Current Jeffrey Epstein - The fallout

Who killed Jeffrey Epstein?

  • He killed himself

    Votes: 15 12.7%
  • Rank incompetence enabled his suicide

    Votes: 17 14.4%
  • Bill Clinton

    Votes: 30 25.4%
  • Donald Trump

    Votes: 19 16.1%
  • The Russians

    Votes: 2 1.7%
  • The Saudis

    Votes: 3 2.5%
  • MI5/6 - British Royals

    Votes: 22 18.6%
  • Ghislane Maxwell

    Votes: 1 0.8%
  • Someone's Dad

    Votes: 9 7.6%

  • Total voters
    118

Remove this Banner Ad

If she takes a fall down the stairs, what's then in the way of Virginia Giuffre releasing the names?

It might be directly related to her case where identities of people she sex trafficked to have been suppressed as that wasn't directly relevant to her case, to whom didn't matter but that she did mattered etc - which would go some way to explaining why she is found guilty of sex trafficking minors to men but those men haven't been arrested for sex with minors.

So is she testifies to their identity, gets a very light sentence or gets to serve her time in home detention and the prosecution goes after the named individuals instead.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Aug 14, 2001
10,211
17,730
Melbourne
AFL Club
Western Bulldogs
Now that she isn't contesting the release of the names of eight men she arranged under aged liaisons with - I wonder if we get to hear who they are.
Well apparently a number or all of them are fighting to keep their names secret. Seriously hope so. It’s diabolical that this story has been front page news for so long and yet we know so little about who Epstein was working.
 

deanc

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 13, 2014
5,808
7,535
Waverley
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Tasmania
It might be directly related to her case where identities of people she sex trafficked to have been suppressed as that wasn't directly relevant to her case, to whom didn't matter but that she did mattered etc - which would go some way to explaining why she is found guilty of sex trafficking minors to men but those men haven't been arrested for sex with minors.

So is she testifies to their identity, gets a very light sentence or gets to serve her time in home detention and the prosecution goes after the named individuals instead.

Some reasonable points here.
Although US law has it's differences - I could be wrong, but I doubt any court/prosecutor/DA has the legal jurisdiction with any defendant found guilty of trafficking minors (Maxwell), to request the names of others involved in relation to negotiating sentencing..?

Even if Maxwell publicly revealed the identities of those she allegedly trafficked to/for (e.g. Clinton etc.) it's actually an entirely different legal case - which is not to say charges against those identities could/would then be pursued separately.

The media speculating otherwise with the; 'no longer objecting to protecting identities' headlines, I think you'll find is simply ignoring the legal relevance and what is permissible here?

I also suspect the main reason these identities have never been known, is that most of the 'alleged victims' had/have no idea who these men actually were/are - and they were paid and encouraged not to ask related questions at the time and were also likely conveniently drunk or drugged or both...
 
Last edited:
Some reasonable points here.
Although US law has it's differences - I could be wrong, but I doubt any court/prosecutor/DA has the legal jurisdiction with any defendant found guilty of trafficking minors (Maxwell), to request the names of others involved in relation to negotiating sentencing..?

Even if Maxwell publicly revealed the identities of those she allegedly trafficked to/for (e.g. Clinton etc.) it's actually an entirely different legal case - which is not to say charges against those identities could/would then be pursued separately.

The media speculating otherwise with the; 'no longer objecting to protecting identities' headlines, I think you'll find is simply ignoring the legal relevance and what is permissible here?

I also suspect the main reason these identities have never been known, is that most of the 'alleged victims' had/have no idea who these men actually were/are - and they were paid and encouraged not to ask related questions at the time and were also likely conveniently drunk or drugged or both...
Can't they offer all the way up to immunity for cooperation in other cases?

Obviously they won't go that far
 
Last edited:

jason_recliner

Club Legend
Dec 9, 2020
2,259
2,573
AFL Club
West Coast
Who was it earlier in this thread who naively thought Ex-Prince Andrew would be the only big name...

Would be some very worried people!

Edit jason_recliner - thoughts now?

