Page 8 of 23 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 338
Like Tree1035Likes

Thread: Jeffrey Epstein (Allegedly) Commits Suicide in Jail

  1. #106
    Elite Member ShimmeringGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,824

    Default

    His final resting place is an eye-level granite compartment in a large community crypt, where the priciest spots are rumored to cost as much as $250,000 (left). It is believed Epstein's remains were secretly transported to Florida before being loaded into a black minivan and discreetly driven through the cemetery gates. Epstein's brother Mark took charge of the body after it was released last week by the New York City Medical Examiner's office. When DailyMail.com contacted Mark to confirm that the sex offender's remains were sealed inside, he raged: 'It's nobody's f**king business'.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...m-Florida.html



    Brookie likes this.

  2. #107
    Gold Member bootspaige's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Austin, Texas, United States
    Posts
    1,027

    Default

    that's a "no."

  3. #108
    Bronze Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    84

    Default

    I thought he was an investment mastermind but $250k for a tiny box in the air which you'll only use when you're dead doesn't sound too bright to me.....no wonder he needed an even scummier side business.

  4. #109
    Elite Member ShimmeringGlow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    6,824

    Default

    How Epstein gamed the system from beyond the grave: New will put more than $577m in assets into a trust fund that 'makes it more difficult for his accusers to collect damages by making beneficiaries private'


    • Jeffrey Epstein signed a will days before his suicide which put $577 million in assets into a trust fund that could make it more difficult for his accusers
    • Estate lawyers and other experts say prying open the trust and dividing up the financier's riches is not going to be easy and could take years
    • Epstein, 66, killed himself August 10 in New York while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges
    • The discovery of the will with its newly created 1953 Trust, named after the year of his birth, instantly raised suspicions he did it to hide money from victims



    The will that Jeffrey Epstein signed just two days before his jailhouse suicide puts more than $577 million in assets into a trust fund that could make it more difficult for his dozens of accusers to collect damages.

    Estate lawyers and other experts say prying open the trust and dividing up the financier's riches is not going to be easy and could take years.

    'This is the last act of Epstein's manipulation of the system, even in death,' said attorney Jennifer Freeman, who represents child sex abuse victims.

    Epstein, 66, killed himself August 10 in New York while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.

    The discovery of the will with its newly created 1953 Trust, named after the year of his birth, instantly raised suspicions he did it to hide money from the many women who say he sexually abused them when they were teenagers.

    By putting his fortune in a trust, he shrouded from public view the identities of the beneficiaries, whether they be individuals, organizations or other entities. For the women trying to collect from his estate, the first order of business will be persuading a judge to pierce that veil and release the details.

    From there, the women will have to follow the course they would have had to pursue even if Epstein hadn't created a trust: convince the judge that they are entitled to compensation as victims of sex crimes. The judge would have to decide how much they should get and whether to reduce the amounts given to Epstein's named beneficiaries, who would also be given their say in court.

    'Wealthy people typically attempt to hide assets in trusts or other legal schemes. I believe the court and his administrators will want to do right by Epstein's victims, and if not, we will fight for the justice that is long overdue to them,' attorney Lisa Bloom, who represents several Epstein accusers, said in an email.

    She said attorneys for the women will go after Epstein's estate in the U.S. Virgin Islands, where the will was filed and where he owned two islands.

    Bloom said it was 'gross negligence' on the part of Epstein's lawyers and jail personnel to allow him to sign a new will, given that he had apparently attempted suicide a short time before. Bloom called a will 'a classic sign of impending suicide for a prisoner.'

    The lawyers who handled the will have not returned calls for comment.

    The assets listed in the 20-page document include more than $56 million in cash; properties in New York, Florida, Paris, New Mexico and the Virgin Islands; $18.5 million in vehicles, aircraft and boats; and art and collectibles that will have to be appraised.

    Typically in any case, trust or not, there is a pecking order of entities that line up to get a share of an estate, said Stephen K. Urice, a law professor at the University of Miami. First in line would be the government - in Epstein's case, several governments - which will collect any taxes owed on his properties and on his estate itself.

    Next would be any other creditor to whom Epstein owed money, such as a bank or mortgage company.

    Lawsuits against the estate by victims would come into play somewhere after that.

    Epstein's only known relative is a brother, Mark Epstein, who has not responded to requests for comment. It is unclear whether he was named a beneficiary.

    One other possibility is that the U.S. government will seek civil forfeiture of Epstein's properties or other assets on the grounds that they were used for criminal purposes. Government lawyers would have to produce strong evidence of that at a trial-like proceeding.

    If they prevailed, they would be able to seize the properties, sell them and distribute the proceeds to victims.

