Jeffrey Epstein arrested on sex trafficking charges

JMMCapital

First i heard of David Icke was watching a doc on vice last night, the guy sounds like an absolute nutter. I'm not big into conspiracies anymore used to be crazy into them back in my teen years.

4068ac1elhodqr

Woodsie1 wrote: »

MaybeMebbe;) Tom can give us a definitive answer

Yhess, Mebbe he wills, mebbbee he won'ts.

Ah No worries, here it is from the urban slang dictionary thing:
Slang term for maybe, used predominantly in the north of England.

Good day to you good man from the Northern Shires, tip 'o the hat and all of that, a pint of the finest mead then it's a tally ho old boy.

TomOnBoard

Nolan Savory Warden wrote: »

Woodsie1 wrote: »

Ive never heard maybe said that way,reading the post in my head sounds unnatural.
Is it said fast or slow?

It sure is weird, and to have been used twice. Maybe it's Zulu or something for the actual proper word: 'maybe'.

So, I posit that you might be David Icke, and your response focuses on my usage of a diminutive 'mebbe'... distraction or what? ??

Lizard men rule... especially with global warming...

4068ac1elhodqr

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Lizard men rule... especially with global warming...

Ok....Whatever floats your boat.
It's warm enough this week, suppose.

Woodsie1

TomOnBoard wrote: »

So, I posit that you might be David Icke, and your response focuses on my usage of a diminutive 'mebbe'... distraction or what? ??

Lizard men rule... especially with global warming...

Oh so its a backhanded insult?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Unless he did it every couple of days over a period of time, I see Epstein's signing a new will 2 days b4 he died as additional proof that he intended to shuffle off his mortal coil (s).

So he suicided. Either he did it entirely on his own or he paid someone to help him. Either way, he intended to die, and any help came from persons paid by him and not from some extraneous power, such as Clintons, Trumps, Illuminati, The Family or whatever. ..

Just let's puts that BS to bed and move on with prosecuting his partners in crime...

Nobody here has mentioned the illumanti, the family and only one or two persons mentioned Clinton. If he was killed, which is fairly likely, it was whatever organisation was funding him these years and was helping the blackmail.

That’s far more interesting than the actual perps.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Tony EH wrote: »

It's not MY evidence. It's THE evidence. At least the evidence that been produced so far.

There has been nothing put forward that can used as a solid case against Prince Andrew yet.

It has been photographs and hearsay, all of which amount to nothing really.

The only thing that has come into play is the allegation by an, as yet, unidentified woman in America. But, still, that remains just an allegation. An allegation that's still being investigated.

What’s the point of this hand waving? Again, this is not a court of law. We know he’s not legally guilty. However he might be guilty of something and it’s highly unlikely that friends of Epstein didn’t know his prolectivity.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

TomOnBoard wrote: »

So, I posit that you might be David Icke, and your response focuses on my usage of a diminutive 'mebbe'... distraction or what? ??

Lizard men rule... especially with global warming...

This is a good example of how the arguments about obvious conspiracies can be well-poisoned, generally by the dullest of minds. When the allegations about the Catholic Church came out, no doubt somebody mentioned lizards or something.

Tony EH

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

What’s the point of this hand waving? Again, this is not a court of law. We know he’s not legally guilty. However he might be guilty of something and it’s highly unlikely that friends of Epstein didn’t know his prolectivity.

Nothing to do with "hand waving".

There's far too much bollocks talk going on though. There always is with stuff like this in the news.

Fact of the matter is that nobody knows fuck all at the moment and there are no smoking guns to be found. Speculation, the odd photo, allegations and what not are just a load of hot air, until something solid can be made of it.

James Brown

Tony EH wrote: »

Nothing to do with "hand waving".

There's far too much bollocks talk going on though. There always is with stuff like this in the news.

Fact of the matter is that nobody knows fuck all at the moment and there are no smoking guns to be found. Speculation, the odd photo, allegations and what not are just a load of hot air, until something solid can be made of it.

