Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Will Epstein Prosecutors Do With Photo Evidence of Illegal "Client" Activity...?
https://hubpages.com/politics/What-Will-Epstein-Prosecutors-Do-With-Porn-Evidence-of-Clients-Already-in-Their-Possession ^

Posted on 08/13/2019 7:25:33 PM PDT by cringeworthy

On July 25, 2019, the New York Post reported that Manhattan federal prosecutors were conducting an “ongoing investigation' of "uncharged individuals” connected to Jeffrey Epstein, according to court papers filed that day. Relevant to that investigation were "images of nude or partially-nude individuals” which had been seized from Epstein's residences, which, if released to the public, “would impede...the Government’s ongoing investigation of uncharged individuals...” The implication was strong that "uncharged individuals" were in the photographs. Why would the leaking of photographs "impede" the investigation of "uncharged individuals," unless the individuals were themselves in the photographs? This might certainly cause some uncharged individuals to flee to avoid arrest. That would certainly impede an investigation.

(Excerpt) Read more at hubpages.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: epstein; moresuspects
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

1 posted on 08/13/2019 7:25:33 PM PDT by cringeworthy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: cringeworthy

“On July 25, 2019, the New York Post reported that Manhattan federal prosecutors were conducting an “ongoing investigation’ of “uncharged individuals” connected to Jeffrey Epstein”

SURE... I believe that. LOL


2 posted on 08/13/2019 7:26:36 PM PDT by DesertRhino (Dog is man's best friend, and moslems hate dogs. Add that up. ....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
"What Will Epstein Prosecutors Do With Photo Evidence of Illegal "Client" Activity...?"

Use it for the same things Epstein did.

3 posted on 08/13/2019 7:28:40 PM PDT by LegendHasIt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cringeworthy

“Yeah, Epstein is dead...but we need to keep all the evidence against him top secret until at least November of 2020... Preferably forever”.

That about it?


4 posted on 08/13/2019 7:28:43 PM PDT by DesertRhino (Dog is man's best friend, and moslems hate dogs. Add that up. ....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino
“On July 25, 2019, the New York Post reported that Manhattan federal prosecutors were conducting an “ongoing investigation’ of “uncharged individuals” connected to Jeffrey Epstein”

To quote humor columnist Dave Barry on an *entirely* unrelated matter,

"Whoa! Get a load of the torts on that plaintiff!"

5 posted on 08/13/2019 7:49:27 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change with out notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LegendHasIt

According to Black’s law dictionary, evidence is “any species of proof, or probative matter, legally presented at the trial of an issue, by the act of the parties and through the medium of witnesses, records, documents, exhibits, concrete objects, etc. for the purpose of inducing belief in the minds of the court or jury as to their contention.” Electronic information (like paper) generally is admissible into evidence in a legal proceeding.

But the establishment of probable cause is hard to define. Although the Fourth Amendment states that “no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause”, it does not specify what “probable cause” actually means. The Supreme Court has attempted to clarify the meaning of the term on several occasions, while recognizing that probable cause is a concept that is imprecise, fluid and very dependent on context. And that becomes opinion rather than existence.

The Fourth Amendment requires that any arrest be based on probable cause, even when the arrest is made pursuant to an arrest warrant. Whether or not there is probable cause typically depends on the totality of the circumstances, meaning everything that the arresting officers know or reasonably believe at the time the arrest is made. So unless there is some action on film which identifies the pictured as accomplishing a crime, there isn’t anything to arrest for. And nudity, by itself, is not a felony. Indecent exposure is a gross misdemeanor on the first offense if the person exposes himself or herself to a person under the age of fourteen years. The punishment for a misdemeanor indecent exposure conviction is probation up to a year or two in jail and a fine. Not sure which will be applied but these are VIP people.

rwood


6 posted on 08/13/2019 7:52:21 PM PDT by Redwood71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Redwood71

If a guy’s dead, do they still need a search warrant to collect evidence from his property?


7 posted on 08/13/2019 7:57:41 PM PDT by Ken H (2019 => The House of Representin')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

The property belongs to someone, so yes, unless the new owner decides to give explicit permission to go in and search for anything to be used at any time for any investigation. Though even then written consent is needed to prevent issues further down the line. The warrant is the best course of action, in any case.

Even with permission it could be later stated that there was no probable cause to enter, as not only was there no specified search parameters but no warrant means no approval by a judge, making anything obtained inadmissible. Some sort of record is necessary to keep rulings from being overturned and evidence withdrawn.


8 posted on 08/13/2019 8:14:04 PM PDT by Tacrolimus1mg (Do no harm, but take no sh!t.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: cringeworthy

https://youtu.be/xM6ibXV20Dk


9 posted on 08/13/2019 8:30:21 PM PDT by ameribbean expat (Socialism is like a nude beach - - sounds great til you actually get there. -- David Burge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cringeworthy

[[What Will Epstein Prosecutors Do With Photo Evidence of Illegal “Client” Activity...?]]

They will of course arrest everyone with evidence, and put them on ‘suicide watch’


10 posted on 08/13/2019 8:32:11 PM PDT by Bob434
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redwood71

Who has the list of these very important people and when will it bereleased, or leaked ? The public has a right to know. Who are the pedophiles nextdoor?


11 posted on 08/13/2019 9:21:08 PM PDT by miserare ( Indict Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cringeworthy

Photo evidence? The ashes piled in the incinerator you mean.


12 posted on 08/13/2019 9:25:52 PM PDT by deadrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cringeworthy

The only people who might get these pictures released would be Judicial Watch. Congress doesn’t care, and Law Enforcement needs to protect their masters.


13 posted on 08/13/2019 9:29:40 PM PDT by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: miserare
"Who are the pedophiles nextdoor?"

True. You can run a search and find out if predators live near you. But that doesn't apply to the super powerful and super wealthy.

14 posted on 08/13/2019 9:31:42 PM PDT by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

Go for it, Judicial Watch!


15 posted on 08/13/2019 9:35:49 PM PDT by miserare ( Indict Hillary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Ken H; Tacrolimus1mg
"If a guy’s dead, do they still need a search warrant to collect evidence from his property?"

I agree with Tacrolimus1mg on this. Get a search warrant. You cannot anticipate everything, but at some point someone might have a legal argument on probable cause. Eliminate possible probable cause challenges by getting a search warrant.

16 posted on 08/13/2019 9:36:00 PM PDT by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

I hope they gave Clinton operatives time to scour the place before they went in. It’s been about a month.


17 posted on 08/13/2019 9:39:01 PM PDT by morphing libertarian ( Use Comey's Report, Indict Hillary now; build Kate's wall. --- Proud Smelly Walmart Deplorable)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Enterprise

Fredo has as much as admitted it was an Epstein client. But what if people like Chucky Schumer are in the photos?


18 posted on 08/13/2019 10:04:01 PM PDT by Vehmgericht
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Vehmgericht

Re what if Schumer were in the photos. Well, first he’d had to have balls to qualify. On the other hand, he is the biggest schmuck in Congress so that would qualify him for “horndog” of the month.

I just hope Chucky, spawn of the devil, is in some of Epstein’s photos. They would be worth a fortune to someone who sold them to a newspaper.

Headlines: “Epstein photos prove that Schumer has balls despite rumors to the contrary”.

“Photos prove that Schumer is the biggest prick around”.

“Photos prove Schumer’s parents were gorillas”.


19 posted on 08/13/2019 11:19:03 PM PDT by MadMax, the Grinning Reaper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cringeworthy

I bet a zillion those “unnamed individuals” will be tipped off.


20 posted on 08/13/2019 11:27:23 PM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-28 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson