If true, this would be the least surprising thing I’ve ever read in print.
Also accused in the court filing this week of sexually abusing Jane Doe #3 was noted law professor Alan Dershowitz.
“[Self-made billionaire Jeffrey] Epstein required Jane Doe #3 to have sexual relations with Dershowitz on numerous occasions while she was a minor, not only in Florida but also on private planes, in New York, New Mexico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands,” the filing states.
Dershowitz issued an adamant denial, saying the case “is all about money.”
“The entire story is completely made up,” Dershowitz said in the statement.
“I have challenged her lawyers for her to repeat these statements in public so that I can sue them for defamation and I have challenged her to file criminal charges against me, because the filing of false criminal charges, which this one is, is a serious crime,” he added.
Desrchowitz actually represented Epstein in some of his legal cases, which have included at least 17 settlements. From what I understand, Epstein is now a registered sex offender and actually served jail time for soliciting sex from underage girls. There’s now a new lawsuit that names not only Dershowitz but also Prince Andrew as people who engaged in inappropriate conduct with minors procured by Mr. Epstein.
This isn’t a case of where there’s smoke, there’s fire because we know there was plenty of fire.
Jose Alessi, a former houseman, told cops that Epstein would receive three massages daily and that his masseuses were “younger and younger” and “appeared to be sixteen or seventeen years of age at the most.” He also reported that following Epstein massages he sometimes had to “wash off a massager/vibrator and a long rubber penis” which had been left in a sink. Alfredo Rodriguez, a former house manager, told probers that he “knew” Epstein’s masseuses were still in high school. Rodriguez also told of having to “wipe down” vibrators and sex toys post-massage and returning them to an armoire near Epstein’s bed. In a 2002 New York magazine profile of Epstein, Donald Trump called the moneyman a “terrific guy” who “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”
I think The Donald’s personal testimony ought to suffice here.
Perhaps he can appear at Dershowitz’s trial and talk about what a “terrific guy” he is, too.
Self-made billionaire? Puke!! Second, I read elsewhere that Epstein supposedly supplied under-age girls for a number of politicians. That wouldn’t surprise me either.
you have a problem with people who make a lot of money just because they make a lot of money?
You should check out what he’s done with his money.
Your beef should be with primarily with his conduct with underage girls.
Would he have made a lot of money with proper public policy? Not likely. Billionaires shouldn’t exist as a matter of policy.
Re: topic, none of this is particularly surprising. Of course, Dershowitz will keep plenty of friends in high places if found guilty, seeing as he’d defend any immoral act Israel can come up with. That is the real make or break in these circles. Teen prostitute ring? No problem. Criticize Israel? Burn them!
Boo, the snark in the last sentence of your main post here is more delicious than any meal I could have had today. Indictment by association with the Donald is quite certain ’round the Frog Pond. Thanks for helping us quaff a hearty glass of tears from the 1%.
BTW, just reading some of the clips you provide here is quite awful. Don’t know if I want to put on the Hazmat suit and click that link…
Is there really such thing as a self-made anything? You darn well know what point the corporate media is trying to get across calling him “self-made.”
BooMan, First I would check out HOW he made the money.
Wouldn’t surprise me either. Especially the Moral Majority boys.
Required? Or forced? Doesn’t sound like forcing. Sounds like prostitution. Of course, also illegal.
Twelve year old girls are victims of sexual predators not prostitutes.
Transporting minors across state or national boundaries for sexual activities is a federal crime. The lists of alleged crimes and number of victims identified by federal investigators in this case aren’t short. Too long for there not to have been enough credible allegations to indict this SOB.
Well, I missed the twelve. I saw 17. Apparently, I missed an important fact. But either they were there with parental consent (a crime by the parents) or they were kidnapped and forced aboard the airplane, which is a capital crime for which rape is just the lesser (legally) crime.
But if they were legally employed adults, who just happened to have the young waif look, then the crime is prostitution.
Either way, Dershowitz and Epstein are scumbags. but being a scumbag is not illegal. Maybe it should be.
My sympathies are with Alessi and Rodriguez who had to clean up. Barf me out.
I highly recommend you read more about current human trafficking of minors all over the USA. Quite a bit written about it with the disappearance of Abby Hernandez – http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2014/07/22/abby-hernandez-the-new-hampshire-teen-m
issing-for-months-mysteriously-returned-home/
though it turns out probably her disappearance was for some other reason, nevertheless the problem received some publicity
Thank you. I didn’t follow Booman’s link and the remainder of the top post sounded like an ordinary sex scandal.
“Transporting minors across state or national boundaries for sexual activities is a federal crime. “
They don’t even have to be minors. Re Eliot Spitzer.