But are you okay if we discuss it on say a discussion forum?

MadYaker

tuxy wrote: »

Yup strong extradition treaty between the US and UK so no issue having him sent to face the music in the U.S if it comes to it......
I assume him being a royal wouldn't have any impact on the law.

Really? I think you're being a bit naive there. The Royal family despite not being directly involved in government are still hugely influential, rich and powerful with connections all over the world. You can be sure they all have diplomatic passports.

Tony EH

Matt Barrett wrote: »

But are you okay if we discuss it on say a discussion forum?

Oh, go on so. :P

But only if your good.

ohnonotgmail

tuxy wrote: »

Yup strong extradition treaty between the US and UK so no issue having him sent to face the music in the U.S if it comes to it......
I assume him being a royal wouldn't have any impact on the law.

absent video evidence of andrew raping an underage girl there is not a hope in hell of them extraditing him. and even if such evidence did exist i'm still not sure they would.

Cheerful Spring2

The former cellmate of Jeffrey Epstein has claimed prison guards have been threatening him to make him 'shut up' about speaking out over the circumstances surrounding the millionaire's suicide, according to a new legal filing.

Ex cop-turned-felon Nicholas Tartaglione, 51, is now requesting to be transferred from the Metropolitan Correctional Center after allegedly being told to ‘shut up’ and ‘stop talking’ about how Epstein was able to commit suicide in federal custody.

Tartaglione briefly shared a cell with Epstein inside the detention center, during which time the accused sex trafficker allegedly attempted suicide for the first time

The clear message Mr. Tartaglione has received is that if he conveys information about the facility or about [Epstein’s] recent suicide, there will be a price to pay,’ Tartaglione’s attorney Bruce Barket said in a letter to White Plains federal Judge Kenneth Karas.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7377001/Man-shared-cell-Epstein-requests-different-jail-guards-threatened-him.html

Let him talk, spill the beans. Why would they want him to keep quiet?

tuxy

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Let him talk, spill the beans. Why would they want him to keep quiet?

I don't understand why the officials of the detention centre wouldn't want the world to know how incompetent they are.

Cheerful Spring2

tuxy wrote: »

I don't understand why the officials of the detention centre wouldn't want the world to know how incompetent they are.

I don't believe for a second, Epstein committed suicide. A bed sheet around the neck would only stop his oxygen supply. It doubtful the force will be strong enough to break the bones around the neck. Robin Williams died in similar way, he used a belt tied around a doorknob and he was found in a crouched position. They found no broken bones in his neck.

Not one but two guards falling asleep allegedly. Taken off suicide watch. No camera footage. Records changed. Of course you will have people claiming your a conspiracy theorist for highlighting his death suspicious.

tuxy

Maybe Mark Epstein will use some of his money to launch an investigation!

Cheerful Spring2

tuxy wrote: »

Maybe Mark Epstein will use some of his money to launch an investigation!

The establishment is covering up his death. They got the muscle and influence to stop any new Epstein investigation. Epstein got too much dirt and they were afraid it come out. Now they can hide any revelations Epstein might have given to the FBI.

Business leaders, presidents, government officials, scientists all knew Epstein. How they all know him? Have you see anyone from CNN touch it and investigate? There you evidence nothing will be done. I have seen this before.

There a sordid dark hidden world they want kept secret from the public. Epstein knew people who were involved in illegal drug smuggling, also knew arm dealers. Epstein probably is asset of US intelligence, or another foreign intelligence service. Nobody has a clue how he earned his money for decades. Will that be looked at, i doubt it. Cover ups are part of human history.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Tony EH wrote: »

Nothing to do with "hand waving".

There's far too much bollocks talk going on though. There always is with stuff like this in the news.

Fact of the matter is that nobody knows fuck all at the moment and there are no smoking guns to be found. Speculation, the odd photo, allegations and what not are just a load of hot air, until something solid can be made of it.

Look. The guy is a convicted pedo. He was given a light sentence because of his contacts. Obviously there’s going to be speculation. And welcome to this discussion board.

Tony EH

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Look. The guy is a convicted pedo. He was given a light sentence because of his contacts. Obviously there’s going to be speculation. And welcome to this discussion board.

For the umpteenth time, I'm not talking about Epstein. :rolleyes:

Cheerful Spring2

Tony EH wrote: »

For the umpteenth time, I'm not talking about Epstein. :rolleyes:

Prince Andrew? I think it is as you make posts about him?

Tony EH

Cheerful Spring2 wrote: »

Prince Andrew? I think it is as you make posts about him?

Bingo. Give yourself a biscuit.

Honestly, you'd wonder sometimes if people are actually reading the thread or just looking for a post to reply to.

RebelButtMunch

Tony EH wrote: »

Bingo. Give yourself a biscuit.

Honestly, you'd wonder sometimes if people are actually reading the thread or just looking for a post to reply to.

Source?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Tony EH wrote: »

For the umpteenth time, I'm not talking about Epstein. :rolleyes:

There’s going to be general speculation about his friends and colleagues who were on his island or in his house(s) where this activity took place.

BorneTobyWilde

For a guy '' not involved'' he sure does end up around a lot of girls who are young enough to be his daughter.
He's already coming up with excuses as to why he'll never return to the USA,
He knows dam well he'll be arrested on the spot.



He's on that yacht with Epstein surrounded by young girls, yet he claims '' I know nothing''
He needs exposing. Sad that these guys who shut Epstein up will get away scott free.

tuxy

Maybe Kubrick was on to something......

TomOnBoard

tuxy wrote: »

Maybe Kubrick was on to something......

??

TomOnBoard

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

For a guy '' not involved'' he sure does end up around a lot of girls who are young enough to be his daughter.
He's already coming up with excuses as to why he'll never return to the USA,
He knows dam well he'll be arrested on the spot.



He's on that yacht with Epstein surrounded by young girls, yet he claims '' I know nothing''
He needs exposing. Sad that these guys who shut Epstein up will get away scott free.

Frankly, while I certainly see photos of women who could be classified as 'young enough to be his daughter', which is basically anyone aged 40+ or below, I'm not seeing any 'smoking gun' of an obvious illegal or even immoral linkage with any one of the ladies photographed. .

TomOnBoard

Furthermore, there isn't one of those beautiful ladies photographed one on one with Andrew who will ever see 18 again as at the date they were photographed. Indeed, there are some beautiful 30+ year bold in there.

I don't know why people will infect a serious thread about a disgusting paedophile (Epstein) with blatant deflections that are simply ludicrous and soo easily disproved

BorneTobyWilde

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Furthermore, there isn't one of those beautiful ladies photographed one on one with Andrew who will ever see 18 again as at the date they were photographed. Indeed, there are some beautiful 30+ year bold in there.

I don't know why people will infect a serious thread about a disgusting paedophile (Epstein) with blatant deflections that are simply ludicrous and soo easily disproved

Shows a pattern. What other Royal is going to Hooker and Pimps parties, or hanging out on yachts with young girls, even if they are barely over18, he's a old man FFS.

In that distance yacht photo he's on Epsteins boat, with a topless girl that looks 15-19 with Epstein also in pic.
Andrew is in it neck deep, and he knows it. Will never set foot in states again. Plus Virgina Roberts said it herself that she was passed around to Andrew 3 times for sex. I'm sure the police would like a word with him, plus that vid of him at his home while teen girls came and went. He's a player for sure.

Atlantic Dawn

Oirish media taking no risks such is the power so to speak.

