1194
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 14 points 11 months ago

This isn't the "flew on his jet a few times" sort of associates, they were named in Giuffre's court case.

The documents are part of a settled civil lawsuit alleging Epstein's one-time paramour Ghislaine Maxwell facilitated the sexual abuse of Virginia Giuffre. Terms of the 2017 settlement were not disclosed.

Low effort version of this post:

Nice try, Andrew.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 8 points 11 months ago

You read part of the article, found something you think confirms your point (it does not) and then just stopped reading and thinking. Your issue is that you're trying to be right, rather than trying to figure out what is right.

Also from the article:

Some of the names may simply have been included in depositions, email or legal documents.

And very explicitly

including Epstein's victims, co-conspirators and innocent associates.

And also

The documents may not make clear why a certain individual became associated with Giuffre's lawsuit,

As I said, people aren't rational especially when it comes to Epstein. I appreciate you coming to me and demonstrating this for everyone.

[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 7 points 11 months ago

I did read the article, I just I didn't realise there was any article after all the jump, sorry. Hate it when sites do that.

But I still don't buy that argument:

Judge Loretta Preska set the release for Jan. 1, giving anyone who objects to their documents becoming public time to object. Her ruling, though, said that since some of the individuals have given media interviews their names should not stay private.

Anyone who was named in those documents knows that they were named in those documents. It is unlikely to include as many innocents as you, or rather that journalist, seem to expect.

[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

So, it's the articles fault you didn't read it because of something that happens extremely regularly in articles on the Internet. I'm wrong because of words you put in my mouth (I made no claims as to how many innocents are on the list). And you're still right based on blind speculation.

It's like you're desperate to demonstrate my point for me.

[-] JoBo@feddit.uk 9 points 11 months ago
[-] EatATaco@lemm.ee 1 points 11 months ago

You act like your first response was respectful and I should have responded in kind.

It's okay to admit you were just wrong and I made a good point.

this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
1194 points (100.0% liked)

News

23287 readers
3207 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS