The Jeffrey Epstein & Ghislaine Maxwell Scandal

[Endlessly Amazed]

This escalation of offending is not my individual take on things. It is nothing to do with any personal view I may hold on the death penalty.

It happens when a crime is perceived to be punished so harshly that an offender might as well commit a more serious offence because they have nothing to lose.

Going back to the kidnapping: If the penalty for abduction is the same as for murder, then a person who is abducted will be at more risk.

There are all sorts of further possible consequences, all bad.
What if the abductor and their victim are tracked down and a rescue attempt is made? The abductor is already likely to be executed. They have no incentive to release their captive. Even shooting the rescuers won't make things any worse.

This can be explained with the example of sex offences. If a society were to become so outraged about rape that it began sentencing rapists to death, then several serious consequences would follow.
One might be that more victims would be murdered; a dead victim cannot testify.
Another is that where the victim was spared, juries might feel the death sentence too serious for the offence and find offenders not guilty.

Here in the UK courts have various punishments available for driving offences including fines, licence 'points' that make insurance more expensive, temporary bans, permanent bans, suspended sentences and actual prison sentences and so on.

Nobody is banned for a first, trivial offence. Persistent offenders are given stiffer punishments and most learn their lesson.

If a person committing a first minor speed offence had their licence automatically removed there would be no respect for the law. When they saw the blue lights following them there'd be no incentive to stop. They might as well try to outrun the police car - nothing to lose.

Instead, Brits will glance in the rearview mirror, sigh, pull over and practice their 'I'm terribly sorry, Officer, was I going a little too fast?' routine. Worth a shot.

I do understand. You and I disagree. I do have some background in the US with the judicial system, domestic violence, and the broader topic of recidivism. I also personally have known a few career criminals, both of the violent crime and white-collar crime varieties, who had careers lasting decades. Whenever they were released from prison, they re-offended within a short time, were caught, convicted again, put into prison, released, reoffended, etc. It was a career. They were all remarkably cheerful and employed their intelligence to not getting caught, not re-offending. They blamed their victims and the judicial system. Blaming the victim was 100% with domestic abusers I have personally known.

You write: "There are all sorts of further possible consequences, all bad." I suggest that all possible consequences include the certainty that the offender, executed, would not go on to commit more crimes. This is not bad. Really. I did not write that a convicted offender should be executed after the first offence; just early on in his or her offending career. I do understand and support the escalation of punishment to fit the nature and escalation of the offense. I do support, on the taxpayer's money, efforts to rehabilitate.

Escargot, we will have to agree to disagree on this. In the aggregate, facts exist to support both sides of the discussion. On an individual basis, which is where justice resides, all the facts of the individual situation should be, but sometimes are not, considered.

 

[escargot]

I do understand. You and I disagree. I do have some background in the US with the judicial system, domestic violence, and the broader topic of recidivism. I also personally have known a few career criminals, both of the violent crime and white-collar crime varieties, who had careers lasting decades. Whenever they were released from prison, they re-offended within a short time, were caught, convicted again, put into prison, released, reoffended, etc. It was a career. They were all remarkably cheerful and employed their intelligence to not getting caught, not re-offending. They blamed their victims and the judicial system. Blaming the victim was 100% with domestic abusers I have personally known.

You write: "There are all sorts of further possible consequences, all bad." I suggest that all possible consequences include the certainty that the offender, executed, would not go on to commit more crimes. This is not bad. Really. I did not write that a convicted offender should be executed after the first offence; just early on in his or her offending career. I do understand and support the escalation of punishment to fit the nature and escalation of the offense. I do support, on the taxpayer's money, efforts to rehabilitate.

Escargot, we will have to agree to disagree on this. In the aggregate, facts exist to support both sides of the discussion. On an individual basis, which is where justice resides, all the facts of the individual situation should be, but sometimes are not, considered.

This is not about whether or not I believe in capital punishment. It's about the fact that when two crimes, one more serious than the other, are punished in the same way the effect will be to encourage the more serious offence.

 

[Endlessly Amazed]

This is not about whether or not I believe in capital punishment. It's about the fact that when two crimes, one more serious than the other, are punished in the same way the effect will be to encourage the more serious offence.

