Torture Advocate Alan Dershowitz Implicated In Sex Slave Lawsuit

[99th_Monkey]

Last edited Sun Jan 11, 2015, 05:49 PM - Edit history (2)

Torture Advocate Alan Dershowitz Busted In Sex Slave Lawsuit
January 5, 2015 10:18 am * Counter Current News

There have been few voices supporting law enforcement torture of suspect as loud as that of Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz. Known for popularizing the argumentative fallacy of the “ticking time bomb” scenario, Dershowitz argued that federal and local law enforcement should be given a blank check to torture suspects if they think it might “prevent another 9/11.”

It would be astonishing enough for a Harvard Law Professor to be named in a suit accusing him of participating in a child sex slave ring, but given his pro-torture background, Dershowitz’s naming in the case is even more significant.

The lawsuit was filed by four women. The suit is against the federal government itself, which they claim violated the rights of victims of sexual assault when the State made a plea deal back in 2008 with Jeffrey Epstein who was alleged to have sexually abuse minors as part of a child sex slave ring.

Epstein only ended up doing about a year in prison for his crimes. But the ladies who have brought this suit against the federal government are saying that Epstein was not alone. In addition to many other notables, Dershowitz found himself accused of having routinely had sexual relations with Epstein’s “sex slave” while she was under the age of 18, before she escaped her slavery to Epstein.

Dershowitz has denied the charges and threatened legal action for these victims of sexual abuse courageously coming forward. Dershowitz said these charges are “totally, unequivocally and completely false”.

http://countercurrentnews.com/2015/01/alan-dershowitz-named-in-suit/

ON EDIT: Some have objected to the countercurrent.com website, so i'm adding the following NY DAILY NEWS link as well:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/alan-dershowitz-categorically-denies-sex-17-year-old-article-1.2067453

[juxtaposed]

1. no fucking way? I hope

[99th_Monkey]

3. It's not on many nooz sites yet, but is on "Veterans Today"

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/01/02/prince-andrew-and-alan-dershowitz-named-in-us-lawsuit-over-underage-sex-allegations/

[zappaman]

7. Veterans Today is a hate site.

Dershowitz is Jewish.
Do the math.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2011/01/06/buyer-beware-veterans-today-and-its-anti-israel-agenda/

[99th_Monkey]

41. Is NY Daily News a hate site too? nt

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crime/alan-dershowitz-categorically-denies-sex-17-year-old-article-1.2067453

[zappaman]

43. No, but the site you linked to is.

Why not edit it and use the daily news link?

[99th_Monkey]

115. Because

It would completely change the whole OP. I can't just add a new link,
because it wouldn't match up with the text or header.

I am adding an "ON EDIT" with the additional link however.

[zappaman]

117. Thanks!

But it wasn't the OP, it was the Veterans Today link.

[7962]

46. "hate" site? Looks like its a NUTJOB site!!

I never heard of it before, but it seems to go along with "wellaware1" in thinking ALL of these attacks are set up by the Jews. The old "false flag" cry. Damndest things ive ever read on those sites. And LOTS of followers!

[rhett o rick]

50. The math says you are quick to come to the defense of Dershowitz .

[msanthrope]

59. It's hardly a defense of Dershowitz to point out that a hate site isn't the most credible source.nt

[zappaman]

60. The math says I pointed out a hate site

That someone linked here.
Is that an issue for you, Rick?
Or do you like to see hate sites here?

[rhett o rick]

65. Pointing out "hate sites" seems to be more important than discussing the issue.

[zappaman]

68. Aw, you think hate sites should be linked to DU?

I don't.
I'll point it out when i see it.
Thanks for your concern.
And thanks for putting words in my mouth.
How "authoritarian" of you.

[rhett o rick]

71. I just think we need to keep perspective. Raging about a link to a hate site

is a distraction from the issue of the OP. Do you have an opinion re. the OP? Do you think that Dershowitz is being unfairly accused?

[zappaman]

72. I don't know, Rick?

Do you?
I believe in innocent until proven guilty. I'm sorry to see that someone as "progressive" as yourself does not.

