No. of Recommendations: 7
again, no evidence but also no credibility.
all these girls, for all these events, for all these years, with all these 'socializers' simply there for the spectacle of epstein as the sole beneficiary. and andrew was a coincidence.
Look, that's what the lawyer for the victims' said. Epstein kept the two worlds separate. It's not all that surprising - having sexual relations with minors is not only a terrible crime, but it's also a horrendous moral stain. It's not only understandable, but an important act of self-preservation, for Epstein to create some level of plausible deniability about whether these minors were engaging in actual sexual relations with him.
It's not especially credible that these women would be coming forward not just to tell their stories about Epstein but all the others who enabled him and trafficked them to his lair, and none of them is saying (either directly or through counsel) that there were other men involved (even without naming names), but this was something that was going on? That Epstein was providing these victims to "clients," but none of the actual victims or their lawyers are saying that it happened - even anonymously, even without identifying the other men, just that people other than Epstein and Maxwell were involved in the sexual acts? And in fact, counsel for some of the victims is actually saying the opposite - that this was all Epstein satisfying his own gross and evil appetites, rather than procuring minors for others?
I don't know - I don't think you should hold out any expectation that there's anything in the governments' files that points to anyone other than Epstein having sex with a minor (again, other than Giuffre's statements about Andrew) given that context. Plenty of opportunity to insinuate, as you've done here - but all those opportunities already amply exist with the material that's been publicly released, so I don't think the files will actually change that, if they are fully released.
