Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. First thought: Wow, a powerful man is going to see some CONSEQUENCES???

First thought: Wow, a powerful man is going to see some CONSEQUENCES???

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
11 Posts 6 Posters 15 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
    girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
    girlonthenet@mastodon.social
    wrote last edited by
    #2

    @benh only if we completely ignore the testimony of survivors!

    notthelbcguy@mstdn.socialN 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG girlonthenet@mastodon.social

      First thought: Wow, a powerful man is going to see some CONSEQUENCES???

      Second thought: Why the fuck is 'misconduct in public office' a priority but 'sexual assault of girls' was not?

      Link Preview Image
      Police asking Andrew's protection officers what 'they saw or heard' as part of Epstein files review

      The Metropolitan Police says officers have been asked to consider whether anything "they saw or heard during that period of service may be relevant to our ongoing reviews".

      favicon

      BBC News (www.bbc.co.uk)

      aadeacon@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
      aadeacon@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
      aadeacon@mastodon.social
      wrote last edited by
      #3

      @girlonthenet I suspect it is a holding charge whilst investigations continue on the more serious charges. it is not unknown to use a lesser charge to hold people in custody whilst the other case is built, especially if there is a risk of the perpetrator fleeing or interfering with witnesses.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG girlonthenet@mastodon.social

        First thought: Wow, a powerful man is going to see some CONSEQUENCES???

        Second thought: Why the fuck is 'misconduct in public office' a priority but 'sexual assault of girls' was not?

        Link Preview Image
        Police asking Andrew's protection officers what 'they saw or heard' as part of Epstein files review

        The Metropolitan Police says officers have been asked to consider whether anything "they saw or heard during that period of service may be relevant to our ongoing reviews".

        favicon

        BBC News (www.bbc.co.uk)

        mactonex@toot.communityM This user is from outside of this forum
        mactonex@toot.communityM This user is from outside of this forum
        mactonex@toot.community
        wrote last edited by
        #4

        @girlonthenet misconduct in a public office is a serious sounding offence (and is in fact a serious offence) but it’s one they can limit to him and him alone. Investigating him and charging him over his Epstein connections threatens to drag all sorts of sordid creatures from out of the mud.

        Still made me very happy to see though, and on his birthday too!

        girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG girlonthenet@mastodon.social

          @benh only if we completely ignore the testimony of survivors!

          notthelbcguy@mstdn.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
          notthelbcguy@mstdn.socialN This user is from outside of this forum
          notthelbcguy@mstdn.social
          wrote last edited by
          #5

          @girlonthenet @benh well, you know the problem with testimony. It’s just a case of he said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, also she said, and also he admitted it in email with a winky emoji.

          girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG 1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG girlonthenet@mastodon.social

            First thought: Wow, a powerful man is going to see some CONSEQUENCES???

            Second thought: Why the fuck is 'misconduct in public office' a priority but 'sexual assault of girls' was not?

            Link Preview Image
            Police asking Andrew's protection officers what 'they saw or heard' as part of Epstein files review

            The Metropolitan Police says officers have been asked to consider whether anything "they saw or heard during that period of service may be relevant to our ongoing reviews".

            favicon

            BBC News (www.bbc.co.uk)

            cougar@infosec.exchangeC This user is from outside of this forum
            cougar@infosec.exchangeC This user is from outside of this forum
            cougar@infosec.exchange
            wrote last edited by
            #6

            @girlonthenet I would assume that either it's an offence they believe they can get to stick, or it's an excuse to raid his properties with a high degree of confidence that they'll find something far more damning.

            No-one is going to arrest the artist formerly known as a Prince unless they're sure, because there's no graceful climb-down to be had here if they can't secure a conviction. Plus that would send a really terrible message to all the others who think they're untouchable.

            IMHO, etc etc.

            girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG juergen_hubert@mementomori.socialJ 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • cougar@infosec.exchangeC cougar@infosec.exchange

              @girlonthenet I would assume that either it's an offence they believe they can get to stick, or it's an excuse to raid his properties with a high degree of confidence that they'll find something far more damning.

              No-one is going to arrest the artist formerly known as a Prince unless they're sure, because there's no graceful climb-down to be had here if they can't secure a conviction. Plus that would send a really terrible message to all the others who think they're untouchable.

              IMHO, etc etc.

              girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
              girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
              girlonthenet@mastodon.social
              wrote last edited by
              #7

              @Cougar oh yeah for sure. I particularly like the bit in their statement which says they are carrying out further searches at his addresses. I think my frustration comes from the fact that for so long, 'survivor testimony' has been written off as 'obviously not good enough evidence'. I would like to live in a world where survivor testimony - especially of the detail and magnitude we see in the Epstein files - is good enough for arrest, at least.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • notthelbcguy@mstdn.socialN notthelbcguy@mstdn.social

                @girlonthenet @benh well, you know the problem with testimony. It’s just a case of he said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, she said, also she said, and also he admitted it in email with a winky emoji.

                girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                girlonthenet@mastodon.social
                wrote last edited by
                #8

                @NotTheLBCGuy @benh extremely well put holy shit

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • mactonex@toot.communityM mactonex@toot.community

                  @girlonthenet misconduct in a public office is a serious sounding offence (and is in fact a serious offence) but it’s one they can limit to him and him alone. Investigating him and charging him over his Epstein connections threatens to drag all sorts of sordid creatures from out of the mud.

                  Still made me very happy to see though, and on his birthday too!

                  girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                  girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG This user is from outside of this forum
                  girlonthenet@mastodon.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #9

                  @Mactonex on his BIRTHDAY oh god thanks for that detail. Lol.

                  mactonex@toot.communityM 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • girlonthenet@mastodon.socialG girlonthenet@mastodon.social

                    @Mactonex on his BIRTHDAY oh god thanks for that detail. Lol.

                    mactonex@toot.communityM This user is from outside of this forum
                    mactonex@toot.communityM This user is from outside of this forum
                    mactonex@toot.community
                    wrote last edited by
                    #10

                    @girlonthenet yeah, pretty sure he’s not going to be going to Woking Pizza Express to celebrate

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • cougar@infosec.exchangeC cougar@infosec.exchange

                      @girlonthenet I would assume that either it's an offence they believe they can get to stick, or it's an excuse to raid his properties with a high degree of confidence that they'll find something far more damning.

                      No-one is going to arrest the artist formerly known as a Prince unless they're sure, because there's no graceful climb-down to be had here if they can't secure a conviction. Plus that would send a really terrible message to all the others who think they're untouchable.

                      IMHO, etc etc.

                      juergen_hubert@mementomori.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                      juergen_hubert@mementomori.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
                      juergen_hubert@mementomori.social
                      wrote last edited by
                      #11

                      @Cougar @girlonthenet

                      Yeah, you start out with the parts that are easy to prove, and then you have the legal cover to search for the _really_ juicy stuff on all his premises.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      1
                      0
                      • R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • World
                      • Users
                      • Groups