I hope this is you being silly....:|

True enough if he had a "dead man switch" style setup to release the info in case he was killed/etc....if he didn't and had it setup where he had to message the person or send out some sort of "signal" first and he didn't have time to then the person with the info is left wondering how to best proceed.
==================
Not immunity, per se, but he likely would have gotten a lesser sentence if he flipped a ton of people.
====================
Who knows....maybe he was trying to get an even better deal or the people in charge were going back and forth with him on what was on offer.

As for believing.....I am leaning more towards it but actual suicide could be a possibility here I agree.....a staged fake suicide just seems more likely to me, is all. Thanks for posting civilly and with some interesting counterpoints/points. :)

Pretty sad end to a life of course, but at least he seems to have had a lot of fun before.

You could say the same of Charles Manson. What the hell do you think my point was?

At least manson got to live until he died naturally(good for him and good for people as he had longer to "suffer" in jail)
====================
I know I was just restating my own take on it.

Don't know if Epstein is in the same league tbh.
My comment above was of course somewhat trollish and I haven't read that much about the story, but my impression was that he's basically been proven to have been a pimp for teenage prostitutes who were paid. Immoral and illegal, but somewhat different from running a pedophile rape network.
Anyway, I have to agree with Fairfox, it seems a bit ill-advised for OP to make threads like this, there are more than enough other, more appropriate sites to discuss this.

He's not. That doesn't mean he wasn't a piece of crap.

Some of the girls he was pimping were as young as 14. He preyed on desperation and poverty.

Agree.

The mods don't care apparently.

Tbh if I may be frank here.....I find it a bit offensive for anyone(in general) to say essentially 'we don't want your kind[of thread] here'.....sure there are other sites to discuss this, but name ONE person this is harming by being here.

People can and likely do avoid the thread if they dislike the topic(it is very clearly written and not meant to lure anyone in with false pretenses), and I am trying to keep it as civil as possible. I also said if staff find it wrong to be here I welcome them to lock it and tell me so, but until then I want people to be able to discuss the subject if they so choose.

Or it's just as likely such threads are ok but some think they aren't?

Without the rule being rewritten to be more clear or staff telling us such on the matter it remains open to interpretation, and I choose to think this kind of thing is ok-ish to post(though as I said if staff want it closed then that's fine and it would clear uip the vague wording a bit in the rules.).

Political threads have been banned on Gog, and this issue with all the conspiracy theories is political...Trump pretty much insinuated that the Clintons had Epstein killed...
I think a lot of people would be glad if they weren't bothered by that kind of polarizing politics stuff here, and if one could only talk about games and harmless pop culture stuff. There's more than enough of that kind of thing in other parts of the net.

A: I wasn't responding to you.

B: Your ignorance on the subject of what qualifies as 'political' is well established.

C: Do you REALLY want to start this shit... again?
This.

I'm avoiding getting too political over this topic as I have my opinions on who is and isn't responsible.

I'm curious how long it will last before someone 'goes there'.

1st: So if anyone in gov't has a stance on something or mentions it then it's political....guess there's no more talking about games then as they mention them all the time.

/sarcasm

2nd: And again many can just avoid the 1-2 threads I make...it's not that hard and it's not like gog is inundated with chan style threads or similar.

The line is less clear, than you think. Prostitutes are often abused too. And that would be naive to think that underage girls weren't pressured to do their job against their will.

Anyways, I think this is one of "we will never know" cases. If there were indeed people who managed to execute such a high-profile assassination, they would be able to cover all traces for sure. And if there weren't, well, how do you prove?

Until other people test the boundaries as well and start making similar threads, and then the forum is full of flamewars about politics, culture war issues etc. again.
And honestly, it's hard not to get the impression that you're playing a bit dumb with your "But this isn't about politics" claims. Come on, of course it's a political issue, and you must know that.

Everyone is free to reply to any post in any thread, correct? Also it was about me a bit so I felt ok in replying.

No, you seem to think(I could be wrong...feel free to correct me if I need correcting) you know best what gog means by politics being banned on the forums means without one shred of proof(just a vague rule about no politics). You also seem to be a bit upset that I post on subjects that you yourself hold back on as to "follow the rules".

No, which is why i'm stopping it after this and sticking to the subject at hand if I can help it.

Sure, my original comment was somewhat tasteless, I sometimes just can't resist trolling :-)
I'm not in favour of prostitution, and certainly not of vulnerable and immature teenagers.

Then maybe the staff would rewrite the rule to be more clear so as to avoid any such incidents in the future....you cannot make an omelette without breaking a few eggs, as the saying goes.

Also imo it's hyperbolic to say that the forums will devolve that badly if a few people post stuff on similar topics.
=============
I never said or claimed that this isn't a type of politics. I just don't think THIS TYPE is the one banned by the rules. Until said rules are made more clear and less vague they are open to anyone's interpretation, and I dislike when some(in general) act like they know what gog was thinking or had in mind when they made that rule.

In the end, if one finds a thread could be rule breaking, then they can report it and see what comes of it instead of derailing/trolling/complaining to the op.

For some to come into a thread just to complain a thread doesn't really help keep the forum a civil place and just ends up adding to the problems one doesn't want to see on a site.


Good points