Nearly 200 names linked to Jeffrey Epstein expected to be made public
List could be released as soon as Tuesday after deadline for objections to unsealing of names passes midnight Monday
Nearly 200 names connected to the Jeffrey Epstein-Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking conspiracy could be released by a New York judge as soon as Tuesday, exposing or confirming the identities of dozens of associates of the disgraced financier that until now have only been known as John and Jane Does in court papers.
A deadline for objections to the unsealing of the names passes at midnight on Monday, nearly nine years after victim Virginia Giuffre filed a single defamation claim against Maxwell, daughter of the late British press baron Robert Maxwell, in 2015, that in turn produced the names in legal depositions.
A year later, in 2016, US district court judge Robert Sweet rejected Maxwell’s motion to dismiss the case, finding that “the veracity of a contextual world of facts more broad than the allegedly defamatory statements” and that Guiffre “was a victim of sustained underage sexual abuse between 1999 and 2002”. The parties settled out of court in 2017.
I want to see that list. I hope no names are redacted.
The odds of a celebrity suicide are higher today than normal
A star is falling, make a wish!
I wish more follow him!
Instead of redacting them, they should turn them into anagrams. :)
Clint Lil Nob
Abba Amok Car
Portland Mud
Clinton and Trump were reported to have some connections, then also was one from British royalty (don't care enough to know which one), also Gates, but was Obama his friend too?
Basically anyone with money or interested in Epstein's money.
"money"...
No, zero evidence on Obama. Proven in a court of law Trump is on there and it's widely known Bill Clinton is on there, this person is just adding a president.
I expected better of Mort Pudland
Lol, glad I sat a sec to solve.
Bill, Barack, Donald?
Didn't we already see the list in the form of the black book that was released years ago? I felt like it came out, and people were like "yep, that makes sense" and then nothing changed.
Law enforcement doesn't need the names to be public, literally the only thing this changes is that the public will know the names. Don't expect anything to happen.
from https://www.newsweek.com/jeffrey-epstein-list-full-dozens-names-revealed-1857103 :
::: spoiler spoiler
I’m sure that somehow some of the names will be left off the list “by accident”.
There's a very wealthy foundation that will stop that from happening. And there's a reason Melinda left Bill.
What reason?
"The billionaire has acknowledged that he "shouldn't have had dinners with him" while his ex-wife Melinda French Gates said the business and technology magnate's relationship with Epstein played a role in their divorce."
Do you have a better source than a nesweek article that is completely based on unproven tweets?
I just did a quick google search to try and find anything in the other persons claims but there is
NYTimes which I can’t access because of paywall
A BBC article of bill gates admitting he had meetings with Epstein
And that’s what I can find after looking for a couple minutes.
Bill gates has publicly spoken about his meetings with Epstein, that's well known and public knowledge at this point.
I believe what's being asked for is more concrete information on why Melinda left Bill Gates and if Epstein had anything to do with it.
I couldn’t find anything regarding that but I wasn’t exactly trying very hard into sprawling the internet for it so it could be out there if you put any more effort than a quick search
Might need to update your search skills/sources/settings, I literally searched "Melinda Gates Epstein" and this was the first result. Kinda feels wrong even calling it a "quick search" given how little effort it took... Hell, you coulda clicked through on the first Newsweek article you posted and found the interview.
Gift link for the NYT article if I did that right.
Thank you! I felt that only upvoting wasn't enough.
https://www.newsweek.com/bill-gates-ex-wife-melinda-relationship-jeffrey-epstein-hurt-marriage-1684812
Skip to 2:05:
https://youtu.be/iADjz5sYyCA
You might have tried the link in the article:
Thanks
Something something Panama Papers... 🤬🖕🏼
They led to over 150 cases of severe consequences in Germany. Beginning with very high tax "recalculations", company closures, heads rolling (firings in some of the affected companies or the end of some political careers, like Bert Meestadt or Nawaz Sharif's dismissal from office) to actual imprisonments. 71 Million Euros of "additional" Taxes have already been payed, Mossack is wanted by Europol, and many many more.
