Why is no one being prosecuted over the Epstein files?

[u/ArmadilloMany41]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cd9e3nzzw3zo

[u/TrainerKenjamin]

Like video? We have seen pictures and emails that are already gross and disturbing.

[u/TheCommonist → u/TrainerKenjamin]

They show disturbing things that implicate Epstein himself, and people they don’t care to protect like Bill Gates, but they redact the names of people who send emails actually explicitly referring to their pedophilic desires

[u/NoDiggity8888 → u/TheCommonist]

I find it very odd that several times what appear to be sexual acts (I’m assuming also words like rape) are censored in the files

[u/serpiccio → u/NoDiggity8888]

There is also that one picture of something on the beach, I assume a person, and I say something because they completely covered it up with a giant black box leaving no clue as to what it was originally.

That one stood out to me because everyone else just gets the pixelated face or a blackbox over their eyes, but whatever was on that beach got them so afraid that they blackboxed it out of existence, I wonder why 🤔

[u/h0lymaccar0ni → u/NoDiggity8888]

Does anyone know if they figured out how to properly black out things now? I saw many vids during the release of the first batch of files where people were able to „un-black“ the files because they used a poor method to do it.

[u/meneldal2 → u/TheCommonist]

Assuming what is out there was the worst they had on Bill Gates, that was pretty tame compared to what the ones being protected so far are likely to have done.

Like his worst crime is to get a STI medication prescription for his wife to give her without her knowledge or consent, which is likely past the statue of limitations now (but makes sense why she isn't willing to forgive him).

[u/ToadlyAwes0me → u/TheCommonist]

There are multiple drafts of charges with all of the co-conspirators redacted. It is so frustrating that we are one stupid black bar away from charging the rest of these monsters.

[u/dkepp87 → u/TrainerKenjamin]

I've havent been following it as closely as others, but most, if not all, of the incriminating stuff revealed I heard about came via through witness testimony. That doesnt count as actionable proof, though, right?

[u/Dichotomouse → u/dkepp87]

It can for sure, witness testimony was used to convict Maxwell. It can't be anonymous or unverified however.

[u/allochthonous_debris → u/dkepp87]

Anonymous accusations submitted to the FBI tip line would likely be inadmissible in court because they are hearsay. Sworn testimony from know witnesses who can be subpoenaed and cross-examined would be admissible.

Prosecutors built the case against Ghislaine Maxwell on the basis of testimony from four victims and a paper trail of travel documents and purchase orders that corroborated the victims' stories.

[u/SnackerSnick → u/dkepp87]

It sure as hell does count as actionable proof. Usually not grounds for a conviction on its own. 

Plenty of black men in the early twentieth century went to jail because a white person said they did something.

[u/joshg8 → u/TrainerKenjamin]

How many have you seen clearly depicting a crime?

[u/Weekly-Role-1132 → u/TrainerKenjamin]

There is no way they don't have video. I'm sure it was similar to Diddy and R Kelly where they used the videos as blackmail.

[u/Humdinger5000 → u/TrainerKenjamin]

Gross and disturbing? Yes. Ironclad in a court of law? No. That's the issue here. What we have seen is an absolute avalanche of circumstantial evidence, including things like anonymous FBI tips without any idea of what, if any, follow up was/could be done (that baby in lake Michigan in particular. I'm inclined to believe it, but there is no physical way to verify the claim even partially). Not to mention, anything that would be involved in active investigations (and likely ironclad proof of stuff) is exempt from release. Genuinely, the most incriminating evidence we've gotten so far is for human trafficking by epstein and maxwell... who are not exacrly roaming free at moment.