Crime Jeffrey Epstein Dead

[SleepyBoy]

Yes, that's solid thinking, this situation is broadly applicable to whatever

No you're right, similar situations have nothing in common.

Explain why they're so different that a comparison between the two isn't appropriate.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Holy shit, some of you are still acting all high and mighty about this?

An extremely rich man with high profile connections was found dead in his jail cell after being accused of basically running a resort from famous people to go to to fuck kids.

Its a pretty interesting story with all sorts of threads yet to be unraveled. Stop getting so upset that people want to talk about it.

We literally have someone saying if you ask the questions:

- why did the security guards not do their scheduled rounds
- why was he taken off suicide watch

That is JAQing and furthering a conspiracy theory.

That asking questions alone that have never been answered and that are being investigated actively is not allowed and is furtherance of conspiracy theories.

That is every bit as nutty as the nuttiest conspiracy as that is not 'doubting the findings or facts' and is only asking the questions the gov't itself is investigating and asking.

We have the emergence of a new extreme now that is every bit as nutty as the CTers and that is people who say 'never ask any questions'. No, not 'do not doubt findings' but rather do not even ask questions before there are findings.

 

[all caps]

I find it rather strange people reflexively accept the story pushed out by authorities without question.

I will remember this and remind these people to reflexively accept what the authorities tell them next time a cop kills an unarmed POC, while his body cam malfunctions, all standard operating procedures go ignored, all of colleagues won't cooperate with the investigation and a self-review of situation finds that they did nothing wrong.
I will remind them that not reflexively accepting the story means that they are a kooky conspiracy theorist with deranged mental problems.

Harsh, but fair.

 

[all caps]

It is this new idea that 'no one should ask questions or for clarification

This isnt a new idea. I and a few others have been trying (poorly, I guess) to point this out for a while now.

 

[MikeMcMann]

This isnt a new idea. I and a few others have been trying (poorly, I guess) to point this out for a while now.

Ya lets be clear.

JAQing is when an issue has been investigated. The experts have spoken and support the conclusions. And yet CTers keep floating open ended questions suggesting there is doubt and a ton of stuff that was never addressed. Fine if they still have doubts but it is by definition a CT if you are going against the findings and experts as you are saying they are in on it.

That is NOT what is happening in this thread and being identifying as JAQing by some very ignorant and stupid posters. The questions being asked have not yet been answered and are being asked by gov't and investigated currently by gov't. We are simply awaiting the answers. And to have people on a discussion forum discuss the OPEN questions being investigated that do not YET have answers is not JAQing and only someone with a monumental misunderstanding of the term would think it was.

 

[all caps]

Ya lets be clear.

JAQing is when an issue has been investigated. The experts have spoken and support the conclusions. And yet CTers keep floating open ended questions suggesting there is doubt and a ton of stuff that was never addressed. Fine if they still have doubts but it is by definition a CT if you are going against the findings and experts as you are saying they are in on it.

That is NOT what is happening in this thread and being identifying as JAQing by some very ignorant and stupid posters. The questions being asked have not yet been answered and are being asked by gov't and investigated currently by gov't. We are simply awaiting the answers. And to have people on a discussion forum discuss the OPEN questions being investigated that do not YET have answers is not JAQing and only someone with a monumental misunderstanding of the term would think it was.

Wtf is "JAQing" ? I dont know what it means.

 

[JonesBones]

Ya lets be clear.

JAQing is when an issue has been investigated. The experts have spoken and support the conclusions. And yet CTers keep floating open ended questions suggesting there is doubt and a ton of stuff that was never addressed. Fine if they still have doubts but it is by definition a CT if you are going against the findings and experts as you are saying they are in on it.

That is NOT what is happening in this thread and being identifying as JAQing by some very ignorant and stupid posters. The questions being asked have not yet been answered and are being asked by gov't and investigated currently by gov't. We are simply awaiting the answers. And to have people on a discussion forum discuss the OPEN questions being investigated that do not YET have answers is not JAQing and only someone with a monumental misunderstanding of the term would think it was.

Man, your palms must be hairy as fuck. You keep JAQing off while saying you are not JAQing off. The medical examiner has spoken. You are still JAQing off. Expert opinion has not slowed you down one iota. You are still rambling.

 

[newerest]

Wtf is "JAQing" ? I dont know what it means.

"Just asking questions"

Example

"How did steel beams melt to jet fuel?"

"Oh steel loses its structural integrity at the temperature jet fuel burns at? Well why does the twin towers collapse look like a controlled demolition?"

"Oh the beams gave out and the floors collapsed top down? Well why did people report hearing explosions?"

"Oh its plausible that was just air moving from fires? Well what about the fact that the buildings owner got terrorist insurance?"

"Look man I'm just asking questions"

Basically it's someone who pretends they are not arguing from the stance that an event was a conspiracy, and then proceeding to finding the evidence to support their theory.

Whenever they get a question answered, they come up with new questions.

 

[SBJJ]

Did we ever hear about cameras filming around his cell? There had to be at least 1 camera functional that filmed a hallway or something leading to his cell or cell block.

This was a question asked at first that seemed to never get answered

 

[MikeMcMann]

Did we ever hear about cameras filming around his cell? There had to be at least 1 camera functional that filmed a hallway or something leading to his cell or cell block.

This was a question asked at first that seemed to never get answered

Yes this and the other questions i have asked have not been addressed.

The M.E has answered one question and one question only and its the question that few were doubting. It was suicide.

He did not address whether it was Aided Suicide thru benglict or purposefully or other such questions that are STILL being investigated.

Some idiots think 'oh he said it was suicide so no other questions need be asked'. This while the gov't itself is still asking those same OTHER questions, rightfully.

 

[HereticBD]

Did we ever hear about cameras filming around his cell? There had to be at least 1 camera functional that filmed a hallway or something leading to his cell or cell block.

This was a question asked at first that seemed to never get answered

Nope. Radio silence. Only report I read was that it was "unlikely" any footage from inside his cell was captured. Absolutely nothing on where cameras are located in the prison, if they were functional, or whatever.

Just more of nothing to see here.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Wtf is "JAQing" ? I dont know what it means.

the definition as applied by the idiot in this thread is

- asking any question or for any clarifications about a situation that has occurred that raises doubts that some level of malfeasance was at play. No not saying there was malfeasance but simply any implication.

So when they say 'protocol is to have cellmate in with a recent suicide. He had one assigned who was transferred only hours before the suicide' you are not to ask questions about that or want answers or an investigation.

Literally he is saying the action of asking that question or any question is a CT

In reality the definition of JAQing is when CTers, despite investigations being completed and answers in and accepted, they keep throwing out open ended questions as if not answered and not looking for answers to create the illusion there is a lot of doubt and things that were not addressed. They just keep barraging with already addressed issues.

that is not the case in this investigation. Every question i have asked are one that HAVE NOT yet been answered and the gov't is actively trying to get answers on themselves.

So the only thing you can say then is that those who see this as JAQing think 'only the gov't should and can ask questions, citizens should never do it'. Most of us would see how stupid that view is though.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Nope. Radio silence. Only report I read was that it was "unlikely" any footage from inside his cell was captured. Absolutely nothing on where cameras are located in the prison, if they were functional, or whatever.

Just more of nothing to see here.

yes and that would be one of the easiest things for them to address. They either have proper and uninterrupted footage from all the camera's in the area or they do not. They could and should immediately speak to that if even to say 'we do have control of all the camera footage. All camera's were working properly. We will release our findings once we have reviewed.'.

In a case like this where there is so much doubt of the authorities (even by the AG) you would think they would announce something like that right away even if they gave no details.

 

[franklinstower]

the definition as applied by the idiot in this thread is

- asking any question or for any clarifications about a situation that has occurred that raises doubts that some level of malfeasance was at play. No not saying there was malfeasance but simply any implication.

So when they say 'protocol is to have cellmate in with a recent suicide. He had one assigned who was transferred only hours before the suicide' you are not to ask questions about that or want answers or an investigation.

Literally he is saying the action of asking that question or any question is a CT

In reality the definition of JAQing is when CTers, despite investigations being completed and answers in and accepted, they keep throwing out open ended questions as if not answered and not looking for answers to create the illusion there is a lot of doubt and things that were not addressed. They just keep barraging with already addressed issues.

that is not the case in this investigation. Every question i have asked are one that HAVE NOT yet been answered and the gov't is actively trying to get answers on themselves.

So the only thing you can say then is that those who see this as JAQing think 'only the gov't should and can ask questions, citizens should never do it'. Most of us would see how stupid that view is though.

This post is perfectly reasonable IMO. Its the CT's and the so called realists who judge them that are out in the periphery here.

 

[Confucamus]

the definition as applied by the idiot in this thread is

- asking any question or for any clarifications about a situation that has occurred that raises doubts that some level of malfeasance was at play. No not saying there was malfeasance but simply any implication.

So when they say 'protocol is to have cellmate in with a recent suicide. He had one assigned who was transferred only hours before the suicide' you are not to ask questions about that or want answers or an investigation.

Literally he is saying the action of asking that question or any question is a CT

In reality the definition of JAQing is when CTers, despite investigations being completed and answers in and accepted, they keep throwing out open ended questions as if not answered and not looking for answers to create the illusion there is a lot of doubt and things that were not addressed. They just keep barraging with already addressed issues.

that is not the case in this investigation. Every question i have asked are one that HAVE NOT yet been answered and the gov't is actively trying to get answers on themselves.

So the only thing you can say then is that those who see this as JAQing think 'only the gov't should and can ask questions, citizens should never do it'. Most of us would see how stupid that view is though.

That's just a chicken shit way of trying to dominate the direction of the discussing of this story. I think most other posters see through that.

I've said before, Epstein very well may have killed himself totally independent of any outside influence. I tend to roll my eyes at conspiracy theories but we're not talking about little gray space aliens living in my attic. There are definitely serious questions that need to be addressed with how this went down. I think you've been doing a good job of keeping track of some important ones.

 

[Hollywood Jack]

Identity of woman filmed with Prince Andrew at Jeffrey Epstein’s house revealed

The woman filmed with Prince Andrew at Jeffrey Epstein’s New York home has been identified as the socialite daughter of a former prime minister of Australia, according to reports.

The Sydney Morning Herald first noted the “striking resemblance” of Katherine Keating to the woman, whom the royal greets as she leaves Epstein’s Upper East Side mega-mansion in December 2010.

Friends then reportedly confirmed to DailyMail.com that the woman in the video, first aired on its site Sunday, was the daughter of Paul Keating, who was Australia’s prime minister from 1991 to 1996.

The politician’s secretary told the outlet he was “aware of what the inquiry was about, but he would not be making a comment.”

His daughter did not respond to multiple requests for comment, the site said.

Katherine Keating, now 37, was seen leaving Epstein’s home in the clip, with Andrew smiling and waving as she leaves.

Its publication intensified the spotlight on the prince’s ties with the phile, already a registered sex offender who had been jailed for sex with a minor. It was filmed just a day before the two men were photographed strolling through Central Park together.

https://nypost.com/2019/08/20/ident...ce-andrew-at-jeffrey-epsteins-house-revealed/

 

[Bald1]

We were all told it was suicide well before the M.E's findings and most beside the nutty accepted that was likely the case.

We need to get better understanding as to whether this suicide was aided either thru gross negligence or purposeful negligence?

Those were the 2 main questions prior and they are still the 2 main questions today.

Gross negligence is the confluence of simple mistakes or poor decisions.
Purposeful negligence can be creating situations where inmates or others can get to him to enact what is known as Prison Justice or knowing he may be suicidal and just leaving him to his devices as you don't care and feel everyone would be better off if he did it.

But these major questions that existed prior to the M.E report are still the ones that need answering now:

- why was he taken off suicide watch? Who made that call? Did it follow protocol?
- Protocol calls for an inmate coming off suicide watch to have a low risk cell mate for a period time post the attempt. The claim is he had one assigned but that person had a last minute transfer order and they decided to go thru with the transfer leaving Epstein alone. Who made that call? Prior protocol is reported to be that any such transfers would be delayed until the new cell mate was put in place. Someone over-rode that. How common is that departure? How often would that happen?
- Protocol was that guards should patrol and put eyes on him at a minimum, every 30 minutes (?). On that evening the rounds were not happening. How often would that departure happen?
- he revised his Will two days before his suicide. It is protocol that the Prisons, if aware of that, consider that a key indicator that a person may attempt suicide soon. Were they aware? Did they follow protocol?
- there is CCTV all thru the prison and yet nothing has been reported about what was captured. Why? Were they all operable? Was there any divergence from what is the norm there?


So as you can see pretty much every issue before the M.E report still exists and remains unanswered even this far into what should be a open investigation.

The only info we really have got is that they had some over worked guards who may have been derelict in their duties. Not shocking. But pinning this all on the low man in the totem pole is too conventiant and does not address all the other major issues that need answering.

No one should deny that the confluence of gross negligence is the leading theory. It is. But every time you require multiple things to ALL go wrong for that to happen then the more evidence is required to substantiate that. One mistake is easy to swallow. Two mistakes, also easy. Four or more required coincidental mistakes, rightly raise questions that require answers.

Yes, the finding was suicide.

So 66 pages and nothing new. Thanks for saving me the time boys.

 

[MikeMcMann]

This post is perfectly reasonable IMO. Its the CT's and the so called realists who judge them that are out in the periphery here.

this thread has outed what @Anung Un Rama noted as a weird phenomena.

Not only do we have nutty Cter's who are certainly out there.

But this new wave of nuts have been formed almost as the polar extreme to them. Maybe out of frustration with CTers who can, in fact be maddening.

This new wave sees something like 'policy says anyone who recently attempted suicide will be assigned a cellmate' and then when you hear 'he was assigned a cell mate. Just hours before that cellmate got a transfer order and contrary to policy was transferred before a new cell mate was assigned and in place', and calls that equivalent to being a Flat earther because you should not be asking a question that suggests that needs to be addressed or answered because in doing so you are opening the door to a CT.

There is clearly a group now so afraid of a CT potentially arising from questions that they see the very act of asking questions as wrong and something to be ridiculed and not done.

Don't ask why he did not have a cell mate. Don't ask if camera's were operating. Don't ask why the staff were not following protocol re doing rounds. If you do that is wrong and furthering a CT.

 

[D Train]

We literally have someone saying if you ask the questions:

- why did the security guards not do their scheduled rounds
- why was he taken off suicide watch

That is JAQing and furthering a conspiracy theory.

That asking questions alone that have never been answered and that are being investigated actively is not allowed and is furtherance of conspiracy theories.

That is every bit as nutty as the nuttiest conspiracy as that is not 'doubting the findings or facts' and is only asking the questions the gov't itself is investigating and asking.

We have the emergence of a new extreme now that is every bit as nutty as the CTers and that is people who say 'never ask any questions'. No, not 'do not doubt findings' but rather do not even ask questions before there are findings.

Yeah, I don’t really understand what’s happening here. Why NOT ask questions? I’m not saying it wasn’t a suicide, but the circumstances are at least unusual. Typically in cases like this, people demonstrate what I consider a healthy dose of institutional distrust. But not in this instance. And I’m not sure why.

 

[MikeMcMann]

That's just a chicken shit way of trying to dominate the direction of the discussing of this story. I think most other posters see through that.

I've said before, Epstein very well may have killed himself totally independent of any outside influence. I tend to roll my eyes at conspiracy theories but we're not talking about little gray space aliens living in my attic. There are definitely serious questions that need to be addressed with how this went down. I think you've been doing a good job of keeping track of some important ones.

Yup.

My view from the start has always been if I were to bet my own money this was suicide and likely suicide by gross negligence. Just a clusterf*ck of mistakes and inattention.

However I would not be shocked if purposeful negligence or what is referred to as Jail House Justice played a role where those in the loop knew he should have a cell mate, knew they should get around to their rounds, etc, but just did not GAF because 'if a phile kills himself, good riddance. World is better off anyway', i am not going to rush to protect that guy. I'll get around to those things when I do.

Is it within the realm of possibility that he was killed or aided in killing himself with intent. Sure but that would be my last bet here.

But until the questions being asked by the AG are answered one cannot simply jump to any conclusion.

Spoiler: Questions that need answering

But these major questions that existed prior to the M.E report are still the ones that need answering now:

- why was he taken off suicide watch? Who made that call? Did it follow protocol?
- Protocol calls for an inmate coming off suicide watch to have a low risk cell mate for a period time post the attempt. The claim is he had one assigned but that person had a last minute transfer order and they decided to go thru with the transfer leaving Epstein alone. Who made that call? Prior protocol is reported to be that any such transfers would be delayed until the new cell mate was put in place. Someone over-rode that. How common is that departure? How often would that happen?
- Protocol was that guards should patrol and put eyes on him at a minimum, every 30 minutes (?). On that evening the rounds were not happening. How often would that departure happen?
- he revised his Will two days before his suicide. It is protocol that the Prisons, if aware of that, consider that a key indicator that a person may attempt suicide soon. Were they aware? Did they follow protocol?
- there is CCTV all thru the prison and yet nothing has been reported about what was captured. Why? Were they all operable? Was there any divergence from what is the norm there?


So as you can see pretty much every issue before the M.E report still exists and remains unanswered even this far into what should be a open investigation.