Many cases are still open - justice takes time.
To say nothing happend due to the Panama Papers is just blatantly misleading and utterly untrue.
That's cool, but it has zero impact on everyone that isn't in Germany.
... How myopic.
And hyperbolic. Cute.
That's a couple quiet drips into the pissbucket, and
No one even implied that "nothing" was done, FFS.
The entirety of the Panama Papers' consequences worldwide is so abysmally, shamefully miniscule by comparison to the crimes inherent that your "um akshually" comes off as pedantic AF.
You and your emoji implied nothing was done... You are someone. The emoji are not.
But 71 million euros extra taxes!
And your evidence to the size of these crimes is....?
Nawaz Sharif walking back into Pakistan after taking a 4 year vacation in Europe to escape imprisonment
Just a big ole nothing burger
the names will come out, people will make a big deal for a couple days, the authorities in charge will go "now now, you've got to understand", then people will move on to the next thing and the people in charge will go back to very publicly fucking children.
Amazingly, they all changed their names to [REDACTED].
There might be breadcrumbs in the redactions. Like
Not Donkey Doug! He's my boy! I don't think of him as my boy, I think of him as my boy! Yeah, but it's more like... "That's my son right there, son." But not, like, "son-son", but, like, "my boy". But not, like...
That Redacted guy sure is a bad dude!
Yes well to be fair he never recovered from his service in every war since WW2 across multiple theaters plus special ops stuff. I would like to see you be perfectly ethical after 9 million man-hours of combat stretched over 7 decades.
What's the point of redaction if everyone can so easily figure out it's Steve Rogers?
That guy is always up to things
That took a while… enough to have double/triple/quadruple checked and "removed" most high profile names with any modicum of power and/or financial backing 🤔
Well I reserve my judgment until the names are published. We already know some of the entourage from previous journalists and reports.
If most names published are of unknown, foreign or already passed away individuals it would be quite suspicious indeed.
Oh I hope those 200 people are very uncomfortable
Seeing as some of them are the victims, probably.
Out of curiosity, what exactly does being on this list mean?
It will look bad on people who try to look ethical, but it will have no effect on those who don't. So the Clinton's would take a hit if Bill was on there, but Trump wouldn't be affected.
The right wing easily draws in one-issue voters since their primary issues are usually about taking away something from someone else, and so they don't require many resources and generally are accomplished more easily using unethical means than ethical ones. "It's just business," and all that.
Leftists tend to be more about building something rather than tearing it down. That's both more work and requires a lot of shared resources. So ethical practices are required to keep those resources from getting misused.
You mean Mr. Blowjob-in-the-Oval-Office?
Is getting a blowjob in the oval office unethical?
Like I know he cheated on his wife, which is unethical. But you chose to bring up the act of receiving the sloppiest top in that specific room as the damning factor and not the actual adultery which is a weird take.
You mean Mr. Cheat-on-my-Pregnant-Wife-With-an-Immigrant?
In reality? Nothing, if there’s no further evidence of the individual’s participation in Epstein’s activities. Because of the shitload of people who encountered Epstein in various social settings without participating in his illegal activities (not saying they didn’t have knowledge of his activities which I assume was an open secret among the wealthy) it will be likely be impossible to pin individuals to crimes sufficient to result in a conviction in court. Plus, being rich and powerful is a disincentive for prosecutors to pursue crimes because of all the usual reasons.
So yeah. Nothing will happen to these people.
I imagine most people thought "Epstein sure likes those barely-legal, young-looking girls!" Some surely knew he was raping minors, but I bet it was a tiny minority. Even if they personally had no problem with pedophiles (unlikely), they must have known how dangerous it would be to be associated with them.
For Epstein, it was probably a big risk every time he revealed that the girls were actually underage. The person he revealed it to might try to blackmail him. So, I bet he was very selective about who he let know that the girls were minors. Sure, he was seen with young-looking girls, but they were probably plausibly old enough that people could assume they were just barely 18. He probably used them to see who was especially interested, and those people were the ones who he revealed the truth to.
Or they let themselves get close to Epstein thinking they everything was barely legal, then Epstein got blackmail material on them from an awkward foot massage. I would pay more attention to the repeats on his flight logs then his address book.
We don't actually know.
I can't rule out "nothing" completely, with the knowledge I have. It's absolutely something we should see, though. It will sketch out the whole picture in a way that allows people to exonerate themselves or be further implicated. If it's specific enough for people to have alibis, then that's interesting, and if it's full of plausible allegations, then they could become more damning. Consider that the details of what people are "accused" is likely to vary - are they accused of being on a plane with other witnesses? Who is accused of having extensive opportunities to have committed abuses during their stay on the island? What was the pretense for their involvement with Epstein and Maxwell? It puts people in a position to explain what they did or did not know about Jeffrey Epstein at the time, and for those claims to be cross-checked, where possible. Close contacts of the accused may be prompted to add additional information from their recollections or records, if they learn that they had been lied to. Another possibility is that the allegations are frustratingly vague and don't actually create a clear picture of any criminal behavior.
What knowledge do you have?
That they were requested to testify or give testimony about their experiences related to Gislanes activity on Epsteins island.
They're asked to testify because of other people's testimony, flight logs, pictures, etc. that place them on the island at some point.
What they were doing there is debatable, but there are implications; at best they were hanging with a shady dude.
That you are into underage sex?
That's not what it means.
You demonstrate exactly why it's such a mistake to release this, as most people don't understand that being on this list doesn't even necessarily mean there is any suspicion around you at all. It's just a list of every name that came up in trial, this can include victims even, but a lot of it might be a person was just included on an email or something else completely innocuous.
Why now?
They are from 2015 and...
Quote taken from here
To distract from alien disclosure. /s
Aliens? Are you telling me you think space is real??
The fact that any names are redacted at all is proof that the only real solution is the guillotine.
Let's rob the guillotine in the Museum of the Prefecture of Paris, and place it back on the street.
I personally recommend Epstine's old street as a warning or a promise.
This is going to be interesting for the news cycle! Trump obviously, but who else? So Bill Clinon, Bill Gates, who else!
More importantly, where did they touch and how long did they touch for?
Miley Cyrus, the entire democrat party ever, most holliwood
Come on man, if you're gonna gaslight at least spell "Hollywood" right. "the entire democratic party ever"? You can do better than that. I know English isn't your first language but you could at least plug it into grammarly or something.
smh this troll can't even troll correctly. I guess enshitification applies to bait accounts too
Not trolling though, the list was published, and Biden, Al Gore, Obama etc were on the island. Most hollywood as well. Trump was no surprise, we all knew he was friends with the guy. But the virtue signaling democrats are a fun sight there
And yeah, English ain't my first language, at least I know more than 1 :) Not gonna use grammarly when typing fast from the phone, sorry.
Typing fast on the mobile, no
Moi aussi.
I was not aware that Biden, Al Gore, and Obama were "the entire democratic party ever"? Strange how that list of under 200 names somehow includes all 250+ federal democratic congressman and presidents AND most of Hollywood?? Wow my apologies, I clearly hadn't realized that over half of the 10s of thousands of people who work in the movie industry were also on that list of under 200!
Good catch on that one!
Perhaps you should try actually engaging in discussion instead of just mouthing off complete nonsense and hoping no one calls your bluff?
Twat^
I didn't know Russian troll farms have made it to Lemmy...
Been here since day 1 mon ami.
Extra effective here, too, since there is less established rules, established mods, and corporate structure to fight.
Pero que ruso ni que pollas, panoli, a ver si aprendemos que al resto del mundo vuestros democratas y vuestros republicanos nos parecen igual de mierdas.
Miley was a minor herself while most of Epstein's "business" was going on. Jesus Christ, find a better target besides right wing hate person of the week.