And please show me my "raging".
Was it when I asked the OP to use the Daily News link instead?

[rhett o rick]

102. If you support Alan Dershowitz you can tell us. nm

[zappaman]

106. What are the charges? n/t

[rhett o rick]

107. That he is a Dersbag. How do you feel?

[zappaman]

108. I feel pretty good.

Allergies acting up a little, but thanks for asking!

[sabrina 1]

83. Of course it is a distraction. As for the naming of Dershowitz in that law suit, I think it's

wrong to do that and a very sneaky way of accusing someone of something they cannot answer.

I heard him deny the charges, and for now, I believe him.

We have a system here where an accused is entitled to face their accusers although there are those even on this site, who do not agree with our system of due process.

He eg, cannot sue this woman because of how the accusation was made.

That is just wrong.

So far, he is innocent as far as I am concerned.

On the torture issue, he is guilty of helping to destroy the very system he will now need to defend HIMSELF.

Ironic, isn't it? You never know when your support for ignoring our system of Due Process can back to bite you.

I hope this helps him to understand the importance of upholding our pretty good system of laws.

[dmr]

116. +1

[NewDeal_Dem]

78. hate sites aren't ok, unless they call themselves parodies? or hate sites are ok, unless

they're linked to privately-owned websites?

or they're not ok?

or they're ok, depending on how unpopular the hatees are?


help me thread these needles.

[zappaman]

79. Ok

Or not...

[muriel_volestrangler]

113. The only new thing about this thread was the link to a hate site

There have been plenty of threads about Dershowitz and this lawsuit already, in the past week. "It's not on many nooz sites yet" was laughably inaccurate:
https://news.google.com/news/story?ncl=dPjG_j1OOGq3IHMu82zI1ZMoE_-bM&q=Dershowitz&lr=English&hl=en&sa=X&ei=J6yxVM3XCom9UbmWhNgH&ved=0CD0QqgIwBg
https://news.google.com/news/story?ncl=dpgHkcWq0y_zjuMhx4_8NYaihjkbM&q=Dershowitz&lr=English&hl=en&sa=X&ei=J6yxVM3XCom9UbmWhNgH&ved=0CCcQqgIwAQ
https://news.google.com/news/story?ncl=duB73FcV6uF0yrMJ8Bzp5sle-60LM&q=Dershowitz&lr=English&hl=en&sa=X&ei=J6yxVM3XCom9UbmWhNgH&ved=0CDEQqgIwAw

etc.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&gl=uk&tbm=nws&authuser=0&q=Dershowitz+&oq=Dershowitz+&gs_l=news-cc.3..43j43i53.475.475.0.1532.1.1.0.0.0.0.360.360.3-1.1.0...0.0...1ac.1.-6yEl2gF4B0

[sabrina 1]

81. Good,with that out of the way, what do you think of Dershowitz's support for torture?

[zappaman]

82. I think it has nothing to do with the OP

What do you think of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches?

[sabrina 1]

84. It definitely has something to do with his willingness to overturn our judicial for SOME people.

Now he is dependent on that very system, being in the position of an accused, to defend himself. A right he denied others.

For the record, as far as I am concerned, he is innocent of those charges, there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

But it's interesting to see someone who advocated for denying the accused due process for some, being in a position where hopefully, no one will deny him the same rights.

Oh, and you avoided my question. But that is your choice.

I otoh, totally oppose anyone who is supportive of the destruction of our Judicial System which requires that every accused person, no matter how egregious the crime they are accused of, is entitled to due process.

[zappaman]

85. No it doesn't.

[LisaL]

89. He doesn't need a system to defend himself.

He isn't charged with anything.
If the accuser went to the press and made these claims he could sue her for slander.
But because the claims were made in a court document he can't do that.
So, basically, it's an easy way to accuse someone with them not being able to do anything about it.

[sabrina 1]

92. He disagrees with you. He is angry that he cannot use the judicial system to defend himself.

He has stated vehemently that he wants this to be brought to court where he CAN defend himself.

I agree with him, when someone is accused of a crime, they definitely should have access to due process in order to be able to defend themselves. As this case proves, anyone can say anything about anyone but without due process there is no way to prove whether the accusations are true or false.

Dershowitz stated in an interview with Nancy Grace last week that he WANTED the woman to sue him as that was the ONLY way he could access our excellent judicial system.

I hope this helps him to understand how important it is to provide due process to everyone. Something he was rather selective about wrt to others.

[Fred Sanders]

101. Like the accusations against Cosby made in court documents and TV. Why the double standard?

Cosby has not been criminally charged either...why the double standard?

Only some are innocent until proven guilty, and some are guilty before charges are laid??

What is the the common principle that unites these disparate opinions, it sure is not "innocent until proven guilty"?

I believe in that principle, as does Derkowitz, as do all criminal law lawyers. The rule of law, due process, blah, blah, blah,.....

The Golden Thread of criminal law is ...............? And also there is the annoying "guilty beyond reasonable doubt, as judged by a jury of ones peers" what is up with that?mand the labyrinth that is evidence law, who needs evidence and a trial where one can face the accuser, we got the world wide web.

Buhler, Buhler?

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

14. He was on CNN prior to the terrorist attacks

Needless to say, his interview played multiple times.

[NuclearDem]

53. You might not want to use VT.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Veterans_Today#Veterans_Today

[hrmjustin]

2. He has come out very forcefully that he didn't do it.

[99th_Monkey]

5. Really? Surprise surprise.

It's not just on Counter Currents

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/01/02/prince-andrew-and-alan-dershowitz-named-in-us-lawsuit-over-underage-sex-allegations/

[LisaL]

6. So freaking what?

[zappaman]

9. That's a hate site.

Among other shitty things, they blamed the Newton massacre on Israel.

http://www.splcenter.org/blog/2013/01/10/veterans-today-editor-blames-newtown-tragedy-on-israeli-death-squads/

[Fred Sanders]

17. Not that there is anything wrong with spreading hate, protected free speech, right?

[rhett o rick]

70. I find your obsession with the spread of "hate" some how ironic.

Also, seems to be a distraction from the issue.

[zappaman]

73. What's the issue, Rick?

Judging the man who has not even been charged?
How "progressive" of you.

[rhett o rick]

74. The progressive approach if one disagrees with the OP would be to address the issue.

Maybe provide a counter argument re. the OP. Focusing on pointing out "hate" in lieu of addressing the issue isn't progressive. And I haven't judged the man on this issue. I am not at all fond of Dershowitz, but willing to listen to both sides here.

You ask a lot of questions but don't give us your opinion.

[zappaman]

75. I already told you I believe in innocent until proven guilty.

Sorry you don't agree.

[rhett o rick]

77. Really? You mean just when Dershowitz is concerned because you favor him.

You don't think everyone is innocent until proven guilty, do you?

[zappaman]

80. Let us know when he's been charged, Rick.

And where did you get the notion I "favor" him since I said no such thing?
Oh right, making things up again.
I forgot how often you did that.
My bad.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

126. I, for one, am glad to hear you're not a hypocrite.

Free Assange!

[zappaman]

127. If he's imprisoned, it's by choice.

What prison is he at?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

128. You'll need to supply the answer, as you're the one talking about prison.

I was just pointing out that I'm glad you're not a hypocritical fuck.

[zappaman]

130. You said "free Assange" so I assumed he was in prison

Since saying "free (whoever)" usually implies that.
Perhaps you meant something different?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

142. Assange is completely free.

He is not under arrest, he's on the run.

No-one is detaining him, he's voluntarily in hiding in order to avoid being brought to trial.

"Innocent until proven guilty" does not mean "You can't arrest and prosecute people, because until they've been convicted they're innocent" - that would be silly!

[99th_Monkey]

48. UK Mirror?

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-andrew-underage-sex-slave-4911294

[m-lekktor]

49. yep. somebody was posting garbage from that site on a friend's facebook page.

so i did a little research and found out all sorts of nasty stuff about that site. people see "veteran" and assume it can't be anything bad.

