cross-posted from: https://links.hackliberty.org/post/733395

Table of contents

  • Introduction
  • Epstein Search Warrant Foreknowledge
  • Hidden Cameras
  • Epstein Technology Stack
  • Epstein Vehicles / Homes
  • List of Potential Witnesses
  • Consolidated Witness Testimony
  • Alan Dershowitz
  • Prince Andrew (Duke of York)
  • Jean Luc Brunel
  • David Copperfield
  • Emmy Taylor
  • Nadia Mareinkova
  • Sara Kellen (a/k/a Sarah Kensignton or Sarah Vickers)
  • Bill Clinton
  • Donald Trump
  • Leonardo DiCaprio, Cate Blanchett, Bruce Willis
  • Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak
  • Michael Jackson
  • Steven Hawking
  • Glenn Dubin, Prince Andrew, Bill Richardson
  • Marvin Minsky
  • Tom Pritzker
  • Stephen Kaufmann
  • George Mitchell
  • Leslie H. Wexner
  • Al Gore
  • Sarah Ferguson, Patrick Jephson, Robert Kennedy Junior, Frederick Fekkai
  • Max Brockman
  • John Casablancas
  • Adam Perrylang
  • Sandy Berger
  • Igor Zinoviev
  • Andrea Metrovich
  • Clare Hazell
  • Sarah Ransome
  • Kevin Spacey
    • PrinceWith999Enemies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      10 months ago

      I’m not going to get into too much interpretation of the names on this list until more details come out.

      The way Epstein worked was to court those he saw as socially powerful - scientists, business leaders, politicians, actors - and fete them to create a social network around himself. He might throw a dinner party and say Bill Clinton is coming, and he’s really interested in your ideas about eradicating malaria.” I don’t know if he did so with the intent of feeding his own ego or of increasing his own sphere of influence, wealth, and power, although he obviously did so.

      I also know that with at least a subset of his social network, he engaged in enabling the rape of children, and that this was key to several of those relationships.

      What I’m not certain of at this time is who among his social network were of the dinner party set and who were part of the raping children set. Having spent a lot of time in academia, I honestly believe that it’s entirely possible - I’d even call it probable - that there’s many people of note who would not have heard of Epstein and who would not have harbored a suspicion that they should check out someone looking to introduce them to philanthropists or people in positions of power. I’ve had meals with Nobel laureates and could not have told you anything about anyone else at the table who weren’t previously known to me, and even there the context would be limited to their professional work.

      I think this needs to be investigated fully, and I think that anyone guilty of raping children should have the consequences of their actions. I’m just unwilling to judge an association based on a list of names of a known social crawler whose entire purpose was collecting people.

      I’m simply saying that I’m going to hold off on making assumptions about the nature of their relationship to Epstein without further revelations.

      • maynarkh@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        10 months ago

        The problem with waiting for investigations is that rich people have a tendency to evade them, many will only be tried in the court of public opinion.

        • c0mmando@links.hackliberty.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          10 months ago

          Rich people can afford to pay lawyers and evade courts; now the rich and powerful have the support from the captured system… which is why Epstein was tipped off to his search warrant.

          • maynarkh@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            I guess what I’m saying is that legal and social systems should only be engaged with in good faith if they are shown to be trustworthy and working. If they are flagrantly abused by some, then all is fair.

            For example, democracy is not a great invention because it lets people have a say in who gets to call the shots. People have a say either way. With democracy, it’s just they can do so with votes instead of guillotines.

      • c0mmando@links.hackliberty.orgOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        Some of the names are mentioned only in questioning, others are directly implicated as abusers. The relevant details are in the forum post.