    'The fact that there is a will should not stop them,' said Cheryl Bader, a professor at the Fordham University School of Law.

    Federal prosecutors declined to comment on the possibility of a forfeiture action.

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...med-grave.html

  5. #110
    Elite Member effie2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Where it all begun
    Posts
    15,938

    Default

    at gr ,so very sensitive about child abuse,there is no thread about fat andy and his pedophilia..there are legions talking about it in defence of their idols,as if andy,s wrong doing compares to their own .I get what you are saying...your problem is WHY any stupid tab haw more articles about them and not about Andy.Andy,s own mother was proudly parading him next to her only a day after his friend,s offing himself.I ve seen hia picture with this girl all over.There is no law against banging a willing ADULT .I know he was given use of young girls by his friend.Again there is no law against that.It is purely ethical.
    I understand perfectly the game media is playing.I also understand that the couple fans would prefer no criticism at all of their idols..I was talking to some friends about GR and people,s reaction and one of them currently working in London,showed me a MM fan cite.90 per cent of the fans were wishing horrible deaths to William and family,so their favorites will finally become kings .It is getting out of hand and dangerous,first of all for the people involved.I see more passion in the defenders than the accusers.And of course,skin color is THE problem..not their actions or the way they handle themselves...there is nothing wrong with them because Wills is pictured being carried sitting on a freaking wooden chair...or andy likes them young.Or trying to prove their flying does not harm any way because...(long Stupid Proving nothing article)..

  6. #111
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    58,709

    Default

    Who on earth idolizes royals?
    As Canadian as possible under the circumstances

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    "What's traitors, precious?" -- President Gollum

  7. #112
    Elite Member NickiDrea's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    2,492

    Default

    Prince Andrew is alleged not only to have had sex with a teenage girl, but she also saw him looking at a book of pictures of naked young girls around her own age. Some of the girls involved in the Epstein case are VERY underage and there were also allegations that some of them were sex slaves- as in RAPE VICTIMS- not willing participants. Prince Andrew is alleged to have associated with a hebophile sex trafficker.

    I can’t speak for the UK, but in the US, having sex with minors is a crime. Having sex with trafficked people of ANY age is a crime. Looking at naked pictures of underage girls is a crime. Being involved in a pedophile sex trafficking ring is a crime.

    Prince Andrew’s disgusting behavior has been detailed at length in the royal threads. I guess one could start their own thread too, but either way it’s already being discussed.

    It’s not even a question that the media is still focused on Meghan when the major story should be the association of the Queen’s son’s involvement with well-known pedophiles/sex traffickers. There is no excuse for it.
    Shinola likes this.
    "Thankfully I'm an educated multi-millionaire who knows better than to speak to perverted unjust cops without my lawyer. "
    "I think she's psychotic...what do I do?" - Jenny Schecter

  8. #113
    Elite Member MsDark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Northwest MS/Memphis TN
    Posts
    30,344

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twitchy2.0 View Post
    Who on earth idolizes royals?
    Crazy people.

    If some group of people exist who are truly such pathological fantards for the boring ass Sussexes that they're wishing actual death to Will/Kate & the kids this is the first place I've heard of it.

    This is a general thread about Royalty. Not just the Sussexes. Hell, not even just the Brits. I'd say the topic of Andrew being Epstein's BFF and partner in pedo-rape should be the topic du jour right now. Unless one of these other overprivileged assholes (from any country) has done anything lately to top this. If so, I'm game for discussing here.

    Also: I get that ages of consent are different in some of the countries outside of the US which comprise the membership of this board. But is the sex-trafficking of women and teenagers (some really younger than even the most lowered ages of consent) actually "not a big deal" anyone living in these countries because of the lowered ages of consent? The age shouldn't even matter because it's ALL non-consensual/forced prostitution. The ages of these women/girls just make them easier prey.
    Last edited by MsDark; August 23rd, 2019 at 09:43 AM.
    Shinola likes this.
    My Posts Have Won Awards. Can Any Of You Claim The Same? -ur_next_ex

    "I don't have pet peeves. I have major psychotic fucking hatreds, okay". ~George Carlin

  9. #114
    Elite Member kasippu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,566

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NickiDrea View Post
    Prince Andrew is alleged not only to have had sex with a teenage girl, but she also saw him looking at a book of pictures of naked young girls around her own age. Some of the girls involved in the Epstein case are VERY underage and there were also allegations that some of them were sex slaves- as in RAPE VICTIMS- not willing participants. .
    Do you have a source for that?
    Some of those girls were 15 right? My daughters age. I would kill him.
    I can’t speak for the UK, but in the US, having sex with minors is a crime. Having sex with trafficked people of ANY age is a crime. Looking at naked pictures of underage girls is a crime. Being involved in a pedophile sex trafficking ring is a crime.
    Age of consent is 16 in UK, some of these girls were younger.