[hrmjustin]

10. I am not a fan but he said he would wave statue of limitations on it.

[grossproffit]

12. Veterans Today is another hate site.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

8. Yeah, he says he waives the statue of limitations

And asks them to sue.

However, he's not getting any more airtime due to the terrorists in Paris.

[hrmjustin]

11. I am not a fan of the man but he did come out swinging.

[BillZBubb]

31. That means nothing one way or another.

[LisaL]

32. Maybe to you.

[BillZBubb]

34. What does it mean to you?

An innocent man would come out swinging to profess his innocence. SO WOULD A GUILTY MAN. That behavior indicates nothing about guilt.

[LisaL]

36. Maybe to you.

[BillZBubb]

38. And any rational person.

But not to you.

[LisaL]

42. How do you know what it would mean to a rational person?

[hrmjustin]

33. That means that he clains his innocence.

He is waving the statue of limitations on it and telling her to file charges.

[BillZBubb]

37. You would expect him to admit guilt?

I'm not saying he's guilty of anything. I don't know. There doesn't seem to be any solid evidence.

But proclaiming your innocence and acting like Dershowitz is doing is fairly common among both the innocent and the guilty.

[hrmjustin]

39. point taken.

[LisaL]

44. Is it failrly common?

Like he said, he didn't have to say or do anything. He wasn't being charged with anything.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

97. No.

No, if someone is factually guilty of a crime and is protected from being tried because of statutory limitations I would not expect him or her to waive those rights, especially when that person is an attorney and law professor.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

61. I believe him when he submits to torture.

What's good for the goose...lol

(P.s. It's "statute" with a "t" on the end)

[Jesus Malverde]

135. The statute of limitations can only be waived by the legisislative body that created it.

Maybe he meant rework Epstiens plea agreement which gave IMMUNITY to the fellow child rapists.

[LisaL]

4. Oh for crying out loud.

He says he never even met the woman who is accusing him.
What exactly is he busted for?

[99th_Monkey]

47. .

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/prince-andrew-underage-sex-slave-4911294

[NaturalHigh]

13. Being accused is a long way from being "busted."

[Fred Sanders]

15. Tell that to Cosby.

[LisaL]

18. Cosby isn't exactly busted since he is running around free as a bird.

[Fred Sanders]

19. "Busted" has several meanings.......?? A secret being exposed is also "busted", no?

You are using a different definition than the author.

[LisaL]

20. Anybody can be accused of anything.

I am supposed to automatically assume that an accused is guilty?
That's ridiculous.

[Fred Sanders]

21. Not sure what you mean. Of course it is. Cosby was also "busted", do you feel the same..

[LisaL]

23. I am not sure what you mean.

Why exactly am I supposed to feel the same about every accusation?

[Fred Sanders]

64. Busted!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

93. Cosby hasn't personally addressed the charges beside making a crude joke about rape./NT

[LisaL]

94. Exactly. I don't hear Cosby screaming from the rooftops about his innocence.

[Fred Sanders]

104. Oh, so you have to shout your innocence or you are obviously guilty?

Why the double standard on innocent until proven guilty in a court of law?

[Fred Sanders]

103. Different strokes for different folks, and Cosby is not a lawyer...this is weak stuff, man.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

118. You have to be an officer of the court to refute a lie?

If some former model goes on CNN and tells Anderson Cooper on national television that I drugged her and raped her and she woke up with a sore vagina and rectum I'm going to be shouting from the proverbial rooftops I'm innocent as would any innocent person.

Oh, and the Cos has thirty accusers... That's right thirty accusers whose accounts are similar but I don't know if the Cos anally raped all thirty.


As they say in legal parlance, at some point the evidence is cumulative.


But Cos in innocent under the law until proven guilty too.

[Bonobo]

16. I like you 99th_Monkey, but that's a pretty low fucking bar for "busted". nt

[99th_Monkey]

143. "Busted" changed to "Implicated", just for you.

