List could be released as soon as Tuesday after deadline for objections to unsealing of names passes midnight Monday

Nearly 200 names connected to the Jeffrey Epstein-Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking conspiracy could be released by a New York judge as soon as Tuesday, exposing or confirming the identities of dozens of associates of the disgraced financier that until now have only been known as John and Jane Does in court papers.

A deadline for objections to the unsealing of the names passes at midnight on Monday, nearly nine years after victim Virginia Giuffre filed a single defamation claim against Maxwell, daughter of the late British press baron Robert Maxwell, in 2015, that in turn produced the names in legal depositions.

A year later, in 2016, US district court judge Robert Sweet rejected Maxwell’s motion to dismiss the case, finding that “the veracity of a contextual world of facts more broad than the allegedly defamatory statements” and that Guiffre “was a victim of sustained underage sexual abuse between 1999 and 2002”. The parties settled out of court in 2017.

  • irotsoma@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    It will look bad on people who try to look ethical, but it will have no effect on those who don’t. So the Clinton’s would take a hit if Bill was on there, but Trump wouldn’t be affected.

    The right wing easily draws in one-issue voters since their primary issues are usually about taking away something from someone else, and so they don’t require many resources and generally are accomplished more easily using unethical means than ethical ones. “It’s just business,” and all that.

    Leftists tend to be more about building something rather than tearing it down. That’s both more work and requires a lot of shared resources. So ethical practices are required to keep those resources from getting misused.

    • DragonAce@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It will look bad on people who try to look ethical, but it will have no effect on those who don’t. So the Clinton’s would take a hit if Bill was on there…

      You mean Mr. Blowjob-in-the-Oval-Office?

      • Goblin_Mode@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Is getting a blowjob in the oval office unethical?

        Like I know he cheated on his wife, which is unethical. But you chose to bring up the act of receiving the sloppiest top in that specific room as the damning factor and not the actual adultery which is a weird take.

    • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      It will also be easier to smear the ‘think of the children’ politicians once we see exactly how they think about children…