[loeg]

Convicted, sure.

Upthread you said:

> Most likely, you didn't know about the evils of Jeffrey Epstein until a Miami Herald reporter started to dig into the story, and then got picked up by national papers. Had that not have happened, most people to this day would still think he's probably an "A OK dude."

But I would heartily disagree with that.

Allegations of sexual assault of minors had been public from 2008 on, and Epstein settled literally dozens of civil suits from victims prior to the 2018 Herald piece. Allegations of trafficking were made in 2015 by Virginia Roberts.

(Also, honestly, isn't a single instance of knowing solicitation of a minor enough? Dude was known to be a creep since at least the 2008 conviction, despite the extremely favorable plea deal.)

[bb88]

> (Also, honestly, isn't a single instance of knowing solicitation of a minor enough?)

Technically, it puts some of the blame on the underage girl, because she then becomes a "prostitute". Hence, she was at least half to blame. Hell, he could even have said: "I didn't know she was underage..." And a lot of guys would believe him.

The fact that she was trafficked instead completely changes the issue. She was never a "prostitute", and he was a bigger sleazeball than we realized.

[loeg]

I vehemently disagree with your stated opinion that a 14-year old girl who is statutorily raped by a man in his 50s is "at least half to blame" about anything.

[bb88]

It wasn't my opinion. It's what the charges mean.

If it was child abuse, they would have charged him with abuse. They basically called her a "prostitute" from the charges suggesting that she was at least partly to blame.