5 ms·

I am not a lawyer, but @klasfeldreports on twitter quotes an unnamed legal source who says: "Background: An important note after Epstein's death: no one else w

I am not a lawyer, but @klasfeldreports on twitter quotes an unnamed legal source who says: "Background: An important note after Epstein's death: no one else will have standing to challenge the search warrant on his house. Everything will be admissible against any other defendant without possibility of a motion to suppress." So maybe this will be a net good for justice?

mc32 7y ago
Maybe. One hopes this can be salvaged. I guess we may never know who was behind it all pulling the levers. Mr Epstein can’t have been at the top.
- ironSkillet 7y ago
  What? The guy supposedly had $500 million to his name. That can buy quite a lot of levers.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  Epstein was quite plausibly the chief procurer; he no doubt had a wife array of powerful clients, but there's not a lot of reason to think there was a higher-level mastermind behind Epstein in the procurement operation.
  - ryacko 7y ago
    Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal.
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      > Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal. That Epstein had politically powerful clients and friends is not in serious dispute (which were clients and which were merely friends unconnected to his child rape business is somewhat less clear), and explains the sweetheart plea deal without resort to some behind-Epstein mastermind. It's not impossible, but there is nothing that is explained more easily by such a mastermind than by the Epstein being the master of his own sex trade operation which garnered him influence (simply heading that operation means he has powerful blackmail material on powerful people.)
      - ryacko 7y ago
        I suggest reading the book October Surprise by Gary Sick. Intelligence agencies don’t use competent people. Your understanding of the situation is incorrect, and is leading you to incorrect conclusions.
        dragonwriter 7y ago
        > I suggest reading the book October Surprise by Gary Sick. Intelligence agencies don’t use competent people. They use incompetent people who can be manipulated into believing they have common interests and competent people who believe in their own that they have common interests, but, yes, they often use incompetent people. The relevance of this observation is unclear, as it still presents no existing phenomenon that requires a shady superior to Epstein to explain. > Your understanding of the situation is incorrect. You have as yet provided no way in which my understanding is incorrect.
        ryacko 7y ago
        Looking at Epstein’s life seems incredible. It is so incredible it is beyond my understanding. But you claim to understand it, which is also very much beyond me. But you are right, more so than you think, I cannot provide a way for you to understand something I don’t understand.
draw_down 7y ago
But his death also ends the criminal case against him, no one else was charged in the indictment. Why act on a warrant for a case that has ended? I’m definitely not an expert in criminal justice proceedings though.
- dragonwriter 7y ago
  > But his death also ends the criminal case against him, no one else was charged in the indictment. If there were related parallel investigations, they could either still be before a grand jury, not yet have been submitted to a grand jury, or already had indictments issued but under seal. The fact that no one else was charged in the Epstein indictment does not mean there is no one else in a related matter against whom an investigation and/or (sealed) charges exist, which, if from no other source, the public coverage of all the investigations around Trump should have made everyone familiar with recently.
dragonwriter 7y ago
> So maybe this will be a net good for justice? It would have been admissible against anyone but Epstein even if Epstein hadn't died, and further warrants derived from information discovered through it (including reseizure of the same evidence under a new warrant) wouldn't, as I understand it, be precluded unless it was to be used against Epstein, all for the same reason that the right to object dies with Epstein, so it does nothing for justice except preventing any Constitutional violation from even being recognized, which is a net loss, not a win.
- greenhatman 7y ago
  That is too much for one sentence. More sentences would read easier.
  - aldoushuxley001 7y ago
    He's a lawyer, it's part of the tradecraft.
    - neonate 7y ago
      dragonwriter is a laywer? Must have graduated recently. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16171225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16171225
      - colejohnson66 7y ago
        I think that was sarcasm
    - dragonwriter 7y ago
      I'm not a lawyer. I did do a few years of law school, but I wrote that way long before that, so that's not why...
gurkendoktor 7y ago
I think that's the best-case scenario, and the worst case looks more like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux#Deaths_of_potential_witnesses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux#Deaths_of_potenti... Even the public prosecutor was suddenly overwhelmed by sadness and took his life during the investigation. Hats off to anyone who dares to touch high-profile pedophilia cases.

mc32 7y ago

Maybe. One hopes this can be salvaged. I guess we may never know who was behind it all pulling the levers. Mr Epstein can’t have been at the top.

ironSkillet 7y ago
What? The guy supposedly had $500 million to his name. That can buy quite a lot of levers.
dragonwriter 7y ago
Epstein was quite plausibly the chief procurer; he no doubt had a wife array of powerful clients, but there's not a lot of reason to think there was a higher-level mastermind behind Epstein in the procurement operation.
- ryacko 7y ago
  Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal.
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    > Epstein comes off as an unhinged individual. With a mansion full of sex art, a normal reaction would be “we should have known in retrospect”, not a sweetheart plea deal. That Epstein had politically powerful clients and friends is not in serious dispute (which were clients and which were merely friends unconnected to his child rape business is somewhat less clear), and explains the sweetheart plea deal without resort to some behind-Epstein mastermind. It's not impossible, but there is nothing that is explained more easily by such a mastermind than by the Epstein being the master of his own sex trade operation which garnered him influence (simply heading that operation means he has powerful blackmail material on powerful people.)
    - ryacko 7y ago
      I suggest reading the book October Surprise by Gary Sick. Intelligence agencies don’t use competent people. Your understanding of the situation is incorrect, and is leading you to incorrect conclusions.
      - dragonwriter 7y ago
        > I suggest reading the book October Surprise by Gary Sick. Intelligence agencies don’t use competent people. They use incompetent people who can be manipulated into believing they have common interests and competent people who believe in their own that they have common interests, but, yes, they often use incompetent people. The relevance of this observation is unclear, as it still presents no existing phenomenon that requires a shady superior to Epstein to explain. > Your understanding of the situation is incorrect. You have as yet provided no way in which my understanding is incorrect.
        ryacko 7y ago
        Looking at Epstein’s life seems incredible. It is so incredible it is beyond my understanding. But you claim to understand it, which is also very much beyond me. But you are right, more so than you think, I cannot provide a way for you to understand something I don’t understand.

draw_down 7y ago

But his death also ends the criminal case against him, no one else was charged in the indictment. Why act on a warrant for a case that has ended? I’m definitely not an expert in criminal justice proceedings though.

dragonwriter 7y ago
> But his death also ends the criminal case against him, no one else was charged in the indictment. If there were related parallel investigations, they could either still be before a grand jury, not yet have been submitted to a grand jury, or already had indictments issued but under seal. The fact that no one else was charged in the Epstein indictment does not mean there is no one else in a related matter against whom an investigation and/or (sealed) charges exist, which, if from no other source, the public coverage of all the investigations around Trump should have made everyone familiar with recently.

dragonwriter 7y ago

> So maybe this will be a net good for justice? It would have been admissible against anyone but Epstein even if Epstein hadn't died, and further warrants derived from information discovered through it (including reseizure of the same evidence under a new warrant) wouldn't, as I understand it, be precluded unless it was to be used against Epstein, all for the same reason that the right to object dies with Epstein, so it does nothing for justice except preventing any Constitutional violation from even being recognized, which is a net loss, not a win.

greenhatman 7y ago
That is too much for one sentence. More sentences would read easier.
- aldoushuxley001 7y ago
  He's a lawyer, it's part of the tradecraft.
  - neonate 7y ago
    dragonwriter is a laywer? Must have graduated recently. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16171225 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16171225
    - colejohnson66 7y ago
      I think that was sarcasm
  - dragonwriter 7y ago
    I'm not a lawyer. I did do a few years of law school, but I wrote that way long before that, so that's not why...

gurkendoktor 7y ago

I think that's the best-case scenario, and the worst case looks more like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux#Deaths_of_potential_witnesses https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Dutroux#Deaths_of_potenti... Even the public prosecutor was suddenly overwhelmed by sadness and took his life during the investigation. Hats off to anyone who dares to touch high-profile pedophilia cases.