    It’s not even a question that the media is still focused on Meghan when the major story should be the association of the Queen’s son’s involvement with well-known pedophiles/sex traffickers. There is no excuse for it.
    I think Meghan is a useful tool for both kat and wills (they had to take a budget flight and be papped... Didn't they fly private for their sky holiday in April?) and for Randy Andy (who flew private to Spain -where is the outrage?/)Is it stupid to fly private that google global warming thing...yes. Should they fly British Airways, as representatives of the country sure but seriously she is being slaughtered online for stuff all the Royals have done. They use her as a diversion tool.
    Shinola likes this.

  10. #115
    Elite Member CornFlakegrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hanging with the raisin girls
    Posts
    14,699

    Default

    Are the legit UK newspapers reporting on Andrew?
    if you're so incensed that you can't fly your penis in public take it up with your state, arrange a nude protest, go and be the rosa parks of cocks or something - witchcurlgirl

  11. #116
    fgg
    fgg is offline
    Elite Member fgg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    33,260

    Default

    Jeffrey Epstein’s Intellectual Enabler

    How did Epstein meet so many luminaries in the worlds of science and technology? It all might trace back to literary agent John Brockman.

    If you are an accomplished science or technology writer, your books are probably handled by the most powerful literary agency in the field: the famous Brockman Inc., started by John Brockman and now run by Max Brockman, his son. As it happens, Max is also my agent—and has been since my first book was sold in 2009. As agencies go, I only have positive things to report: The Brockmans fight for their authors and get us very handsome advances. That’s what agents are for.

    But that’s not the whole story. John is also the president, founder, and chief impresario of the Edge Foundation, which has earned a stellar reputation as an eclectic platform for conversations that involve scientists, artists, and technologists. There is more than one Edge Foundation, though: There is the one meant for public consumption, with its “annual question”—e.g. “What are you optimistic about?”—answered by famous intellectuals and thinkers; and one meant for private consumption by members of Brockman’s elite network. The former exists primarily online. The latter has a vibrant real-life component, with sumptuous dinners, exclusive conferences, and quite a bit of travel on private jets—it functions as an elaborate massage of the ego (and, apparently, much else) for the rich, the smart, and the powerful.

    Over the course of my research into the history of digital culture, I’ve got to know quite a lot about John’s role in shaping the digital—and especially the intellectual—world that we live in. I’ve examined and scanned many of his letters in the archives of famous men (and they are mostly men), such as Marshall McLuhan, Stewart Brand, and Gregory Bateson. He is no mere literary agent; he is a true “organic intellectual” of the digital revolution, shaping trends rather than responding to them. Would the MIT Media Lab, TED Conferences, and Wired have the clout and the intellectual orientation that they have now without the extensive network cultivated by Brockman over decades? I, for one, very much doubt it.

    Lately, John has been in the news for other reasons, namely because of his troubling connections to Jeffrey Epstein, the so-called financier who reportedly hanged himself earlier this month while facing federal charges of sex-trafficking. Epstein participated in the Edge Foundation’s annual questions, and attended its “billionaires’ dinners.” Brockman may also be the reason why so many prominent academics—from Steven Pinker to Daniel Dennett—have found themselves answering awkward questions about their associations with Epstein; they are clients of Brockman’s. Marvin Minsky, the prominent MIT scientist who surfaced as one of Epstein’s island buddies? A client of Brockman’s. Joi Ito, the director of the elite research facility MIT Media Lab, who has recently acknowledged extensive ties to Epstein? Also, a client of Brockman’s.

    Should we just write it off as natural collateral damage for someone with a network as extensive as Brockman’s? He is, after all, a networker’s networker. Based on my observations over the last decade, his whole operation runs on two simple but powerful principles. First, the total value of the network (and thus his own value) goes up if the nodes start connecting to each other independently of him. Second, the more diverse the network, the more attractive it is to newcomers as well as to all the existing members. Billionaires are rich, but they might harbor an insecurity complex related to not being very well-read (looking at you, Bill Gates!). Scientists, in contrast, are usually well-read but might aspire to fancier cars and luxuries and funding for their pet projects. And so on: There’s something for everyone—and, in the case of Epstein, someone seems to have done the matchmaking.

    In Brockman’s world, billionaires, scientists, artists, novelists, journalists, and musicians all blend together to produce enormous value—for each other and, of course, for Brockman. This mingling of clients doesn’t happen in other literary agencies, at least not to this extent. Nor does this happen at Brockman Inc., as all such interactions that we know of took place under the umbrella of the Edge Foundation, a sibling organization, with Brockman as its president. Would Brockman Inc. exist without the Edge Foundation? Possibly—and it did, at the outset. Would it be as powerful, trading on Brockman’s ability to rub shoulders with academics and billionaires alike? Probably not. Still, I can attest that Brockman’s authors face no pressure to get involved with Edge: I, for example, diligently responded to their annual questions between 2010 and 2013—and then stopped, as I was put off by Brockman’s insistence that people responding to the annual question should keep away from politics.

    When the Epstein-Brockman connection first surfaced in the news, I wanted to give Brockman the benefit of the doubt. It’s possible, I thought, that Epstein was just one of the many rich people in Brockman’s orbit. Or maybe the two had been close only before Epstein’s first criminal case in the mid-2000s. Or maybe Brockman was in the dark about Epstein’s tendencies and they only talked about quantum physics and artificial intelligence.

    In the last few weeks, such a charitable interpretation has become very hard to sustain, especially as other details—implicating Marvin Minsky and Joi Ito, who has apologized for taking money from Epstein—became public. John Brockman has not said a word publicly about his connection to Epstein since the latest scandal broke, preferring to maintain silence on the matter. That I have found quite infuriating.

    Knowing that Brockman likes to brag about all the famous people he has met and befriended—you can easily count the seconds until he name-checks “Marshall” (McLuhan) or “Andy” (Warhol) or “Gregory“ (Bateson) in a casual conversation—I decided to look over our correspondence over the past decade and see if he might have name-dropped Epstein somewhere. And, of course, he did. Browsing through our email correspondence, I stumbled upon a most peculiar email from September 12, 2013.

    It was very laconic: “JE, FYI, JB”—followed by my short bio and some media clippings. (You can check the entire PDF of the correspondence here.) Strangely, it was sent to me and had no other contacts in cc. Perhaps he wanted to send it to “JE” but put my email there by mistake. When I commented on the meaning of this cryptic message, he responded with the following message, reproduced here in full:

    I missed that one.

    Jeffrey Epstein, the billionaire science philanthropist showed up at this weekend’s event by helicopter (with his beautiful young assistant from Belarus). He’ll be in Cambridge in a couple of weeks asked me who he should meet. You are one of the people I suggested and I told him I would send some links.

    He’s the guy who gave Harvard #30m to set up Martin Nowak. He’s been extremely generous in funding projects of many of our friends and clients. He also got into trouble and spent a year in jail in Florida.

    If he contacts you it’s probably worth your time to meet him as he’s extremely bright and interesting.

    Last time I visited his house (the largest private residence in NYC), I walked in to find him in a sweatsuit and a British guy in a suit with suspenders, getting foot massages from two young well-dressed Russian women. After grilling me for a while about cyber-security, the Brit, named Andy, was commenting on the Swedish authorities and the charges against Julian Assange.

    “We think they’re liberal in Sweden, but its more like Northern England as opposed to Southern Europe,” he said. “In Monaco, Albert works 12 hours a day but at 9pm, when he goes out, he does whatever he wants, and nobody cares. But, if I do it, I’m in big trouble.” At that point I realized that the recipient of Irina’s foot massage was his Royal Highness, Prince Andrew, the Duke of York.

    Indeed, a week later, on a slow news day, the cover of the NYpost had a full-page photo of Jeffrey and Andrew walking in Central Park under the headline: “The Prince and the Perv.” (That was the end of Andrew’s role at the UK trade ambassador.)

    To which I responded:

    thanks for clarifying this. I’m sure he’s an all-around sweet guy but I’ll have to think about it. It could be that I spent far too much time in the Soros bubble but I have zero interest in meeting billionaires - if I did, I’d be going to Davos every year. but I appreciate you taking the time.

    Here is Brockman again:

    A billionaire who owns Victoria’s Secret plus a modelling agency is a different kind of animal. But I hear you and basically agree. Gregory Bateson once advised me that ‘Of all our human inventions, economic man is by far the dullest.’

    JB

    And here is my final answer:

    “A billionaire who owns Victoria’s Secret plus a modelling agency” --> one more reason to stay away actually.

    I didn’t know who Epstein was at the time. Since I’ve never been very keen to hang out with billionaires, mine was a natural response (I similarly declined Brockman’s invitations to hang out on his farm or attend his famous billionaire dinners). So I didn’t think much of that invitation and eventually forgot about it. Needless to say, I never heard from Epstein—or from Brockman about Epstein.