4068ac1elhodqr

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I don't know why people will infect a serious thread about a disgusting paedophile (Epstein) with blatant deflections that are simply ludicrous and soo easily disproved

You would appear to be soley trying to deflect any attention (from Air-miles Andy), and his close involvement with a sick convicted P (JE).
Perhaps start with the national and international press (too late), who had Andy plastered across front pages for the last week or so along with many questions.

Maybe it's because you (as a likely Northern English lad)? judging by your slang previously, won't have a bad word said about this loaf, as some sort of duty? Maybe he's your (strange) hero.

Sure nothings proven (and difficult to ever do so). But the media are already wild with speculation. It's soooo natural indeed, just to ask questions as to his (Andy) close association with this convict, even after he was charged years before. Imagine remaining friends with a convict of that genre.

It's also natural to assume these type of criminals have some sort of 'inner circle' to operate within. It's hard to deny that Andy is somewhat within his inner circle (of friends).
...The only question remains (that's near impossible to answer) is... exactly what type of circle of friends? And that, we'll never know for sure/.

q85dw7osi4lebg

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Furthermore, there isn't one of those beautiful ladies photographed one on one with Andrew who will ever see 18 again as at the date they were photographed. Indeed, there are some beautiful 30+ year bold in there.

I don't know why people will infect a serious thread about a disgusting paedophile (Epstein) with blatant deflections that are simply ludicrous and soo easily disproved

Is that you Andrew

MadYaker

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Furthermore, there isn't one of those beautiful ladies photographed one on one with Andrew who will ever see 18 again as at the date they were photographed. Indeed, there are some beautiful 30+ year bold in there.

I don't know why people will infect a serious thread about a disgusting paedophile (Epstein) with blatant deflections that are simply ludicrous and soo easily disproved

So you think it’s all perfectly acceptable and prince Andrew has absolutely no questions to answer whatsoever?

Franz Von Peppercorn II

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Furthermore, there isn't one of those beautiful ladies photographed one on one with Andrew who will ever see 18 again as at the date they were photographed. Indeed, there are some beautiful 30+ year bold in there.

I don't know why people will infect a serious thread about a disgusting paedophile (Epstein) with blatant deflections that are simply ludicrous and soo easily disproved

These are visible photos who show Andrew with younger women, not necessarily underage. They prove the connection to Epstein. Andrew remained friends with Epstein after the 2008 conviction, now claiming to not know anything.

TomOnBoard

MadYaker wrote: »

So you think it’s all perfectly acceptable and prince Andrew has absolutely no questions to answer whatsoever?

I think Andrew probably has lots of questions to answer and I hope he will be made to answer them.

As to whether it is perfectly acceptable or otherwise that he hangs around with younger women, he joins millions of older/old men of wealth and power who do so in the fleshpots of the world. Go anywhere that rich and powerful men congregate on their yachts and in their clubs, and there'll be older men cosying up to younger women. The point is, unless they are doing it with under-age girls, or they are forcing their attentions in some way on the women, it is legal. Whether it is all perfectlty acceptable as you ask, is defined I assume by one's morals. What is perfectly acceptable to one person is totally wrong to another.

When someone posts a series of photos here and portrays them as some kind of 'proof' that Andrew is guilty of a crime, those photos better stand up. And the ones that were posted did not. Rather than portraying Andrew being involved in a crime, they portrayed him being together with women who looked to be well into their 30's. They could have come from Hello magazine.

This thread was about Epstein's long-proven criminality and then became more about his suicide. It deflects from Epstein' crimes to post up meaningless photos that prove nothing about Andrew or anyone else. That is what I was responding to.

And your attempt to put words that I never said into my mouth says much more about you and your thoughts than it does about mine. That's the kind of ould 'hide behind the keyboard' foolishness that comes from too much time 'interacting' on Reddit and 4-chan, and is beneath what counts for discussion on here.

James Brown

Prince Andrew statement the other day:

He said it was a "mistake" to meet Epstein after he left prison in 2010.

"During the time I knew him, I saw him infrequently and probably no more than only once or twice a year," the 59-year-old prince said.

