1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Jeffrey Epstein, dead

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Michael_ Gee, Aug 10, 2019.

  1. Neutral Corner

    Neutral Corner Well-Known Member

    No telling what evidence is in that place. Given what was found in his NY home, he obviously didn't think that he'd be searched. Probably doubly true offshore.
  2. Smallpotatoes

    Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

  3. heyabbott

    heyabbott Well-Known Member

    Chef2 likes this.
  4. WriteThinking

    WriteThinking Well-Known Member

    I wonder about all the lawsuits against Epstein's estate that are likely to occur. Will winning a lawsuit and getting a pile of money make right all the wrongs that occurred? If so, to what degree (because, yes, I do believe the plaintiffs will feel better; they might even feel wonderful, or believe they will). Uggh. Everything about this case is distasteful, including, most likely, any resolutions that will occur on behalf of the victims.

    Of course, I do tend to think that way, anyway. I managed to get myself excused from jury duty once because I brought up how distasteful I found it, in the civil case for which I was being considered for the jurors' panel, that the plaintiffs were suing the defendant (a roadway construction company), even though the plaintiffs' son, and two others, were killed in a car accident that occurred while the plaintiffs' son was driving under the influence. To me, it was like, 'We can't have our kid, but we'll take your money' (if we can).

    I know the law gives plaintiffs the right to financial recourse, probably because, sometimes, it is the only recourse available. But that doesn't make it any less unseemly.
    Liut likes this.
  5. Della9250

    Della9250 Well-Known Member

  6. SoloFlyer

    SoloFlyer Well-Known Member

    WTF is with you posting the thoughts of random people on Facebook? Who cares?
    Starman likes this.
  7. 2muchcoffeeman

    2muchcoffeeman Well-Known Member

    The conspiracy counts are still hanging over other people yet to be publicly identified.
  8. Smallpotatoes

    Smallpotatoes Well-Known Member

    I happen to agree with them. You have a problem?
  9. Webster

    Webster Well-Known Member

    1) how else is one supposed to seek redress for a wrong which was committed on them? Of course, awarding $1,000 or $1mm for a rape will never make up for the pain which has been inflicted, but I’m not sure what another better solution would look like?

    2) I cannot believe that in the jury selection process that the information which you described would be disclosed to potential jurors.
    Fred siegle and OscarMadison like this.
  10. Baron Scicluna

    Baron Scicluna Well-Known Member

    Civil lawsuits are not like criminal cases in which the end result is black and white (not guilty or guilty). Civil suits can have percentages of liability applied. The construction company may well have been liable, and then you factor in the drunk driver’s impairment and deduct a percentage from the liability, and then apply that to whatever award is decided.

    I get the disgust over drunken driving, but that doesn’t necessarily get the construction company off the hook if they did, in fact, mess up.
  11. Scout

    Scout Well-Known Member

    "fell asleep"
  12. WriteThinking

    WriteThinking Well-Known Member

    1). I'm not sure there's another solution, either. But, intellectually and emotionally speaking, that's just my point. I don't think there is a solution, and, although I've not been in such a position, I don't think I'd want money -- not even a lot of it -- for the death (or sexual assault) of a loved one. Because if you do, what does that say? Other than that, yes, a million dollars (or more) would make up for it.

    2). That information wasn't said, not outright explicitly, but the criminal trial decision had already been determined, so there was no denying some things, and enough of the facts about who was who, and who was doing what now (because it was a civil case, and, as you said, what else could be done?) were given for exactly the reason that resulted in my being excused: To see if there were specific potential biases that potential jurors may have had that would have been detrimental (to either side/whichever side asked them to be excused). My thoughts, specifically, prompted the judge in the case to explain legal rights in some detail and cite how "The law gives plaintiffs/victims the right to do what they are doing." Basically, I played reporter (they knew I was one, once), and laid things out so that they had to be addressed, and they were. It got the days'-long process moving along, and several other jurors were quickly excused along with me. I was clearly not the only one with questions/concerns about this issue/case.
    Last edited: Aug 14, 2019
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page