The Worm Turns: Schadenfreude for Many

alanThe British press is agog with the story of British Prince Andrew  who has been accused by a woman of having sex with her when she was underage as shown by the stories here and here. Buckingham Palace has said the claims of the woman are untrue as you would expect.

It seems there is a rich guy in Florida named Jeffrey Epstein who has served 13 months of an 18-month sentence time for  soliciting paid sex with a minor to which he pleaded guilty. According to the Guardian ‘prosecutors said they had identified 40 young women who may have been illegally procured by Epstein. Dozens of his alleged victims are reported to have settled with Epstein out of court.’ He is now a registered sex offender.

Prince Andrew apparently has been a friend of Epstein who is being sued in civil court by some women who allege to have been violated by Epstein while under the age of consent. The initial suit is six years old and apparently would be dragged on forever because Epstein who is alleged to be a billionaire has the financial ability to do that. How Prince Andrew was dragged into the case was through a motion by the complainants seeking to add two other women as victims. It was one of these women who said she was kept as a sex slave by Epstein who accused the prince.

The motion reads that Epstein ran a: “sexual abuse ring”, loaning out underage women to “prominent American politicians, powerful business executives, foreign presidents, a well-known prime minister, and other world leaders”. 

It was not only the prince the woman accused. She also accused our own Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz. Now isn’t that something that the man who holds himself up as the moral arbiter and who has accused a vast number of good Massachusetts politicians and religious leaders of  being corrupt finds himself accused of having sex with an underage woman who alleges she was being pimped about by Epstein. Certainly none of the alleged corruption Alan accused others of being involved comes one-two to what he is accused of doing.

Alan, as  expected, professes his innocence saying the woman’s allegations are “a complete and total lie” adding “I was never anywhere near her, with her, under any circumstances.”  Dershowitz is taking it one step further. He says he is going to sue the woman for making the allegations against him.

Bring it on Alan, is what I got to say. But I  can’t help suppressing a smile when I think of how many public figures Alan has accused of corruption and seeing him get a little taste of the medicine he freely dispensed. If Alan sues to vindicate his name he knows he puts himself in jeopardy of having all his financial records scrutinized and his associations and travels brought to the light of day.

But what choice does he have if the woman just pulled his name out of the hat and falsely accused him. How can it be he must wonder that of all the billions of people in the world she came up with his name? How is it this woman who was a young underage sex toy even knew of his existence?

It appears Alan and Epstein have a close relationship. Back in 2003 Alan is reported to have said: “I’m on my 20th book…. The only person outside of my immediate family that I send drafts to is Jeffrey.”  Later in 2011 it was reported Alan said “as he was getting to know Epstein, his wife asked him if he would still be close to him if Epstein suddenly filed for bankruptcy. Dershowitz says he replied, ‘Absolutely. I would be as interested in him as a friend if we had hamburgers on the boardwalk in Coney Island and talked about his ideas.'”

Interesting enough, it is said in an article about one of Epstein’s girls, Virginia Roberts, pictured above, and Bill Clinton that Alan was Epstein’s lawyer in the case which Epstein ended up doing time on.

If Alan is wrongfully accused then he’ll understand how others feel when he cavalierly accused them of crimes they never committed; if Alan did do what is alleged then he has shown himself to be the king of hypocrites.

The latest from Alan is: “I’m planning to file disbarment charges against the two lawyers who signed this petition without even checking the manifests of airplanes or travel itineraries, et cetera. I’m also challenging the young woman and the lawyers to level those charges against me outside of the courtroom, so that I can sue them for defamation…..Finally, I’m challenging the woman to file criminal charges against me because the filing of false criminal charges is a crime.”

Epstein’s legal team is said to include “such heavyweights as former independent counsel and solicitor general Ken Starr, trial lawyer Roy Black, and Dershowitz.” Of these, only Alan has been accused. Who would ever have believe that Alan would be accused of being a dirty old man preying on minor women. This is certainly going to be one interesting case to follow.