I can't change Counter Current's but I changed the OP header to Implicated

[SomethingFishy]

22. Here's a Guardian article... He also hired PI's to try to discredit one of Epstein's accusers..

Ignore the "how dare you" bullshit. Epstein was raping underage girls, and then sending them home with $1000 and calling it prostitution. Dershowitz hired investigators to try to discredit one of the girls:

Alan Dershowitz, the Harvard University professor accused alongside Prince Andrew of having sexual relations with a teenage associate of their friend Jeffrey Epstein, was also involved in an effort to discredit a teenage girl who accused Epstein of rape.

Dershowitz, who strongly denies the allegations about his own conduct, recruited private investigators to carry out inquiries on the girl while acting for Epstein’s defence team and sent police printed copies of her MySpace page, claiming it displayed a “fascination with marijuana”.

The professor also suggested, in a letter obtained by the Guardian, that the girl may be pursuing Epstein, a wealthy banker, for his money, and that as a drama student, she was an expert in misleading people.

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/jan/08/alan-dershowitz-girl-jeffrey-epstein-teenager

I suppose the Guardian is a hate site too...

[LisaL]

24. Seems like a standard defense in that sort of case.

What would you expect the lawyer to do?

[SomethingFishy]

26. I would expect anyone with a modicum of decency to back the fuck off

and let the man go to prison for raping underage girls. Instead they tried to discredit them, and when they couldn't they worked out a deal with the government for Epstein to do a year in jail. A year.

I cannot fucking believe I am having to defend taking a position against child molesters and the people who help set them free. This was not just some guy and an underage girll, it was a guy and girls, and he was "lending them out to his friends". It's fucking sickening.

Whether or not he's a pedophile, he certainly helped one escape justice. If you think that's righteous, then we have nothing to discuss.

[BillZBubb]

28. Dershowitz is a lawyer. His modicum of decency disappeared years ago.

[SomethingFishy]

29. Yeah and apparently much of DU's along with it.

[NewDeal_Dem]

54. dershowitz has always been scum imo. but he's popular at DU.

[LisaL]

30. I haven't said anything about "righteous." You are the one trying to imply that

him being the guy's lawyer somehow makes allegations against him credible.

[SomethingFishy]

35. I'm not implying anything. At the absolute least

he helped Epstien get the charges dropped from rape to promoting prostitution. That is a fact, not an imposition or a truth, that is what happened. At the very least.

BTW, he's not the guys lawyer. And he never was the guys lawyer. He was helping his friend.

Get it yet? He was not acting as the guys lawyer he was "helping the defense team".. He was never representing Epstein. Who has already been found GUILTY AS FUCK.

Dershowitz can go fuck himself while you all debate on how guilty he is. Whether or not he was actively involved, he was absolutely involved in the cover up. That is a FACT.

[hrmjustin]

40. I didn't know all this. thanks for posting this.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

25. So Alan Dershowitz, Bill Cosby and Giraffe walk into a bar...

[UTUSN]

27. Lawrence O'DONNELL lashed into him last night (about something else) n/t

"Let me give you some advice..."

"I don't need advice from you..."

[SunSeeker]

55. Yeah, Dershowitz kept saying "France rewards every terrorist."

It was a ridiculous thing to say and it got Larry pretty steamed (rightfully).

[former9thward]

45. This was a smear.

Court pleadings are not under oath and you can say anything in them about someone without worry of being sued for defamation. Lawyers then "alert" media people to the filing and let them spread the lies.

[Omaha Steve]

52. And anything said about Bill Cosby so far wasn't under oath

Do we smear them automatically too?

[NewDeal_Dem]

86. No, cosby's accusers are given 100% credibility here at SelectivePolitics-land.

[Omaha Steve]

88. Wait for it...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

95. You don't have to be under oath to defame someone

I forgot her name but I saw a woman on CNN who said Cos drugged her and then anally and vaginally raped her.

I don't have to be an attorney to know that rises to defamation of character , if false.

[former9thward]

96. Not sure what you mean.

The women who have made allegations against Cosby could be sued for defamation if Cosby chose to do so. The accusations against Dershowitz have been made in court pleadings so he can't sue until they say something in public.

