It sure does. Unfortunately one of those parts is an ATM with no bottom.

    2. Afterthought: The Washington Post and the New York Times have subjected Epstein to a new indignity by stripping him of billionaire status. The sex fiend is now viewed as a mere multi-millionaire.

      1. I noticed that, too. Much more of a sympathetic character if he only has multi-millions of dollars. Areal Oliver Twisted.

  5. The more things change etc….Back when I had hair, Maurice Gordon donated a large amount to B U School of Nursing and the students protested accepting the donation from a slum lord who was also suspected in the death of his mistress in a hotel fire. I worked midnights at BCH with nurses who went to BU where I spent my daytime getting an alleged education. They were evenly split on the issue understanding the source of the money and the use to which it would be put.
    In a personal note, Matt, had lunch yesterday with Brian Hanlon who is up visiting from Florida. He is well and send you his regards and best wishes.

  6. Well, I pipe in only to say these things.
    (1) How abhorrent the crimes are . . .a years-long ongoing enterprise by a billionaire to lure scores of young girls (eighty-plus girls by one reporter’s count) fourteen, fifteen and sixteen year-old girls (think freshman and sophomores in high school) into prostitution (sex for cash.) Alleged crimes, because I believe Jeffrey Epstein in his plea deal in Florida admitted to being a sex offender and admitted to certain related acts but was not required to admit to sex trafficking. (I’ll double check.)
    2. There is no Statute of Limitation for sex crimes against minors in 37 states, and none on the federal side.
    3. As for all the good charitable things Jeffrey Epstein has done in his life, remember this nostrum: Mussolini made the trains run on time; Hitler improved the economy. Sometimes deliberate acts of cruelty, abuse, bullying (especially to children) outweigh the good.

    Innocent until proven guilty . . . .Epstein has already admitted being a sexual predator.

    4. Senator Harris glibly calls President Trump a predator, forgetting innocent until proven guilty. Congresswoman AOC says anyone who criticizes her for anything is a racist, bigot, sexist, including Pelosi who criticizes her because she’s a woman of color.

    5. America’s system of justice operated by judges and lawyers, human beings, no better or worse than others, some good, some power abusers (too many), was put to the test in Florida and failed Jeffrey Epstein’s victims . . . .the obscenely lenient sentence he got was solely due to his cash . . . money talked, and the prosecutors cowered . . .

    6. We’ll see whether power continues to corrupt America’s system of justice.

  7. Some commentator claimed there was no Statute of Limitations on Federal sex crimes with minors. If so there were acts alleged in NY not just Florida. A rape was alleged recently. So nothing would preclude the Feds from acting today. The public is going to demand blood. What judge is going to give Epstein a break? It seems the defendant can’t risk trial and has to plead out to 12 years. A lost trial would be a life sentence. He has to flip on his socialite buddies. 2. Henry and Abe both seem to be right.

  8. I have made my judgement. I have friends that have known about Eppie for many years. And Dershowitz, too. Did you see Big Al’s denial of any knowledge about Eppie’s lifestyle on the news yesterday? If you know anything about tells when someone is lying, you could count a half dozen big ones while he was on camera. Ask Barnicle about Al’s love of “submissive, pliable “ Asian girls that he loved so much. That was from a conversation that took place 35 years ago. This is a pack of fucking rats and they should all be drowned. Our government fails us over and over again. Let us see if they can get it right this time.

  9. I think it’s fairly obvious that the arrest of Epstein hides the real agenda at the SDNY. The case is not being handled by the ‘sex crimes’ division but by Major Corruption. May we safely presume there is a Grand Jury behind the application for search warrants?

Comments are closed.