Yeah, lets screw law and order, and just trust, how many again? 100? 1000? 100.000? How many do I need to gather, to jail someone I hate, because it’s a public trial, rather than evidence based. Hey, I get it, I hate Epstein more than the next person. I love to see the guy rot in hell. I also think trump, and most of the elite is in it as well. I also think the USA court system is full of flaws and is corrupt as fuck. But what happens when we go full jungle law in a society? Spoiler alert: It isn’t going to be better. I get the hate, but the whole public trial thing, is dangerious as fuck.
…
Someone needs to tell this person the difference between testimony, evidence and confession
For certain! Both my life and that of 3 other guys would have been ruined if the judge chose to just believe the first girl I was with.
They would later go on to say that they lied on every single one of them. Tho, it didn’t help the youngest one and latest they accused. He still got bullied out of the school they were in.
People downvoting you cause they can’t handle the truth that stuff like that actually happens. It conflicts with their worldview in which women never lie and men are never falsely accused.
Say this in some places and they’ll either call you a rapist or a rape apologist. It’s the same as when cops say “If you’re not doing anything wrong then why do you need rights? If you don’t have any drugs then why won’t you let me search your vehicle?”
Ask them if people should have believed Emmett Till’s accusers and they’ll say “THAT’S DIFFERENT” without really being able to explain how…
P.S., Epstein is a scumbag and all his associates should burn. Nothing in this comment is intended to be read as an excusal of them, but rather as an argument against overgeneralizing it to treat all men as guilty unless proven innocent
I am genuinely very confused by this post. Were there really a lot of people who saw the Epstein files and were like, “Oh, so maybe women were telling the truth after all”? Because all of the reactions I have seen so far are either “I knew it!” or possibly “Whoa, this goes even further than I thought!”
It’s devoid of context, but it could just be talking about the people who only just now have begun believing despite the voices of the victims.
The post makes it seem like this was a typical perspective, though. I get that womens’ voices are generally not taken seriously enough when it comes to this kind of thing, but if there were one exception to this rule then Epstein seemed to be it because in my experience everyone considered him to be a dirtbag even before the files were released. Have I just been unwittingly sheltered when it comes to peoples’ views on Epstein? (Genuine question.)
I wouldn’t call it unwittingly sheltered. More like programed by right-wing media to never trust the victim when women step forward.
Have I [emphasis mine] just been unwittingly sheltered when it comes to peoples’ views on Epstein? (Genuine question.)
I wouldn’t call it unwittingly sheltered. More like programed by right-wing media to never trust the victim when women step forward.
That is a peculiar thing to say about me.
I’m sorry I misread your comment. I thought it was speaking generally not you specific. That comment was directed towards the people who are just now coming around and or the ones who are still stubbornly refusing to see the reason.
People believed them. That’s why there are documents detailing various agencies’ research into Epstein & co.
If no one believed them, no one would have looked into it.
Now, the Trump admin and captured agencies are trying to cover it up, redact abusers names, release victims names/info/pictures, cover the whole thing up, etc. But that’s a different story.
People knew Epstein didn’t kill himself and knew he was killed off to hide lots of terrible things. And of course knew that meant powerful and rich people were involved in unspeakable acts. But then to be able to point fingers at specific people (especially those who are in position that make claims against seem like slander used politically e.g. Trump) you have to get more than claims to implicate them.
Still, being certain someone committed a crime because multiple people, women, men, cameras or TVs said so doesn’t seem reasonable without evidence.
Testimonial evidence is still evidence, and documentary evidence can be faked so it is not foolproof.
i hope a snopes but deeper searchable thing comes out that proves claims with citations, and disproves ones (with cits too if able.)
like how do we know if they were farming babies to turn them into cream cheese?
but also clearly we know they were doing shit THOUSANDS of victims say an need to be believed.
fluff an slop will dilute the waters. on purpose. :/
womensstuff…
I get the point she’s trying to make, but that, of course, is not how justice works, or should work. Everyone is innocent until PROVEN guilty and that only works if we apply it to everyone, pedos included.
The alternative to this is what trump is implementing right now and I think we can all agree that that is a very bad idea.
Yeah. We know.
I think at this point either people understand this or will never care.