Escargot – I have not expressed myself clearly if you think that my comment was about what you believe. It is not. I am familiar with the statistics and extrapolations of crime and the death penalty, but likely not as familiar as you are with them. Respectfully, I do disagree with you. I stated twice (posts #575 and #577) that an offender, if executed, could not go on to harm future victims. I did not state that the death penalty would act as a deterrent to others. It may, but this is likely to be impossible to prove. I know that in developed countries, a current cultural bias exists against the death penalty, in contrast, for example, with the same countries’ bias 100 years ago.

If an offender is executed, he or she can do no harm to future victims. This is true, not sophistry. Since you and I have a different interpretation of the aggregated facts, and we both know this difference, I think we should end this discussion as we are likely to not persuade the other.

Forgive the late response. I apparently have caught covid again and feel like crap. I have had the two-part vaccine as well as a single booster.

 

[escargot]

Escargot – I have not expressed myself clearly if you think that my comment was about what you believe. It is not. I am familiar with the statistics and extrapolations of crime and the death penalty, but likely not as familiar as you are with them. Respectfully, I do disagree with you. I stated twice (posts #575 and #577) that an offender, if executed, could not go on to harm future victims. I did not state that the death penalty would act as a deterrent to others. It may, but this is likely to be impossible to prove. I know that in developed countries, a current cultural bias exists against the death penalty, in contrast, for example, with the same countries’ bias 100 years ago.

If an offender is executed, he or she can do no harm to future victims. This is true, not sophistry. Since you and I have a different interpretation of the aggregated facts, and we both know this difference, I think we should end this discussion as we are likely to not persuade the other.

Forgive the late response. I apparently have caught covid again and feel like crap. I have had the two-part vaccine as well as a single booster.

No, this is not a different interpretation. You said 'offender', not 'murderer'.

 

[escargot]

'Prosecutors in Ghislaine Maxwell's sex trafficking trial have rested their case following two weeks of testimony.'

This seemed rather short to me but I'm no expert.

It's now time for Maxwell's defence, which seems to be along the lines of those women are lying sluts and I didn't do anything and anyway Epstein made me do it.

Ghislaine Maxwell trial: Prosecutors rest case after 10 days

Annie Farmer, the last of four alleged victims to testify, recounted on Friday the "dark memory" of abuse by Ms Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein.

Ms Farmer, now 42, said she had been groped by Ms Maxwell, who is accused of grooming underage girls for Epstein between 1994 and 2004.
Ms Maxwell has pleaded not guilty to eight charges against her.
Over the past two weeks, prosecutors sought to portray her as an accomplice to Epstein, a convicted sex offender, calling them "partners in crime" who had built "a pyramid scheme of abuse".
Epstein was convicted of state sex crimes in Florida in 2008, but died by suicide in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex trafficking charges.
Ms Maxwell's defence say she is being scapegoated for crimes committed by Epstein because he is not able to face trial.

 

[Kondoru]

I like to think I have had a sheltered life.

Nevertheless I have seen things that have disturbed me...mostly folk getting away with stuff.

Where are the MOTHERS in this?

 

[Floyd]

Nah. Excessive sentences encourage escalation of offending.

For example, a highly notorious British double murderer called Colin Pitchfork was released on licence in September and lasted two months before he was back in prison after pestering women.)

I couldn't believe they ever let McGreavy out though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_McGreavy

 

[Floyd]

I visited someone a handful of years ago who was selling a car. It was in the depths of somewhere mega expensive. Modern mansion in 30 rolling acres of countryside with horses and a fountain and lake the size you normally see on a National Trust property. Electric entry gate. You get the picture. Oh dear I thought , not going to enjoy dealing with the mega rich. Couldn't have been a nicer couple. Turned out the wife was very well known and we chatted for ages about her cars and her profession. Didn't buy the car but was invited back anytime. Turned out to be a pleasant surprise and confirmation that you can be too superficially judgemental.
Stark contrast to a local millionaire (so he reckons) who is the biggest tosser you could ever have the misfortune to meet and is prone to having teenage girl hissy fits if he doesn't get what he wants.