"I have stayed in a number of his residences. At no stage during the limited time I spent with him did I see, witness or suspect any behaviour of the sort that subsequently led to his arrest and conviction."

The duke - who said he first met Epstein in 1999 - added that he had "tremendous sympathy" for all those affected by Epstein's behaviour.

Sounds like he's threading water to me. Trump said of Epstein, "He likes them Young'. And Trump wasn't as tight with him as Andrew. I do not believe Andrew knew him as long as he did and stayed in his residences and never took part in or saw children at parties. Also Andrew has had his own rumours in that regard for many years. With Epstein, we are not talking 'younger women' we are talking about children.

ohnonotgmail

TomOnBoard wrote: »

I think Andrew probably has lots of questions to answer and I hope he will be made to answer them.

As to whether it is perfectly acceptable or otherwise that he hangs around with younger women, he joins millions of older/old men of wealth and power who do so in the fleshpots of the world. Go anywhere that rich and powerful men congregate on their yachts and in their clubs, and there'll be older men cosying up to younger women. There point is, unless they are doing it with under-age girls, or they are forcing their attentions in some way on the women, it is legal. Whether it is all perfectlty acceptable as you ask, is defined I assume by one's morals. What is perfectly acceptable to one person is totally wrong to another.

When someone posts a series of photos here and portrays them as some kind of 'proof' that Andrew is guilty of a crime, those photos better stand up. And the ones that were posted did not. Rather than portraying Andrew being involved in a crime, they portrayed him being together with women who looked to be well into their 30's. They could have come from Hello magazine.

This thread was about Epstein's long-proven criminality and then became more about his suicide. It deflects from Epstein' crimes to post up meaningless photos that prove nothing about Andrew or anyone else. That is what I was responding to.

And your attempt to put words that I never said into my mouth says much more about you and your thoughts than it does about mine. That's the kind of ould 'hide behind the keyboard' foolishness that comes from too much time 'interacting' on Reddit and 4-chan, and is beneath what counts for discussion on here.

Made to answer questions about what? Have there been any allegations made against him personally?

4068ac1elhodqr

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

Made to answer questions about what? Have there been any allegations made against him personally?

Now JE is gone, it's likely his inner circle will be asked questions. The palace even said they would co-operate with authorities.

The DailyMail https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7393521/Prince-Andrew-willing-talk-FBI-requested-Palace-sources-say.html (their comments section usually reflect well, the view of the general populous).
still have plenty of questions, especially surrounding his latest statement, which they have examined and raises even more questions:

skimpydoo

TomOnBoard wrote: »

??

The movie Eyes Wide Shut.

TomOnBoard

skimpydoo wrote: »

The movie Eyes Wide Shut.

Ah, OK! Gotcha!


Eyes Wide Shut carry-on goes on all the time IMO in so-called High- Society!

However, my recollection of the movie was that of multiple beautiful women (not children) being passed around by men of power and riches in an almost occult-inspired environment. If so, once again I must say, it's largely irrelevant to Epstein's crimes ( as well as such crimes as anyone in his orbit engaged in, whether that be daughter of a famous publisher, or son of a Queen!).

TomOnBoard

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

These are visible photos who show Andrew with younger women, not necessarily underage. They prove the connection to Epstein. Andrew remained friends with Epstein after the 2008 conviction, now claiming to not know anything.

Andrew's connection to Epstein has been long documented. It didn't need a Hello photo spread to do so. The OP placed these photos as some kind of 'proof' of Andrew's involvement in Epstein's paedophilia. Frankly, all they proved is that young women up to their 30s will hang out of a saggy Prince in this 21st Century, just like they hung out of other decrepit Princes back into The Middle Ages!

Treppen

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Andrew's connection to Epstein has been long documented. It didn't need a Hello photo spread to do so. The OP placed these photos as some kind of 'proof' of Andrew's involvement in Epstein's paedophilia. Frankly, all they proved is that young women up to their 30s will hang out of a saggy Prince in this 21st Century, just like they hung out of other decrepit Princes back into The Middle Ages!

