• @afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        17 months ago

        I bet there is some catch. The only thing unsealed will be boring stuff. Oh it turns out a company Bill Clinton owned stock in, back in 1991, did some construction work for a property Epstein owned. It isn’t going to be stuff like “here is a video of Justice Thomas raping a kid”.

    • @mhague@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      807 months ago

      Most of the names will be innocent people and victims. All of them will be sent death threats and harassed because people will consider them pedophiles. People can’t understand two things at once (Epstein was a socialite and a child trafficker) and they don’t know what being an associate of Epstein implies. There’s good reasons to keep the list private from the masses.

      • @Serinus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        177 months ago

        It’s funny that those people will be threatened, but people we know have been involved in bribery at the highest levels of our government are not.

      • fmstrat
        link
        fedilink
        English
        107 months ago

        Not sure how true this is given:

        Anyone who did not successfully fight to keep their name out of the civil case could see their name become public – including Epstein’s victims, co-conspirators and innocent associates.

        I imagine anyone who was innocent and an associate had the money to hire the right lawyers to remove themselves.

        I also imagine those who should be on it, also won’t be.

        • @SCB@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          6
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          I imagine anyone who was innocent and an associate had the money to hire the right lawyers to remove themselves.

          Epstein was incredibly well connected, so this statement is dubious at best.

          I also imagine those who should be on it, also won’t be.

          This is correct. 0% of people “associated” with Epstein have any evidence against them of his crimes, or they’d have been charged as co-conspirators.

        • @afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          27 months ago

          And everyone is mystified how groups like the Roman Catholic Church were able to suppress stories of child raise and trafficking for quite literally over a thousand years. Seriously a document was found from before the first crusades talking about it.

          The crime doesn’t go to criminal trial because the family is bribed and threatened. Then it is in civil matter and the records get sealed. Priest goes and rapes another kid. Rinse lather repeat.

      • @afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        37 months ago

        6th amendment of the US Constitution cuts both ways. People have the right to observe what the government is doing in criminal cases. If the US government is refusing to let the public know what is going on during these procedures the possibility of corruption goes from low to almost certain.

      • @NatakuNox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        27 months ago

        The judge stated some names will be redacted as they were victims. I also doubt someone would interact with Epstein several times and not know. He wasn’t even trying to hide it.

      • @PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        277 months ago

        Probably more because it’ll tip the ones who actually have cases open on them off.

        That’s like 90% of what’s in still classified docs from controversial moments in domestic investigations, information which could show the hand to people currently under investigation, and also techniques the FBI uses in evidence gathering which aren’t known to the wider public and who’s exposure could lead to suspects catching wise and closing the avenue.

        If you’ve ever seen one of those get smart posts about how to avoid being identified at a demonstration, Domestic Intelligence is openly trying to avoid more shit being added to those lists of ways to avoid detection. Yes it’s absolutely adversarial to the privacy of the public but it’s a lot less conspiratorial than a blood libel agenda to cover up the child trafficking of the rich.

        • littleblue✨
          link
          fedilink
          67 months ago

          So, you mean like Ice T. breaking it down ELI5 for the viewers every week?

            • littleblue✨
              link
              fedilink
              47 months ago

              Oh, Johnny. I hope you get better, and soon. Don’t start hanging out with that ratfuck Chappelle, either.

          • @PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            77 months ago

            That’s not how major investigations of entire criminal networks work and if you weren’t trying to make blood libel cool because class consciousness or whatever you’d know better.

    • Hubi
      link
      fedilink
      67 months ago

      Probably because being on a list of names is not proof of any wrongdoing or crime but will most definitely be interpreted as such by people on the internet.