Lmaooo as if anyone really doubted that he was killed... I mean come on people.
post
I don't think they have any shame or fear of repercussions. At this stage, the law doesn't apply to them.
This is 1000x more likely to be a clerical error or time zone thing rather than a conspiracy.
His body was supposedly discovered on August 10 at 6:30am. Which time zone are you suggesting?
Edit: also it says Friday, August 9, 2019 which is much harder to make a mistake.
I don't see the document in the article, here it is: https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%208/EFTA00013180.pdf
This looks like it was a draft. Here's the final version https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/statement-manhattan-us-attorney-death-defendant-jeffrey-epstein it is slightly modified and adds "of apparent suicide"
Occam's Razor says that explanation with fewest assumptions is likely the right one. With all the other coincidences that led to his death, his apparent suicide requires a lot of more assumptions.
Occam's Razor says that explanation with fewest assumptions is likely the right one.
Yeah, the Occam's razor answer definitely isn't that someone reused an existing document from the day before and forgot to change the date. That's just unbelievable. It's more likely that this was a premeditated murder and someone filed the paperwork a day early on accident.
Yeah:
- someone reused an existing document and put wrong date
- the camera observing his cell failed
- the redundant camera observing his cell also failed
- the remaining cameras that could capture something apparently turn off for 3 minutes every day (that's apparently normal for security cameras)
- they accidentally removed him from suicide watch
- he managed to kill himself despite cells being designated to prevent that
- he was missing a cell buddy just for that night
- three fractures on his neck which are unusual to hanging
Each of them could be explained somehow through assumptions, but there are quite a lot of assumptions, don't you think?
I would imagine that in 21 century, FBI would have system to enter such notices and it would populate it with current date, because why would you want to modify date if you aren't doing anything shady?
The questioning about this article is less about whether he did or did not kill himself but more so whether the date error is evidence he didn’t kill himself
Even if we were 100% sure he was murdered, why would some lowly typist know about it in advance and pre write a report. Like obviously the admin is incompetent and left so many glaring holes but why would they tell a non essential person?
At the end of the day it’s basically impossible that he actually killed himself of his own volition but to say that a date error is proof of that is incredibly flimsy
it's also plausible that, if it were a murder and not a suicide, everything was prepared the day before but they couldn't go on time and had to wait a day.
there are a lot of possibilities. certainly a critical error is one of them. but if we're going to talk about plausible explanations that isn't the only one
Why though. Why would you prepare the document the day before? Why do you need to have it "ready to go"? There's literally no logical reason to premake such a document. It doesn't benefit the murder plan at all.
It absolutely 100% does make sense to do that.
It is called crafting a cover story.
Have you ever done something for one reason, but told people you did it for another reason?
Have you ever been in a scenario where you were considering whether or not you would do something like that, but realized you would need a convincing false narrative for other people first, before you considered actually doing the thing?
It very much benefits a group of people or an organization that is doing something like this, to get all their stories straight, before they proceed.
If your cover story works properly...
... no one will ever know, or at least not untill so much time has passed as to make being caught not really matter any more.
... This is just the logic of how all kinds of people and organizations who need to maintain one kind of outward public image or reputation, while actually doing things that do not match their outward appearance, how they act.
No, it doesn't.
This is akin to calling the police for the murder of your spouse BEFORE you commit the murder. There's literally no good reason not to wait until after.
Please, name me a logical reason why, before you commit the act, during the planning stage, or even when you are moments from planning to execute the plan, you would call someone entirely unrelated to prepare a document about what you are going to do, instead of calling them AFTER.
Did you just ask "why premeditate a murder?"
... evidently the concept of planning a nefarious act is... a novel concept, for some.
No, I didn't.
This is akin to calling the police for the murder of your spouse BEFORE you commit the murder. There's literally no good reason not to wait until after.
Please, name me a logical reason why, before you commit the act, during the planning stage, or even when you are moments from planning to execute the plan, you would call someone entirely unrelated to prepare a document about what you are going to do, instead of calling them AFTER.
I think he made a point that the date might be auto populated and one who generated it didn't notice or forgot about it.
... Or, the message was not drawn up by some random lowly typist, and was drawn up by somebody in a much, much higher position.
Not sure if you've ever worked in any kind of large bureaucratic corporation of other kind of organization, but that happens all the time, when somebody wants to specifically handle something personally, and also have the plausible deniability of 'random clerk made error.'
The nature of bureaucracies is to a large extent that those best at establishing as many avenues of plausible deniability as possible, those who can set themselves up with the ability to throw other people under the bus... they tend to 'win', persist longer and get promoted higher in said bureacracy.
Them writing the report especially in advance would take away their plausible deniability and just bring more attention to the scene
The report had no urgency to be done so having it done in advance especially considering in a murder details could have changed seems pointless
Them writing the report especially in advance would take away their plausible deniability and just bring more attention to the scene
... assuming that it can be determined conclusively that that happened.
Which, it often cannot be, in a bureaucratic system that normally has some kind of subordinate to do those things of things, but where sometimes the superior person just directly does it instead.
So ok, you clearly have not worked in a large bureaucratic organization before, or ... this would be very obvious to you.
The report had no urgency to be done so having it done in advance especially considering in a murder details could have changed seems pointless
This is just nonsensical.
The entire ... thing here is a statement that was released urgently.
The entire contention is that it may have been so urgent that it was actually pre-planned and drafted prior to the actual event.
You are just entirely dismissing this possibility, to prove that this possibility did not happen.
I am not saying 100% either way that it was a clerical error or a premeditated construction.
I don't know for certain either way.
But you are using very bad logic to argue that it was a clerical error.
Imagine you rob a jewelry store, and you want to make sure you have an iron clad alibi so you have a person pretend to be you and get seen on video camera at a bank.
Would you request that video in advance from the bank so as soon as a cop comes to see you, you can present it? No! Because pre obtaining an alibi for a crime you are pretending you didn’t commit makes you look guilty
Writing the report in advance makes you look guilty even if it wasn’t murder
Bypassing standard operating procedures and having a senior person (someone high enough that they are “worthy” of the knowledge that the suicide was staged) writing a report is also suspicious
Having a report prefilled out so it can be urgently released instead of the normal wait time is also suspicious
So we go back to Occam’s razor is the assumption that they ignored numerous basic attempts to cover their tracks that any idiot who watched an episode of NCIS would know to do, or did a person put in the wrong date?
Again I am not denying in the slightest that Epstein didn’t kill himself but the argument that this is proof of it is ludicrous.
This recent analogy is completely unlike the scenario we are talking about.
You are talking about an independent bad actor who is making requests and attempting to do alibi construction via independent organizations that they are not a member of.
The scenario with the pre-dated Epstein letter is potentially an 'inside job' kind of scenario, where the bad actors would be members of the organization that would be facilitating the crime.
It would be more like a jewelry store owner hiring a stick up man to rob and then torch his place so the store owner can collect an insurance payout on his otherwise failing business.
And then the jewelry store owner has a drafted up version of the insurance claim paperwork that is dated to the day before the actual robbery and arson took place, because the stick up man he hired has to delay 24hrs at the last minute.
So then the robbery/arson occurs on the 10th, the store owner goes back to his insurance claim draft, moves the date forward a day, saves it as another file, then submits that to the insurance people.
... but, a subsequent law enforcement investigation into the entire thing finds that the jewelry store owner actually forgot to delete the old draft of the insurance claim, dated to the 9th, prior to the robbery and arson.
Writing the report in advance makes you look guilty even if it wasn’t murder
Correct.
The document with the August 9th date we are talking about was not actually released by the AG office.
It was discovered to exist during the subsequent FBI investigation into the entire event/affair.
As in, they had this drafted up, you know, oddly, suspiciously, but did not release it publically, because that would indeed have been odd, strange and potentially incriminating... but they also forgot to delete it.
Which, by your own logic, makes them look guilty.
Yep.
Uh huh.
That's... the entire point.
From the article:
The document released by the US Department of Justice in the latest set of the Epstein Files describes Epstein being found unresponsive in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Centre in Manhattan, where he was declared dead.
However it is dated Friday, August 9, 2019, while prison records and official document show it was not until August 10, 2019, that a corrections officer delivering breakfast found Epstein unresponsive in his cell.
Here is the document that actually was released to the public, dated August 10th:
https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/statement-manhattan-us-attorney-death-defendant-jeffrey-epstein
And here is the seeming early draft of it, dated August 9th:
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet%25208/EFTA00013180.pdf
... these links are both in a high level comment that our own conversation descends from.
Please familiarize yourself with the actual details of the case, detective.
And if the jewelry store owner had a dedicated person on the staff whose job it is to fill out insurance reports would he tell the person to write the letter in advance (giving away that he intended to commit insurance fraud) or would he bypass the employee who now is suspicious and is a possible whistleblower?
Then is the insurance investigator in on it as well? Or why isn’t the insurance investigator suspicious that a person had a full list of the things stolen/burned immediately when it happened instead of taking the normal amount of time to process it
And finally the same point I have iterated multiple times now that you keep ignoring is WHATS THE ADVANTAGE OF DOING IT IN ADVANCE? It literally is only a chance for it to be more suspicious and makes you look suspicious.
It’s a generic letter head that was likely copy pasted from th day prior
You are the one positing the idea the an underling clerk wrote it.
I am the one saying its possible that did not happen and it was just written by, you know, the AG, the guy whose name is on the letterhead.
The point of doing it advance is to have it ready to go when the time comes.
And sometimes, plans change a bit, and he accidentally forgot to remove his early draft.
This really isn't that hard of a concept to grasp.
Our entire convo chain stems from me saying 'maybe it was not a clerk that wrote it.'
You seem to be incapable of considering this, conceptually.
Did you read what I read… I addressed both, it’s the same conclusion
There is no advantage to having it done in advance
Having it “ready to go” makes it suspicious
It’s a short letter to write
Even if a person did want to have it ready the more logical thing to do would be to type it up in a word doc and then copy paste the relevant part onto the report with the official letter head
I am understanding your point and refuting it. It is not that you aren’t being clear with your opinion it’s that you believe your opinion is fact and are refusing to listen to criticism. It literally feels like I am talking to a Comcast chat bot where I keep saying “problems with billing” and you keep responding with “would you like to hear about our new cell phone plan”
If you aren’t going to read what I am writing and have a conversation then just don’t respond because you have not addressed the most basic refutation to your point I have stated numerous times
The first bullet point is infinitely more trivial than the others, and knowing way too much about document management and content management, I'm aware that it's common to make date errors in templated forms. That one doesn't meet the reasonable-doubt test.
The other bullet points, though... a lot of things about that situation stink to high heaven.
Don't get distracted by the small stuff. If you're wrong about it, bad actors will claim that that's proof that everything you're saying is wrong too.
I think you mean coincidences not assumptions
Occam's Razor talks about assumptions.
If we assume that the goal was to kill Epstein then all those events can be explained together with that one assumption.
If those were just coincidences, it means that those mere chances happening independently and for each of them we need to make a separate assumption (the cameras just happen to broke on that day, the backup ones maybe broke last week, but they didn't fix it, one of the guards who fell asleep celebrated his birthday until late and didn't sleep, the other one couldn't fall asleep last night because neighbor's dog was barking all night etc a lot of assumptions)
... Why would there be a template or version of an existing document specifically dated to ... the previous day?
As opposed to ... just a blank date field?
You know, a template?
Did something else happen on the 9th, that required a document of this format to be drafted up?
Also... how often is such a template used, for a pretty uncommon, special statement to the general public, actually used?
Probably not very often.
Your argument is not very good.
You're layering in a bunch of assumptions, adding more complex conditions that would have to be met, you know, the opposite of doing Occam's Razor.
Clerical error then
Yeah, the cleric filled it too early. Didn't want to work on Saturday.
Clerk, BTW.
A cleric is a member of the clergy (and typically the healer in an adventuring party)
Hmm yes but surely clerk is just a descendant of cleric right? It’s almost a contraction
It is actually!
Basically only the clergy could read and write, so they handled accounting and acted as scribes to nobles and the monarchy.
It split off like 600 years ago or so
Edit: a few extra words added in, I'm going to blame the keyboard/autocorrect just because I can.
Lots of words have unified origins. They diverge to allow 2 different concepts to be named. Calling someone a cleric still means something different to calling them a clerk.
However, a clerical error could be ambiguous. Likely as the term was less common, and so didn't have enough usage to warrant divergence.
LAY ON HANDS!
I was going to post the same thing. I cannot tell you the number of times I've misdated a document because I used a previous document as a template and forgot to check the date.
am i the only person who had the foresight to make blank templates? that autofilled the dates?
I would say "you'd be surprised" but you evidently are also a corpo or ex corpo, so... no, you wouldn't be.
Yeah, most of your (ex)coworkers are in fact devious, petty, self-centered idiots.
Yep.
Keep flaunting your Office skills like that and you might just land yourself a job in middle management if you're not careful
I get what you mean but we'd need a couple dozen templates and updating them would probably not be worth the time. I've gotten in the habit of highlighting everything that needs updating or verification on the first pass.
seriously i took a few hours for a week at the beginning of my career to write out basic forms that i could use over and over, that would autofill. shit that would take an hour or two a client if i did it by hand. is this just attorney stuff to pad out billable hours or does no one else think that far ahead?
The they also changed the cause of death after they found Epstein in his cell
time zone thing
really? what time zones did JEE fly across in his prison cell?
Fun fact: Anybody can type any date they want into Word. They could have dated it March 15, 44 B.C., since that string of characters isn't document meta-data. When I worked at a law firm, it was common to create a new document by opening an older file, editing it, and saving it as a new one. Quite possibly, the legal assistant edited an August 9th press release to create the draft, and forgot to change the date before saving. Further, this press release comes from the U.S. Attorney's office, which is a different location, with entirely different staff, from the corrections center. It would make exactly zero sense to get the U.S. Attorney, much less the legal assistants, in on a conspiracy. Keep the number of conspirators to a minimum; that's like Conspiracy 101.
There's are a lot of odd circumstances around his death, but as evidence of something fishy, this is super weak.
I agree. It’s not like they would leak that they would kill Epstein to the person drafting press releases…
i'm trying to remember, wasn't Barr running the US Attorney's office? or was it just the bureau of prisons and the entire rest of the department of justice?
I personally don't know how the US government functions, but I know people that worked for various big insurance companies and they had a system in place with all the templates and things such as the date would be autofilled by it. I wouldn't expect the US government to just have a random folder with random templates that they pick and edit in Word.
Keep the number of conspirators to a minimum; that’s like Conspiracy 101.
That's why I believe Bush did 9/11, but he kept it to himself. He didn't coordinate anything. He just pretended not to read the "Bin Laden determined to strike U.S." memo.
Damn conspiracy theorists... just because CCTV didn't have NTP enabled...
/s
Assuming he is actually dead.
American Government under budget and ahead of schedule for the first time in living memory and y'all are out here complaining.
Incredible.
I too already have a long message about Putin's death.
Not that i'd ever want to talk to him, but I wonder what he thought of death given his wealth, power, and apparent obsession with eugenics, and the fact that he was facing life imprisonment. I wonder if he evee even thought about how long he wanted to live or how he would go.
Agree but the photo is bullshit, it was generated with Gemini.
Even if it were true, i doubt JE would even have a small amount of power left. Everyone involved wants him to be the scapegoat and not them, so i would assume they would all want him dead, not alive and hiding somewhere
Haters will say his suicide was staged
It must have been a typo … is what I would've said if not for:
- They can't identify where the noose came from. BTW where is that noose now?
- Everybody swears they didn't take the noose off him.
- Guards say the do rounds about hourly … but not that night.
- A prisoner count went down by one mysteriously (and without alarm) hours before Epstein was killed
- "There is no video" despite Epstein being in a wing expressly so there would be video
- "Here is video showing the stairs" that basically doesn't show the stairs "nobody went up or down, the video proves"
- Someone noticed a gap in that video "The video cuts out for almost a minute at midnight due to system reset"
- Turns out it was three minutes. "Okay here's video that shows we lied" with a few seconds gap, not minutes.
- FBI documents identify someone, likely an inmate, going up the stairs. Not released BTW.
- Others go up and down the stairs without detection that we have documentation of.
- "Gaurd took linens upstairs." "No we didn't!"
- "It was a suicide" conclusively, quickly, despite all of this…
- And then it turns out we now have evidence Trump wanted Epstein dead too.
Seems like the story and the facts keep changing to whatever you're likely to believe and stop asking questions.
I mean, no new information, but it's definitely interesting to see the premeditation.
Can't believe they've really been this fucking incompetent, but I'll take it.



all 92 comments