The latest filings may include unsubstantiated claims, why not let it play out in court? Alan Dershowitz? Come on! The link with the British royal family will not need any further PR push as the British tabloids will be screaming for weeks. Sex, wealth, power, elites, trafficking, it’s been of all ages: recently DSK and Berlusconi. The crime is primarily in trafficking of girls and women for prostitution. Making the profession legal as in many European nations has not limited this problem. For the Middle East, sex slavery is quite common, what to think of thousands of girls and women enslaved by jihadist groups e.g. ISIS?
Murdoch’s News empire had suffered some setbacks in the UK for using PM Cameron as his crony, he was hoping for a better start of the new year!
Another gem from Murdoch’s empire: Rupert Murdoch & HarperCollins’ Omission
We won’t tell our kids where Israel lies, perhaps no one will notice …
○ US State Department is ‘deeply concerned’ … Settlers Throw Stones at American Consular Officials
Former Mossad officer Ari Ben-Menashe reported that in 1986 Robert Maxwell tipped off the Israeli Embassy in London
that Mordechai Vanunu had given information about Israel’s nuclear capability at Dimona to the Sunday Times.
○ Israel’s National Security State Fears This Man: Mordechai Vanunu
○ Montreal-based lobbyist Ari Ben-Menashe promoting separate Cyrenaican State in Libya
While the FBI is reportedly to reopen its investigation of Epstein’s involvement with underage girls, given the fact that he is a member of the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations and supports the `Friends of Israel Defense Forces‘, it is doubtful that Epstein’s possible connections to the Israeli Mossad will be scrutinized.
○ Billionaire Pedophile Goes Free | The Daily Beast | July 2010 |
○ Jeffrey Epstein: International Moneyman of Mystery | NY Mag |
Where are you seeing this: While the FBI is reportedly to reopen its investigation of Epstein’s involvement with underage girls,?
Legally, this lawsuit (originally filed in 2008) against the federal government is interesting. From AP six months ago:
Doubt that anyone can project all the possible ramifications of this suit should the plaintiffs prevail.
Should also note:
Would those settlements have been much larger had the feds proceeded to prosecute Epstein under all the criminal statutes that he likely violated?
Well Epstein’s ‘self made’ part is pretty interesting. The part about managing assets of clients with net worth of at least a billion is pretty impressive and puts him solidly in the inner circle of the 1%’s which would explain his ability to skate through the Florida charges.
His contributions to Harvard and the medical research that led to treatments of cancer, HIV, and more are impressive and important.
But, to remember the drama of a sitting President being impeached for lying about sex acts with an intern, the concept of a circle of 1%ers, Alan D and a Prince (oh and let’s hope Rupert Murdoch was also involved!) in open court is pretty hot indeed. And let’s not forget the journal that is floating about provided by the housekeeper.
Being amongst the wealthiest for a good (HIV Aids charity) cause, Bill can’t be held to account, can he? Epstein formerly served as public relations director for Vietnam Vets for the Truth, the anti-John Kerry group which emerged for the 2004 presidential election. [False accusation of Kerry on photo with Viet commies]
○ America’s Truth Forum was founded by Jeff Epstein
○ La Frontera: The Anti-Minutemen Project Response
What an absolute @$$hole is this guy!
Bill better get his ‘explainer in chief’ hat dusted off. Epstein’s story is rotten, thanks Oui.
I sometimes go to sleep with the radio on, sometimes the BBC, and it plays all night. Yesterday, I woke up to Alan Dershowitz shouting his adamant denial. That’s not a good way to wake up.
Perhaps it isn’t a great way to wake up, but given his past statements which have attempted to place moral justifications to support dubious legal support for torture and other immoral acts, it is good to see Dershowitz in enough real hot water that he feels the need to make public denials. I’d expect that if these accusations weren’t credible, Alan wouldn’t have felt the need to deny them at all.
And if the charges are false, are you saying the best way for Dershowitz to handle them is to remain silent and let them hang out there?
On the torture issue, iirc he only approved it in a legally sanctioned process involving the rare “ticking time bomb” scenario.
Regardless, I’d like to see just a tad more evidence, including information about the accuser, as well as a thorough legal proceeding before pronouncing him guilty.
“And if the charges are false, are you saying the best way for Dershowitz to handle them is to remain silent and let them hang out there?” Like Cosby. See how well that’s working for him.
The ticking time bomb scenario isn’t “rare”, it’s nonexistent. Think about it: if we KNOW that a bomb is literally ticking and will go off within minutes, we already KNOW so much- why would we need to torture someone to get more info? Even if we granted the premise credibility, torture DOES NOT deliver reliable information, and it makes intuitive sense that short-term torture, which is all that is available under a ticking time bomb scenario, is even less likely to get the info needed.
So, Dershowitz was engaging in major moral cowardice there. It’s severely disappointing that he used his name recognition to give legal legitimacy to the concept of torture.
I think he posited a scenario where a high-level terrorist has been captured and reliable intel from elsewhere discloses an imminent wmd attack on a major US city is in the works. But it’s not known which city or when.