Will be interesting to see who they are and if we've heard of them. I doubt that they will be 'big names', in the sense that they are more famous/powerful/weathy than those already implicated, but I'd be very happy to be proven wrong :)
 
Or blackmail purposes? Not for money - Epstein didn’t need that - but to keep Andrew quiet?
There is also that footage of Andrew peeking out of the door of Epstein mansion. Was there a possible tip off that he would be there?
The photo of Prince Andrew at the mansion was odd, I think Paul Keating's daughter was photographed nearby?
 

Bits

Team Captain
Oct 31, 2019
409
2,411
AFL Club
Adelaide
Yep. Keating’s daughter is the “mystery woman“ being waved at by Prince Andrew as she leaves Epstein’s mansion in video taken during the same period as the infamous walk in Central Park.


 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

jason_recliner

Club Legend
Dec 9, 2020
2,259
2,573
AFL Club
West Coast
Unfortunately I think Andrew's strategy is to use a 'contaminated' jury. The jury won't be able to give an unbiased verdict due to the extensive global media coverage over many years and the case will be dismissed.
 
$5million! Who is going to cover that costs, Prince Andrew will need his mum to help him out. I thought he would've been worth more considering he sold his property years ago

Anyway I am surprised he wants a jury trial

He's delusional, this is the guy who termed that trainwreck of an interview a 'great success'.
 
Unfortunately I think Andrew's strategy is to use a 'contaminated' jury. The jury won't be able to give an unbiased verdict due to the extensive global media coverage over many years and the case will be dismissed.

They can do judge only over there, I'm not sure who has final say though.
 
Just playing the game imo, I think he'll have to settle because if it goes to trial Ghislaine Maxwell might show up to testify against him. The risk to her life is no more or less, she really has nothing to lose.

Maxwell might be prepared to throw the Prince under a bus to show the rest of them how serious she is and they need to work to get her out of there.
 

deanc

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 13, 2014
5,808
7,535
Waverley
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Tasmania
Anyway I am surprised he wants a jury trial

Really, gee I must of missed a related report..?
From what I've read and understand PA and his legal counsel are arguing for a dismissal of trial proceedings based on legal jurisdiction as Ms. Guilfre does not reside in the US and failing that claim, accordingly this looks like heading towards a default determination - whereas in the absence of a defendant the court awards restitution (financial compensation) and often costs to the claimant, subject to appeal, which may or not be published - ala, similar to Ms. Giuffre's earlier related case and settlement with Mr. Epstein...
 
Last edited:

deanc

Norm Smith Medallist
Jun 13, 2014
5,808
7,535
Waverley
AFL Club
Hawthorn
Other Teams
Tasmania

Prince Andrew reaches 'settlement in principle' with Virginia Giuffre in civil sex case​

The Duke of York will also be making a "substantial donation" to Ms. Giuffre's charity in support of victims rights, while the exact sum of the settlement will remain confidential.

Early media 'speculation' suggest this is/will be around USD $15 Million. Although 'confidential' usually means this should never be public record.
Watch this space...
 
Last edited:

Hojuman

조수미 사랑해요
May 20, 2012
22,402
65,335
Seoul
AFL Club
North Melbourne

Prince Andrew reaches 'settlement in principle' with Virginia Giuffre in civil sex case​

The Duke of York will also be making a "substantial donation" to Ms. Giuffre's charity in support of victims rights, while the exact sum of the settlement will remain confidential.



" Aussie girl takes Prince Andrew to the cleaners " 👍
 

Prince Andrew reaches 'settlement in principle' with Virginia Giuffre in civil sex case​

The Duke of York will also be making a "substantial donation" to Ms. Giuffre's charity in support of victims rights, while the exact sum of the settlement will remain confidential.

Early media 'speculation' suggest this is/will be around USD $15 Million. Although 'confidential' usually means this should never be public record.
Watch this space...
If $15M... there was way more to it than an innocent photo as he has been claiming.
.
I was hoping it would go to court so the details came out... but I gather Prince Andrew just kept offering more compensation.
 
Back