    In that old email, it seems clear that Brockman was acting as Epstein’s PR man—his liaison with the world of scientists and intellectuals that Brockman had cultivated. That Brockman has said nothing over this affair is rather bewildering. (He did not return requests for comment left on his email and voicemail.)

    I do know that John Brockman has been in poor health over the last few years. So I have cut him some slack. But, patient as I am, the time has run out. It’s not as if the Epstein story broke yesterday. It’s been more than a month since Epstein was arrested on the latest charges. Still, no word on the issue. And, now that I’ve found that old email he sent me, I cannot believe that he knew absolutely nothing of Epstein’s wild sexual escapades—in fact, his email suggests he was trying to capitalize on them to recruit yet another useful idiot into Epstein’s network.

    There’s more: A close analysis of Edge Foundation’s (publicly available) financial statements suggests that, between 2001 and 2015, it has received $638,000 from Epstein’s various foundations. In many of those years, Epstein was Edge’s sole donor. Yet, how many of Edge’s contributors—let alone readers—knew Epstein played so large a role in the organization?

    I’m just one of the many authors in Brockman’s agency; my departure wouldn’t affect anything. I am also the last one to complain: His agency sold two of my books, and I have two more underway, also sold by them.

    Yet, I am ready to pull the plug on my association with Brockman’s agency—and would encourage other authors to consider doing the same—until and unless he clarifies the relationship between him, the Edge Foundation, and Epstein. If such an explanation is not forthcoming, many of us will have to decide whether we would like to be part of this odd intellectual club located on the dubious continuum between the seminar room and a sex-trafficking ring.

    Excessive networking, it appears, devours its own. Brockman is already many months too late to what he should have done much earlier: close down the Edge Foundation, publicly repent, retire, and turn Brockman Inc. into yet another banal literary agency. The kind where authors do not have to mingle with billionaires at fancy dinners or worry about walking in on Prince Andrew getting his foot massage. The un-network.

    https://newrepublic.com/article/1548...ectual-enabler
    Brookie likes this.
    can't post pics because my computer's broken and i'm stupid

  12. #117
    Elite Member Sarzy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    England
    Posts
    15,901

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NickiDrea View Post

    I can’t speak for the UK, but in the US, having sex with minors is a crime. Having sex with trafficked people of ANY age is a crime. Looking at naked pictures of underage girls is a crime. Being involved in a pedophile sex trafficking ring is a crime.
    It's the same in the UK, except our age of consent is 16. I agree with your post btw. Epstein and Andrew’s alleged behaviour is gross.

    Quote Originally Posted by CornFlakegrl View Post
    Are the legit UK newspapers reporting on Andrew?
    The Guardian and the Independent have quite a few articles about him. Not checked the rest

  13. #118
    Elite Member effie2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Where it all begun
    Posts
    15,938

    Default

    As it happens,the customers of a house of pleasure are not prosecuted and jailed generally speaking..They pay for the service they get.Andy payed for his vices,probably selling out his royal status ,like many royals do.Mind you,i am not defending him,far from it,just stating facts..Also,all the victims at the pictures look quite happy and beaming.Them and their families KNEW what was going on and they were more than ok with it.Now that is fashionable and profitable to scream abuse and get something out of it,they remembered all the misery they wen through..because they were made..I cannot imagine anybody able to make me massage and screw old people,no way..
    I d love to see anybody breaking the law behind bars,a royal one would be lovely,i just dont see it happening.

  14. #119
    Super Moderator twitchy2.0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Milliways
    Posts
    58,709

    Default

    fashionable?

    Dear god.
    As Canadian as possible under the circumstances

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    "What's traitors, precious?" -- President Gollum

  15. #120
    Elite Member effie2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Where it all begun
    Posts
    15,938

    Default

    It might not be the right word,i am not a native,but you all know what i mean...before metoo and such,no one was suing for alleged crimes that happened decades ago.And before i ll be accused of god knows what,i dont say it shouldnt happen and i dont mean all victims are not real victims and not willing participants after more money.

Page 8 of 23 FirstFirst ... 45678910111218 ... LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Jim Carrey's girlfriend commits suicide
    By fgg in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: February 1st, 2018, 01:12 PM
  2. France: Far right activist commits suicide
    By Butterfly in forum Politics and Issues
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: May 22nd, 2013, 03:32 PM
  3. Marie Osmond's son commits suicide
    By buttmunch in forum Latest Gossip
    Replies: 126
    Last Post: November 11th, 2010, 06:05 AM
  4. Man commits suicide at a California concert
    By celeb_2006 in forum News
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: August 22nd, 2010, 06:47 AM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: August 15th, 2010, 09:20 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •