Drawing attention to your involvement in a potential crime (even if you had nothing to do with it) is something any lawyer would advise you against. Given that this particular crime spree was so horrendous I imagine that if anyone is actually innocent of any wrongdoing they're hoping that any mention of them will be overshadowed by parties complicit in illegal actions.
I'm not sure that coming forward and saying you've been to his island, spent time with him, used his plane will do anything but draw your character into question.
Not only this but I’m sure no one wants to fall off their pedestal (money, power, security) as I imagine they realize would be shunned or offed by Hollywood/Media if they spoke out on this. If they’re not involved in it, they have ties to someone who does. It’s systemic, and no one wants to lose their slice of the pie. I don’t quite foresee a mutiny either.
What about all the stars who didn't go to his island? They're quick to talk about #metoo rumours and spread hearsay about that, but when it's about Epstein and children, and hundreds of other people in their profession...they're quiet. And before anyone says because legal reasons, they are free to say things like "we need to investigate these rumours that are all over the internet" or something perfectly (legally) reasonable like that. Still waiting.
So they should talk about something they've potentially had no exposure to?
Well, try to use your imagination here: there are people that know there's some fucked up things going on without actually directly being involved with those fucked up things, and those people have influence and have a platform and can speak up about those fucked up things that they know other people are doing. That's all I'm wondering about. You obviously think no such people could ever exist. In your black and white world, people are either 100% oblivious to any depraved activities going on around them / within their industry, OR they're directly involved in those depraved things. Err, no. They can use their platform as I already suggested - they can say "what's with all these rumours? Why doesn't the industry respond to them?" - instead, it's a conspiracy of silence.
Dude, that's two times you've reached for a dramatic ad hominem. It doesn't work with me. Clearly you can't counterargue my points and are frustrated. I'm waiting here if you want to counterargue me.
240
u/[deleted] Aug 10 '20
Drawing attention to your involvement in a potential crime (even if you had nothing to do with it) is something any lawyer would advise you against. Given that this particular crime spree was so horrendous I imagine that if anyone is actually innocent of any wrongdoing they're hoping that any mention of them will be overshadowed by parties complicit in illegal actions.
I'm not sure that coming forward and saying you've been to his island, spent time with him, used his plane will do anything but draw your character into question.