The true upper class types are, or certainly used to be, very polite, drive a battered old car covered in mud, own plenty of dogs covered in mud, live in a crumbling, cold pile and spend most of the time wearing wellies- covered in mud. I don't suppose there's too many of them left now though.

 

[Cochise]

N

I like to think I have had a sheltered life.

Nevertheless I have seen things that have disturbed me...mostly folk getting away with stuff.

Where are the MOTHERS in this?

Not every woman who gives birth becomes what we ideally would like to think of as a mother. Like anything else to do with human feelings, the 'right' emotional response isn't always there.

 

[escargot]

I couldn't believe they ever let McGreavy out though.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_McGreavy

The Birmingham Mail covered his release in an article about gruesome Midlands murders.

McGreavy is thought to be subject to an electronic tag and living in supervised accommodation.

In addition, he is banned from Worcester, as well as the area where Elsie (mother of the victims) and her family live.

So like all lifers he is not free in the sense of being able to come and go as he wishes. This also applied to Pitchfork who messed things up for himself right away.

As we haven't heard anything of McGreavy he must be keeping his head down and behaving.

 

[Floyd]

The Birmingham Mail covered his release in an article about gruesome Midlands murders.


So like all lifers he is not free in the sense of being able to come and go as he wishes. This also applied to Pitchfork who messed things up for himself right away.

As we haven't heard anything of McGreavy he must be keeping his head down and behaving.

Must be difficult for the family and friends though, to know he's 'out there somewhere'.

 

[escargot]

Must be difficult for the family and friends though, to know he's 'out there somewhere'.

Of course. However, he did serve over twice as long as his recommended sentence of 20 years and is now about 70.
While I wouldn't presume to guess what the family think about this, I sincerely hope they continue to feel safe from him, as they have been for over 45 years.

 

[Floyd]

Of course. However, he did serve over twice as long as his recommended sentence of 20 years and is now about 70.
While I wouldn't presume to guess what the family think about this, I sincerely hope they continue to feel safe from him, as they have been for over 45 years.

Yes, nothing has happened so far and maybe it never will, but I'm willing to bet she is permanently on edge. Not necessarily through fear of him coming back (although that could be possible), but just the fact he is out. Should have just thrown away the key- court adjourned.

 

[Sabresonic]

The true upper class types are, or certainly used to be, very polite, drive a battered old car covered in mud, own plenty of dogs covered in mud, live in a crumbling, cold pile and spend most of the time wearing wellies- covered in mud. I don't suppose there's too many of them left now though.

Sounds like the Humbug of the man Humphrey Smith who owns the Sameuel Smith Brewery in Tadcaster.

 

[Floyd]

Sounds like the Humbug of the man Humphrey Smith who owns the Sameuel Smith Brewery in Tadcaster.

Too right. Don't want any riff-raff spoiling it for the rest.

 

[Xanatic*]

I see that Gucci has a perfume called Guilty. I know just who would be great as the new face for that.

 

[PeteS]

Sounds like the Humbug of the man Humphrey Smith who owns the Sameuel Smith Brewery in Tadcaster.

There's a hotel/pub on the A6 (going off topic) can't remember name, owned by Sam Smiths. Very old building in a great location. Never has any customers even on a busy Sunday lunch time. I mean deserted. Apparently if you answer your mobile when in there you simply get thrown out (yeah ok I know) ,but there are other weird rules. Book a hotel room and they can't guarantee you'll get any food. All this apparently comes from "above". Just weird in this day and age.

 

[maximus otter]

There's a hotel/pub owned by Sam Smiths. Apparently if you answer your mobile when in there you simply get thrown out…

That’s all of them.

More like this, please.

maximus otter

 

[escargot]

There's a hotel/pub on the A6 (going off topic) can't remember name, owned by Sam Smiths. Very old building in a great location. Never has any customers even on a busy Sunday lunch time. I mean deserted. Apparently if you answer your mobile when in there you simply get thrown out (yeah ok I know) ,but there are other weird rules. Book a hotel room and they can't guarantee you'll get any food. All this apparently comes from "above". Just weird in this day and age.

Fishy.

 

[PeteS]

That’s all of them.

More like this, please.

maximus otter

Encouraging face to face interaction is fairly noble, but there's not much interaction going on when you have no customers.