Young women up to their 30s ???
Where does your scale start?
Woody Allen adopted his partner ...

Anyway the question remains, why would anyone want to associate with Jeffrey? Particularly after his conviction of procuring 'a' prostitute who happened to be a minor.

But he's the scapegoat, so nothing else to see here then I suppose.

TomOnBoard

Treppen wrote: »

Young women up to their 30s ???
Where does your scale start?
Woody Allen adopted his partner ...

Anyway the question remains, why would anyone want to associate with Jeffrey? Particularly after his conviction of procuring 'a' prostitute who happened to be a minor.

But he's the scapegoat, so nothing else to see here then I suppose.

It's actually quite simple... The scale starts at Legality! Anything outside that ought to be crushingly dealt with in accordance with the Law! Does that answer your question?

TomOnBoard

And in the meantime, while all this discussion continues in respect of Andrew Windsor, charges have now been dropped against Epstein himself. Therefore, the Prosecution's case for forfeiture of Epstein's New York property has now fallen foul of his suicide, and, unless civil proceedings are successfully taken, Epstein wins that one (albeit posthumously). That's a $77 million property his estate gets to keep on foot of his death!

Cheerful Spring2

Truth coming out bit by bit.

At least one camera stationed in the hallway outside billionaire financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s prison cell, where officials say he hung himself earlier this month, had footage that was deemed unusable, The Washington Post reports.

What caused the camera to malfunction, suffer a glitch, and not be useable?

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/458922-video-from-camera-outside-epstein-jail-cell-unusable-report

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/jeffrey-epstein-death-suicide-cctv-video-footage-fbi-child-sex-trafficking-a9080111.html

Treppen

TomOnBoard wrote: »

It's actually quite simple... The scale starts at Legality! Anything outside that ought to be crushingly dealt with in accordance with the Law! Does that answer your question?

No it doesn't.

What age was the 'prostitute' which he was charged for...if you say the scale starts at legality. You mentioned women 'up to 30'

Anything outside that ought to be crushingly dealt with in accordance with the Law!

I agree. Do you agree the case he was convicted for was crushingly dealt with?

Treppen

TomOnBoard wrote: »

And in the meantime, while all this discussion continues in respect of Andrew Windsor, charges have now been dropped against Epstein himself. Therefore, the Prosecution's case for forfeiture of Epstein's New York property has now fallen foul of his suicide, and, unless civil proceedings are successfully taken, Epstein wins that one (albeit posthumously). That's a $77 million property his estate gets to keep on foot of his death!

Forget about Epstein, he's the scapegoat.

TomOnBoard

Treppen wrote: »

No it doesn't.

What age was the 'prostitute' which he was charged for...if you say the scale starts at legality. You mentioned women 'up to 30'

He was convicted on charges of child prostitution, which is/ was illegal in Florida. That is exactly what the scale starting at Legality means. If it was legal he wouldn't have been charged.

He was also involved with dozens of other minors and I'm not sure their cases were even part of the final conviction.

Treppen wrote: »

agree. Do you agree the case he was convicted for was crushingly dealt with?

I believe that he got off almost scot-free. He got a total sweetheart deal. Disgusting and disgraceful. Furthermore, other people who were also committing similar paedophilia were allowed to skate as part of the deal. I think it was total disgust on the part of some in law enforcement that led to the ultimate charges being brought in New York, as they were outraged that the whole cabal got off so lightly in Florida.

So, no! The law firmly failed his victims and he was nowhere near crushingly dealt with. Sadly, his death now makes any real justice for his victims even more difficult to obtain.

TomOnBoard

Treppen wrote: »

Forget about Epstein, he's the scapegoat.

I don't know what that means. How should we forget about Epstein when he is the subject of this discussion?