[Omaha Steve]

105. I meant is either accusation more of a smear than the other to the public?

By shear numbers the majority of DU has decided Bill is guilty.

Most haven't seen enough of Alan's accusers to form an opinion yet that I can tell.

[former9thward]

110. I think the shear number of accusations against Cosby

has turned much of the public against him. And it is not a smear if it is true. The Dershowitz accusation is one person (and not even one person, the lawyers for one person) and quite frankly the allegations are somewhat confusing at the point. So I don't think as many believe it at this point.

[dsc]

112. that is actually not true

depositions had happened in the case he settled and those are under oath.

[bluestateguy]

51. I don't like the guy, but the accusations are not credible and are baseless

nt

[roguevalley]

56. how so?

[davidn3600]

57. Where is the proof?

We don't throw people in prison in this country based only on accusations. You need proof and so far there isn't any at all...as far as Dershowitz is concerned at least.

[roguevalley]

58. when the trial if it comes the proof will come. that he is digging dirt on the accuser is a

terrible thing because it looks like he's hiding. If he is not guilty, if there is no proof, why dirty the accuser? Same as Bill cosby. this is in the speculation realm for now. People are talking about this and that is to be expected. You can talk and even take sides. Everyone does. even with bushes and cheneys.

[Democat]

62. If someone made false child abuse claims against you, you would likely be digging dirt too

What you call digging dirt, others might call exposing a fraud.

[LisaL]

66. What trial?

He isn't being charged with anything. So how is he supposed to defend his reputation?

[elias49]

63. Kick

[Jesus Malverde]

67. He's sick when it comes to torture.

I don't doubt he would sleep with young girls.

Sick torturer is sick pervert.

+100000

For inflammatory headline and OP rhetoric.

[zappaman]

69. Yup no need for a trial.

Hell, no need to even charge him!

[Jesus Malverde]

111. Torturers and their advocates don't get trials.

They get a pass. You know that right?

From the plea agreement Epstien signed, his pervert associates got a pass too.

[rhett o rick]

124. Personally I would like to see a trial, but I understand how you might feel otherwise. nm

[zappaman]

125. Of course you don't understand sarcasm.

We all know that.

http://www.puckermob.com/lifestyle/sorry-but-sarcastic-people-are-actually-smarter-than-you-are

[rhett o rick]

129. And I bow to your superior smartness. Now if we can only get you to address actual issues.

[zappaman]

131. Yes, this is such an actual issue for you, isn't it?

Tell us how deeply this affects you, Rick.
Problems sleeping?
Frequent urination?
What?

Keep us posted on this important issue, Rick!
As an attorney, you are perfect to examine this important issue for us.

And since we know you have difficulty...

[rhett o rick]

132. I don't like Dershowitz and not sure why you do. You just won't tell us

anything.

[zappaman]

134. Where did I say I liked Dershowitz, Rick?

I'm sure you wouldn't make that up, Rick.
So show me where I said anything remotely like that.
I'll wait...

[rhett o rick]

136. Since you won't commit one way or other I had to surmise from your avid

defense of him.

[zappaman]

137. Where did I defend him, Rick?

Wow, you really like to make things up, Rick!
You can stop lying about me whenever you like, Rick.

[rhett o rick]

138. Just trying to guess whether you like Dershowitz or not as you won't commit.

I don't like Dershowitz.

[zappaman]

140. You don't like the 6th amendment either.

Apparently.
I'll remember that the next time you admonish someone for "not being a liberal", Rick.

[valerief]

76. A pro-torture guy having sex with a minor and a slave at that? Why does that not surprise me? nt

[SomethingFishy]

87. But he's innocent! Haven't you read this thread?

DU is so fucking bi-polar it's not even funny.

Ok, just because Dershowitz came to the aid of a pedophile, helped him reduce his charge and got him only a year in jail doesn't mean he was involved. But considering that he wasn't acting as the guys lawyer, just helping a friend who raped 16 year old girls and "lent them out to his friends" doesn't mean he's a bad guy... Right?