.

6 thoughts on “The Worm Turns: Schadenfreude for Many

  1. Mat:

    The Tsarnaev trial begins. Will you be able to comment, regularly? Can you get a seat in, or, close, to the courtroom, and, observe the voi dere (sp) process? Who will be in court for the Feds?

    1. Khalid:

      I’m down South in the land of Dixie for the winter so Tsarnaev will go on without me. If I were up north I would not have covered it. It seems an open and shut case as to who did it (the video, the chase, the recovery in the boat, admissions) just like Whitey’s case. Most of the case will be listening to the poor souls hurt by the explosion who will be used to turn the jury totally against the defendant as to the issue of guilt. The second phase concerning the death penalty may be more interesting but that will involve much evidence attempting to mitigate the defendant’s evilness.

      However, were I there I think I’d have attended the Hernandez case where there will be real evidentiary questions and a court room battle. Hernandez’s attorneys will be trying to keep out all evidence of a joint enterprise to murder Hernandez as well as any showing he had the gun that killed the victim. If they are close to successful there then the judge will be required to direct a verdict of not guilty.

  2. Does not pass the smell test. Say what you want about Professor Alan Dershowitz, he does not exactly bristle with libidinous energy. So now Dershowitz, based on a professional/business/friend connection to a fellow Jew who managed a successful hedge fund is now tarred as a dirty old …. man. Dershowitz is all elbows and Billy Bulger in his brilliant Biblical Saul and Esau comparison and putdown of Dershowitz and was it Silverglate? … back in 151 State St. Days showed Dershowitz what a really sharp elbow back feels like. That’s the scrum of politics; that’s the hurly burly. If Dershowitz’s name is just being thrown into the mix because he is a friend of a prominent Jew, Epstein, who is a convicted ” dirty old man ” , then we are indeed the very King of Hypocrites to gleefully dog pile on before the legal facts are in and evidence adduced before we so liberally smear the feisty Professor. We paradoxically , though I prefer to say ironically, prove ourself to be the Professor’s aptest pupil, if indeed we maintain that his most popular Course is in how to slander people. These wily litigants have caught a Dershowitz by … the ” Tale . ” They had better prepare for the legal … Claws !!! 🙂

    1. John:

      If you used the smell test there would be a lot of people with Roman collars still giving sermons. A long time ago perhaps when I encountered my first used car salesman I realized you could not tell a book by its cover. I have no knowledge of why Dershowiz’s name is in the mix; as far a the Jewish angle I’d have to guess that is a non-starter: Prince Andrew wasn’t Jewish nor do I suppose Dershowit is the only Jewish friend of Epstein.

      The post is predicated on the idea that Dershowitz is falsely accused. That’s what makes it so delicious because Dershowitz can feel the stings of false accusations which he so cavalierly tossed out at other people not the least being Billy Bulger.

  3. Matt, Let’s face it, it’s irresistible. It is admittedly delicious. There is a problem of proportion or more accurately properly assessed portions, of responsibility and blame that enacts itself with false charges that are this scurrilous. The fact us that precisely because well founded and substantive charges of sexual abuse were abundantly proven against Catholic clergy there was opportunity for Catholics to smell the incense once again and not the corruption. Your qualification that you suppose the charges false as do I is noted, and speaks to your fairmindedness. False charges debase real charges of actual instances of criminal acts however and that’s the danger of throwing Dershowitz under the slander and scandal bus. Sexual impropriety in the House Of David !?!?!!!! … Our bushy Catholic Gentlemen’s brows waggle in bemusement and a confessed glee. Dershowitz is just not a good test case here however. He never stooped to slander that included false accusations of pedophilia that I am aware of. He is in a fine stewing outrage here, threatening lawsuits if the ogre defamation rears its head again. Yes, there is a … variety … of poetic justice to it. But if one wants to slay the dragon it requires a sword that cleaves to the truth. Happy 2015 !!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *