4 ms·

> That said, I take full responsibility for my error in judgment. I am deeply sorry to the survivors, to the Media Lab, and to the MIT community for bringing su

> That said, I take full responsibility for my error in judgment. I am deeply sorry to the survivors, to the Media Lab, and to the MIT community for bringing such a person into our network. If you don't know that a person is bad, then you just don't know. People didn't know Bundy was a serial killer, and we shouldn't fault them for not knowing. You don't know what you don't know. That's not a fault. That's not something you have to apologize for.

driverdan 7y ago
Epstein had already been convicted. It wasn't a secret.
calvinmorrison 7y ago
He pled guilty in 2008 for hiring child prostitutes. Joi mentions they met in 2013. If you don't do due dilligence, or even a cursory Google search, I believe you might bear some moral culpability in being willingly associated with a pedophile. Frankly, nobody seems to have given lark about this guy until the new broke again this time. I'm not sure if it was his connections with many obviously famous people and the time peroid this took place, but before the MeToo movement it seems like many famous people had things like this swept under the rug or people looked the other way. I'm sure it's still happening, but hopefully more light will be shed on bad people in positions of wealth and power.
- aflag 7y ago
  After he paid for his crime, doesn't he deserve a second chance?
  - jessaustin 7y ago
    This is part of the problem; at that time Epstein hadn't "paid for" his crimes in any meaningful sense.
    - ndarwincorn 7y ago
      Rehabilitation/reintegration of sex offenders after they're released from prison is a real discussion that we'll need to have as a society sooner than later, but I think we should start with the folks on probation/parole listing a walmart parking lot as their residential address because they can't find housing, not a billionaire that gets a slap on the wrist.
      - deleted 7y ago
        [deleted]
  - devinjflick 7y ago
    I'd argue he didn't pay his debt to society and was not rehabilitated. His previous sentence and it's execution were a complete joke. It's well documented that he continued to keep incredibly young companions and surrounded himself with plenty of "art" of scantily clad very young women. Even if both of those had been appropriate, his sentence fair and he was making obvious efforts to avoid past behavior, you couldn't be sure that you weren't taking money that was generated from the trafficking of other human beings. That's where Ito fucked up, plain and simple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein#Conviction_and_sentencing_(2008%E2%80%932011) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein#Conviction_and...
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- xboxnolifes 7y ago
  > If you don't do due dilligence, or even a cursory Google search, I believe you might bear some moral culpability in being willingly associated with a pedophile. If they didn't know they were a pedophile, then they didn't willingly associate with a pedophile.
  - Barrin92 7y ago
    if you're taking a quarter of a million from someone whose sex offenses are listed on their wikipedia page then you didn't just not know, you didn't want to know. He's either lying or he was willfully ignorant, both of which amount to the same complete disregard of ethics.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
bbunix 7y ago
This has been blowing up for a very long time. They almost got away with it... now that people are leaving the lab the apology is certainly suspect. By the same token, will the organizations that fight trafficking take Epstein-tainted money?

driverdan 7y ago

Epstein had already been convicted. It wasn't a secret.

calvinmorrison 7y ago

He pled guilty in 2008 for hiring child prostitutes. Joi mentions they met in 2013. If you don't do due dilligence, or even a cursory Google search, I believe you might bear some moral culpability in being willingly associated with a pedophile. Frankly, nobody seems to have given lark about this guy until the new broke again this time. I'm not sure if it was his connections with many obviously famous people and the time peroid this took place, but before the MeToo movement it seems like many famous people had things like this swept under the rug or people looked the other way. I'm sure it's still happening, but hopefully more light will be shed on bad people in positions of wealth and power.

aflag 7y ago
After he paid for his crime, doesn't he deserve a second chance?
- jessaustin 7y ago
  This is part of the problem; at that time Epstein hadn't "paid for" his crimes in any meaningful sense.
  - ndarwincorn 7y ago
    Rehabilitation/reintegration of sex offenders after they're released from prison is a real discussion that we'll need to have as a society sooner than later, but I think we should start with the folks on probation/parole listing a walmart parking lot as their residential address because they can't find housing, not a billionaire that gets a slap on the wrist.
    - deleted 7y ago
      [deleted]
- devinjflick 7y ago
  I'd argue he didn't pay his debt to society and was not rehabilitated. His previous sentence and it's execution were a complete joke. It's well documented that he continued to keep incredibly young companions and surrounded himself with plenty of "art" of scantily clad very young women. Even if both of those had been appropriate, his sentence fair and he was making obvious efforts to avoid past behavior, you couldn't be sure that you weren't taking money that was generated from the trafficking of other human beings. That's where Ito fucked up, plain and simple. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein#Conviction_and_sentencing_(2008%E2%80%932011) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeffrey_Epstein#Conviction_and...
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
xboxnolifes 7y ago
> If you don't do due dilligence, or even a cursory Google search, I believe you might bear some moral culpability in being willingly associated with a pedophile. If they didn't know they were a pedophile, then they didn't willingly associate with a pedophile.
- Barrin92 7y ago
  if you're taking a quarter of a million from someone whose sex offenses are listed on their wikipedia page then you didn't just not know, you didn't want to know. He's either lying or he was willfully ignorant, both of which amount to the same complete disregard of ethics.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

bbunix 7y ago

This has been blowing up for a very long time. They almost got away with it... now that people are leaving the lab the apology is certainly suspect. By the same token, will the organizations that fight trafficking take Epstein-tainted money?