 

[maximus otter]

Encouraging face to face interaction is fairly noble, but there's not much interaction going on when you have no customers.

Breathalyser + “sin taxes” + Covid panic = tinned-up pubs.

maximus otter

 

[escargot]

Encouraging face to face interaction is fairly noble, but there's not much interaction going on when you have no customers.

There are stories galore of landlords banning various harmless behaviours or informal forms of dress. Madness when you consider there's always somewhere else that'll gladly accept your money.

OTOH Techy and I have been served delicious rmulti-course meals and other refreshments when wearing hi-viz Lycra.
(Cycling clothes are ideal for this purpose. Nice and stretchy. )

 

[Sabresonic]

There's a hotel/pub on the A6 (going off topic) can't remember name, owned by Sam Smiths. Very old building in a great location. Never has any customers even on a busy Sunday lunch time. I mean deserted. Apparently if you answer your mobile when in there you simply get thrown out (yeah ok I know) ,but there are other weird rules. Book a hotel room and they can't guarantee you'll get any food. All this apparently comes from "above". Just weird in this day and age.

Used to be great pubs but started to change for the worst in the last 10 years with him messing up jobless mangers lifespan's, and then bit by bit he stripped the pub away with juke box, hot and cold food and the Mobleys phone thing ( not a bad them sometimes in some cases) and then worst of all he 100% price increase on the beers because of fucking Covid.

 

[ChristLionQC]

There's a hotel/pub on the A6 (going off topic) can't remember name, owned by Sam Smiths. Very old building in a great location. Never has any customers even on a busy Sunday lunch time. I mean deserted. Apparently if you answer your mobile when in there you simply get thrown out (yeah ok I know) ,but there are other weird rules. Book a hotel room and they can't guarantee you'll get any food. All this apparently comes from "above". Just weird in this day and age.

Another entirely approving article about this, and from the opposite side of the floor to the Telegraph

"At the behest of this Samuel Smith pub’s 75-year-old owner, Humphrey Smith, modernity has been barred. The list of prohibitions is impressively long: no phones, no laptops, no Kindles, no music, no TV, no bank cards, as well as no swearing and no dogs."

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeand...ility-returns-as-samuel-smith-pub-bans-mobile

 

[Floyd]

There's a hotel/pub on the A6 (going off topic) can't remember name, owned by Sam Smiths. Very old building in a great location. Never has any customers even on a busy Sunday lunch time. I mean deserted. Apparently if you answer your mobile when in there you simply get thrown out (yeah ok I know) ,but there are other weird rules. Book a hotel room and they can't guarantee you'll get any food. All this apparently comes from "above". Just weird in this day and age.

There's a pub near to where I grew up (in the middle of nowhere) with a sign on the bar saying ''don't ask for lager as a smack in the mouth may offend). I hope it's still there.

 

[Floyd]

Encouraging face to face interaction is fairly noble, but there's not much interaction going on when you have no customers.

 

[Bigphoot2]

There's a pub near to where I grew up (in the middle of nowhere) with a sign on the bar saying ''don't ask for lager as a smack in the mouth may offend). I hope it's still there.

A mate went into pub way up in the Scottish Highlands and asked for a whisky then said to the barman, "Oh and put some water in it."
He was told in no uncertain terms "They make it with water, you don't need any more!"

 

[escargot]

A mate went into pub way up in the Scottish Highlands and asked for a whisky then said to the barman, "Oh and put some water in it."
He was told in no uncertain terms "They make it with water, you don't need any more!"

Before Techy knew about fine single malts he made the error of asking for Famous Grouse in a Scottish pub. The barman derided him for ordering cuking' whisky.

 

[pandacracker]

When I lived in Glasgow, when refusing to put water in my 10 year old Macallan, one of the Scots I was with muttered something about not going to drink whisky like an Englishman as he put a splash in his.

But aren't we getting a bit off topic?

 

[escargot]

When I lived in Glasgow, when refusing to put water in my 10 year old Macallan, one of the Scots I was with muttered something about not going to drink whisky like an Englishman as he put a splash in his.

But aren't we getting a bit off topic?

We do have a thread or two on booze-related subjects.