No idea about it (meaning how old she was when she visited) but she was on the list as visitor to the island
Probably most ceos.
Yeah, a couple of the were in it as well
ARREST EVERYONE
Why is Williem Dafoe's face on Gary Olman?
[REDACTED]
I'm getting big "the reddit safe" vibes with this one. Going to be waiting a long ass time to see absolutely nothing.
The what safe? No idea what you're talking about
Some redditor found an old safe (in his basement?) and everyone was excited to see what was inside but it turned out to be basically nothing
Glad the names are being released.
Perfect time for the media to release a bombshell news about aliens to divert attention
this is the sanitized list. all the child rapists who matter will continue to rape children with impunity.
Is this really a good idea? Aren't dozens and dozens of Epstein's victims now going to be doxxed?
They are marked out on the documents.
Not all that well tho, seems they just did the ol "black bar over image" thing idiots keep doing with PDFs where you can actually remove the black bars and see what's underneath.
But a lot of names are only first names or initials, so it's probably not going to be as helpful or exposing as one would like them to be.
The Orange One and JFK Jrs names are in there in full tho.
Here's the flightlogs.
How do you mean?
Well, the lead paragraph says:
'dozens' is not the same as 200. Therefore, I'd have to assume that some of those names, that are just described as 'connected' to Epstein could very well be his victims. I could well be wrong, it just seems a bit concerning that no one's considered how the actual victims feel about this.
200 is 16⅔ dozens.
Oh. I see your concern. A bit of a leap, since dozens doesn't really have an upper limit, and it could be including the already confirmed names released, and it wouldn't make much sense for him to write down the names of his victims, much less their current addresses
And there are lots of groups concerned and acting on part of Epstein's victims, so they aren't so forgotten or defenseless as you might be worried about.
I'd also rather the police released the name of a hypothetical victim to catch a rapist than to leave the rapist at a large out of concern, endangering catalyst others, for a modicum of privacy for one victim.
As I understand it, these aren't just names he'd (or Maxwell) wrote down or otherwise recorded, these are names linked to him through various sources. Some of his victims might not even know they're on that list (if they even are). Not all victims voluntarily come forward and suddenly being named like this might be a massive shock. Just because you're OK with a victim being named, doesn't mean they are. They've already gone through at least one violation.
I'm all for catching rapists and abusers, but there must be ways of handling this that don't involve just info dumping loads of names to the general public. At the very least, shouldn't they be released to some sort of authority that can investigate and sift out potential victims before they're plastered everywhere?
You're piling fear-based assumption on top of assumption.
Your point is that if something bad you're imagining happens, bad things might happen?
What a deduction. Good thing you spread that out over several paragraphs.
No, I don't think we should further procrastinate pursuing an alreadt delayed critically important investigation out of respect for hypothetical, indirect risks.
From the article you clearly haven't read;
I realise that, to you, it's much more important to gloat over the names of people you don't like you hope are on there. My perspective is that, if there are indeed names of victims amongst these 200 names as seems at the very least a distinct possibility, in order to prevent them being re-victimised , it might be better to take the time to do everything that can be done to stop that happening because, I assure you, to a rape or abuse victim, the risks are neither hypothetical or indirect.
Pull as many false claims from the air as you want, equating the hypothetical disclosure of names with actual rape is wildly irresponsible equivocation and is not a good reason to protect rapists.
Which is all you're advocating for.
Yeah, just me and a well respected national newspaper.
Who on earth is talking about protecting rapists? The other names are still going to be on there so you can have your little moment of glee seeing all those people you hate named and shamed.
You're not interested in the rights of victims whatsoever - you're one of those people who loves to air their righteous indignation as publicly as possible, never giving a thought to the fact there's actual people, actual victims who this man and his friends raped and abused and just possibly it might be an idea, to prevent them having to relive that trauma, to ensure that their names don't become fodder to every internet mob and tabloid editor in the world.
Wow, you projecting that hard is going to burn-in your screen, be careful.