This was his probably well-intended, narrowly-drawn attempt, immediately in the wake of 9-11, knowing that the Bush admin and Congress would be pushing hard to roll back rights and civil liberties in the name of security, for liberals and civil liberties advocates to offer some compromise proposal to limit the damage. Unfortunately, some used it as intellectual/moral cover to justify unleashing their dark side.
It would be interesting to see if in light of recent torture disclosures whether he’s in favor of prosecuting Bush admin officials.
But regardless, his controversial proposal from 13 years ago shouldn’t be used to give legitimacy to the concept of presumption of guilt before being proved innocent.
I’m not presuming Dershowitz’s guilt in this case. I agree that people should not have criminal claims leveled against them in public if they are innocent of those claims. It certainly looks as if he is lying with an awfully mangy dog, however, and has gotten the fleas one would expect.
Besides, if a person can still defend torture in 2014, no matter how (supposedly) carefully, how can we expect that same person to draw the line on having sex with a 17-year-old?
Read this essay from September 2014: Alan not only say nothing about prosecuting Bush officials, he thinks current government officials should have the legal option to torture today, tomorrow and all days forward.
http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/09/17/torture-tool-fight-against-terrorist-groups-like-isis/
1Tfqfk1Amck7Rh9kEra8IN/story.html
“That’s why I favor torture warrants.” C’mon, this guy remains a moral leper.
Actually I don’t think his not addressing the issue of prosecuting Bush admin officials means what you think it does. He clearly says what they were doing was torture, and in non-ticking bomb situations, and so by the laws in effect that would make it illegal and prosecutable. And again he emphasizes averting the imminent great harm event as the sole exception, which does make him different from the Bush-Cheney torture-’em-all crowd.
Interesting too, which I’d forgot, that Bill Clinton initially agreed with him — before Hillary weighed in to correct him.
I also tend to agree that any president faced with this imminent great harm scenario would likely act as Bill Clinton suggested he would. I think Obama would too, despite his comments to the contrary. AD wants to make that situation above board and clear with an agreed on method that causes no permanent harm. Very controversial stuff, but it’s hard not to agree that in this possible scenario — not as far-fetched as some here believe (and as 9-11 showed, extreme cases tend to be dismissed as “never would happen” until the first time they happen) — presidents would almost certainly act as Clinton stated. If not, and thousands in a city were killed because a president refused to approve such action, there would be immediate impeachment and conviction.
As for AD “lying with an awfully mangy dog”, it goes with the territory. Or don’t you believe that even the worst criminal defendants are entitled to legal representation?
GMAFB. Alan Dershowitz favors torturing brown people because they are brown. He is no different than Marty Peretz in his hatred of Arabs in general and Palestinians in particular. He favors torture of those people in particular. He is scum.
As for Izrul, I’m much farther apart from AD than I can almost believe, a rather radical position in fact, but that’s where I’ve evolved to. I seriously doubt a true peace can be achieved there any time soon and meanwhile it’s costing us billions per year in aid plus all the negative PR from Israeli govt overreactions on security.
Time therefore to open up our borders and encourage all those big empty-box states in the West to take in some folks, as Obama would put it. Plenty of tax incentives for the people and the states concerned, with full US citizenship granted after one year of a clean record.
I want to add that I’m giving AD some slack on his TTB proposal largely because of his good work done previously.
I’m thinking primarily of his strong voice excoriating the Ken Starrchamber/Paula Jones/Monica Lewinsky witchhunt of Clinton, then his outstanding book calling out the 5 politically-interested “robed robbers” on the Sup Ct re Bush v Gore.
In both cases he spoke out in forceful terms against the political insanity of the times, while, in that pre-blogosphere time, far too many voices on the left (I’m thinking The Nation magazine if memory serves) took a nuanced and day late/dollar short attitude about the Starr witch hunt (because Clinton had been insufficiently liberal — think welfare reform primarily –and so unworthy of their full-throated support). And in the case of BvG, AD’s clear calling out of the Court’s illegitimate ruling stood in stark contrast to certain liberal voices of the time, like his fellow HLS colleague Lawrence Tribe who seemed to urge liberals to politely accept the ruling despite our disagreement. Dershowitz seemed to suggest at least 3 of the 5 robbers (or maybe all 5) had made an impeachment-worthy ruling.
Meanwhile AD gave not only a spirited defense of himself today on NBC, he again challenged the accuser, Jane Doe #3 and her lawyers to make their charges public so he can then sue them for defamation.
Strikes me as being very consistent with someone who is entirely innocent of the allegations — he’s forceful, passionate but with specifics: “I was only at the house once, with my wife and daughter, for one hour … never on the plane as the manifests will show” etc.
I suspect people here have let their hatred of AD over the torture and Israel issues cloud their judgment in this case.
Alan Dershowitz would be one of the last people I would suspect of such charges. And his conduct since they became news has only reinforced that belief.
Couldn’t tell you as definitively about the prince as I’m not that familiar with him.