You can bet if the name at the top of this page was Greenwald instead of Dershowitz every one of these excusers would be calling for his head.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

99. I would say he is innocent until proven guilty...

I would say he is innocent until proven guilty and would apply said standard to everybody from Charlie Manson to Mother Teresa.

[SomethingFishy]

133. He's not innocent of fighting to protect a pedophile..

He used time money and resources to get his friend a good deal from the government. Acting only as his friend not his lawyer.
When you find out one of your friends is using 16 year old girls as sex slaves you walk away, you don't hire investigators and call in favors from your friends in the government to protect him.

You wanna stand up for him go ahead.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

141. If Hitler lived I would have argued he deserved legal representation at Nuremberg.

Without the rule of law you have the rule of the street and that's how you end up with Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and Robert Mugabe in charge.

If you believe a society where the accused are not entitled to legal representation is a good one there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion.

[madville]

90. So this is allegedly the same guy and place

Bill Clinton was reported to be flying around and hanging out with multiple times between 2002-2005, and at the guy's private island where these girls supposedly were being held? Sounds kind of far fetched at the moment.

[99th_Monkey]

91. Clinton is quite cozy with the Bush Crime Family too. -nt-

[Sebastian Garfield]

98. Your headline is false

He was not arrested.

[99th_Monkey]

100. "Busted"

2) to raid or search (premises where illegal activity is suspected): their house got busted.
• arrest: he was busted for drugs.
• (be/get busted) be caught in the act of doing something wrong: I sneaked up on them and told them they were busted.
• reduce (a soldier) to a lower rank; demote: he was busted to private.

Oh and it's not my headline. It's author of article's headline.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

114. Have Jesse Ventura waterboard his ass and he'll talk

and OJ's lawyer will likely confess to anything

[99th_Monkey]

120. OMG

Oops .. I'm sorry. I really didn't mean to laugh.

[arikara]

119. Court Documents

...

http://cases.bms11.com/Documents/FL76/09-34791/ECF_DOC_1603_10567451.pdf
Exhibit C - 2009

Epstein vs. Edwards
Undisputed Statements of Facts

Jeffrey Epstein
Plaintiff

vs.

Scott Rothstein, individually, and
Bradley J. Edwards, individually
Defendants

~//~

Edwards provided notice that he intended to depose Alan Dershowitz. Edwards possessed a legitimate basis for doing so: (a) Dershowitz is believed to have been friends with Epstein for many years; (b) in one news article Dershowitz comments that, "I'm on my 20th book... The only person outside of my immediate family that I send drafts to is Jeffrey"... (c) Epstein's housekeeper Alfredo Rodriguez testified that Dershowitz stayed at Epstein's house during the years when Epstein was assaulting minor females on a daily basis; (d) Rodriguez testified that Deshowqitz was at Epstein's house at times when underage females where there being molested by Epstein... (e) Dershowitz reportedly assisted in attempting to persuade the Palm Beach State Attorney's Office that because the underage females alleged to have been victims of Epstein's abuse lacked credibility and could not be believed that they were at Epstein's house, when Dershowitz himself was an eyewitness to their presence at the house; (f) Jane Doe No. 102 stated generally .... categories that Dershowitz and acquaintanceso of Dershowitz fall into; (g) during the years 2002-2005 Alan Dershowitz was on Epstein's plane on several occasions according to the flight logs produced by Epstein's pilot and inforamtion... suggested that sexual assaults may have taken place on the plane; (h) Epstein donated $30 Million one year to the university at which Dershowitz teaches
...

See also:
http://cases.bms11.com/Documents/FL76/09-34791/ECF_DOC_1603_10567747.pdf

[99th_Monkey]

121. Thank you for posting these source documents. Very helpful.

Classic 'smear the victim' stuff from Dershowitz.

[Sebastian Garfield]

122. correction. Alleged victim

Get it right.

[99th_Monkey]

123. Totally. nt

[olddots]

139. Ron Silver ?

So confusing