IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Ghislaine Maxwell , Jeffrey Epstein , sex trafficking

Reply
Old 8th April 2021, 04:18 AM   #481
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 21,584
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
He wasn't convicted of murder though.

The words "Ex-boyfriend escaped murder" in the title ought perhaps to have served as a clue....


(Anyhow, this is all now getting pretty off-piste as regards the actual topic of this thread)
Soz, poor google translation, it actually read Milla's murder: boyfriend escapes the murder sentence.

He was charged with murder and he got away with a lesser charge as two-thirds of them do (65 homicides 2019 only 20 murder convictions). And in any case, had he got 'life' he would have been legally entitled to apply for parole well before the maximum of fifteen years.

Compare and contrast 35 years for being a Madam (if your name is Maxwell, that is).

Compare and contrast to Heidi Fleiss, a self-professed prostitute who ran a prostitution ring:

Quote:
Superior Court Judge Judith Champagne seemed almost apologetic Wednesday as she sentenced Heidi Fleiss to 3 years in prison for running a ritzy call-girl ring that catered to rich and powerful men.

Fleiss, known as the Hollywood Madam, received the mandatory 3-year minimum sentence required under California law.
Chicago Tribune

This was overturned on appeal.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2021, 04:21 AM   #482
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 21,584
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
A line has to be drawn somewhere.

Where would you draw it? 16? 14? 13? 12? 10 perhaps?
I understand that point. However, we were discussing psychological and physical harm. I was interested in understanding why it would be more harmful for a 'call girl' to be seventeen than eighteen in the USA, yet in the UK a seventeen year old is a consenting adult?
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2021, 04:23 AM   #483
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 21,584
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Great news! G. gets her covid vaccine.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime...il/ar-BB1fmVTa
We have all these news articles in the UK berating how killers and reprobates in prison (for example, Ian Huntley) are getting their 'jab' exemplifying good old British envy, so it is interesting the USA is similarly peeved.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2021, 04:31 AM   #484
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 21,584
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Doesn't matter exactly where we draw the line. The specific age of consent is a red herring. Vixen is minimizing the risk of harm in principle. Wherever you draw the line, she's still going to insist that what Maxwell is accused of probably isn't really so bad.

The fact that some countries put the age of consent lower than the ages of some of Maxwell's victims isn't supporting an argument that the age of consent should be lower. Vixen isn't arguing that. It's supporting her argument that the risk of harm isn't as great as we make it out to be, and maybe Maxwell doesn't deserve such a harsh sentence.
I am not trying to underplay the harm, I am trying to get to the objective facts. ISTM that there are those who can be happily married at fourteen or more frequently, sixteen, and others whose development into maturity extends as late as into the twenties. The type of women Epstein attracted appeared to be those who mostly didn't seem to mind being sexually active, or already had been, except now they were being paid.

I completely agree young people need to be protected from sexual predators but is it an absolute truth that someone aged seventeen in the USA is harmed by sexual relationships, whereas as one in the UK is not? Do American women take longer to develop or is it a case the USA is more protective. I think it is great that young adults in the USA are barred from drinking alcohol, given the unedifying spectacle of UK teenagers falling over drunk in the streets on Saturday night after legally consuming huge quantities of the stuff.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2021, 04:33 AM   #485
Ian Osborne
JREF Kid
Tagger
 
Ian Osborne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 8,261
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
A line has to be drawn somewhere.

Where would you draw it? 16? 14? 13? 12? 10 perhaps?
Exactly. People use that argument like a drunk uses a taxi. It gets them to where they want to go, but they show no interest in where it came from or where it goes afterwards.

"it's ridiculous that a 16-year-old can have sex, but someone who's 15 years, 364 days is too young."

Maybe it is. But if you accept that argument, it then becomes just as ridiculous that someone who's 15 years, 364 days can have sex, but someone who's 15 years, 363 days is too young.

Then it's just as ridiculous that someone who's 15 years, 363 days can have sex, but someone who's 15 years, 362 days is too young...

Fast forward an hour or two...

It's ridiculous that an eight-year-old can have sex, but someone who's seven years, 364 days is too young. Etc.

I'm sure none of us are arguing for eight-year-olds having sex, but if you keep chipping away at the age of consent in increments so small they make no apparent difference in the maturity of the individual, when do you stop chipping? If you argue that it's ridiculous that you can have sex on your 16th birthday but not the day before, but wouldn't dream of making this case for your eighth birthday, where did you stop and why? That date will also be vulnerable to the one-day-before rule.

As you rightly say, you have to draw the line somewhere. You could argue it's in the wrong place of course, and make a case for an earlier or a later one, but pointing out someone's no more mature a day earlier is an argument that takes the arguer into places they really didn't want to go.

I used the UK age of consent here, but you can substitute your local one if you wish.
__________________
"Faith without doubt leads to moral arrogance, the eternal pratfall of the religiously convinced" - Joe Klein, Time magazine

"The fact that some geniuses were laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown." - Carl Sagan
Ian Osborne is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2021, 01:27 PM   #486
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: USA! USA!
Posts: 22,860
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Sadly, already been done. This clip shows why Wolf of Wall Street was incredibly popular with us City accountants, as I was, then. I got it right with Sex Ponzi.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.
I AGREE
Whooosh.
carlitos is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2021, 11:03 PM   #487
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 21,584
Originally Posted by Ian Osborne View Post
Exactly. People use that argument like a drunk uses a taxi. It gets them to where they want to go, but they show no interest in where it came from or where it goes afterwards.

"it's ridiculous that a 16-year-old can have sex, but someone who's 15 years, 364 days is too young."

Maybe it is. But if you accept that argument, it then becomes just as ridiculous that someone who's 15 years, 364 days can have sex, but someone who's 15 years, 363 days is too young.

Then it's just as ridiculous that someone who's 15 years, 363 days can have sex, but someone who's 15 years, 362 days is too young...

Fast forward an hour or two...

It's ridiculous that an eight-year-old can have sex, but someone who's seven years, 364 days is too young. Etc.

I'm sure none of us are arguing for eight-year-olds having sex, but if you keep chipping away at the age of consent in increments so small they make no apparent difference in the maturity of the individual, when do you stop chipping? If you argue that it's ridiculous that you can have sex on your 16th birthday but not the day before, but wouldn't dream of making this case for your eighth birthday, where did you stop and why? That date will also be vulnerable to the one-day-before rule.

As you rightly say, you have to draw the line somewhere. You could argue it's in the wrong place of course, and make a case for an earlier or a later one, but pointing out someone's no more mature a day earlier is an argument that takes the arguer into places they really didn't want to go.

I used the UK age of consent here, but you can substitute your local one if you wish.


Do people seriously believe that a seventeen-year-old is in the same arbitrary category as an eight-year-old? Is it really correct to call someone attracted to a seventeen-year-old a 'paedophile' and should be subjected to the same penal code as someone who really is attracted to children and acts on it?
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th April 2021, 01:05 AM   #488
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,659
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Do people seriously believe that a seventeen-year-old is in the same arbitrary category as an eight-year-old? Is it really correct to call someone attracted to a seventeen-year-old a 'paedophile' and should be subjected to the same penal code as someone who really is attracted to children and acts on it?
You'll be happy to know that within the US, laws penalizing sex acts involving a minor mostly have bracketed definitions and penalties, so indeed someone who statutorily rapes a 17 year old is not subject to the same code and penalty as if their victim had been 8.

Federal law has different sentencing guidelines for trafficking victims between 14-17 and victims und 14.

NY law on statutory rape brackets under 11, under 15 and under 18 as separate codes.

I suppose if you might have looked that up if you were interested.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th April 2021, 01:15 AM   #489
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 6,659
But over and above sentencing specifics, stop equivocating between legal wrongs and moral wrongs.

Things will be legal in one jurisdiction and illegal in another, duh. You can say the same about speed limits, drug use or the allowable size of basement egress windows. Yet people seem to save this whole weird conflation of drawing a legal line with an objective moral line for a few pet issues including age of consent.

Laws aren't moral truths, they're attempts at practical tools for human welfare, arrived at in a messy way, crafted by politicians who disagree madly and hate each other.

Many things are morally reprehensible without being illegal. Some things are illegal and ultimately harmless.

If this is a surprise to you or feels like a great injustice and you're over the age of consent in your country, then I don't know what to tell you.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th April 2021, 03:23 AM   #490
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 22,900
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post


If this is a surprise to you or feels like a great injustice and you're over the age of consent in your country, then I don't know what to tell you.
And the age of consent is irrelevant when the girl said "no".
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending

Last edited by jimbob; 9th April 2021 at 03:30 AM. Reason: quote tag
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th April 2021, 03:37 AM   #491
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,485
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
And the age of consent is irrelevant when the girl said "no".
Are you referring to a specific girl that said no in this case?
Just catching up.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 9th April 2021, 03:47 AM   #492
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 22,900
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Are you referring to a specific girl that said no in this case?
Just catching up.
This for starters


Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Right. You don't understand what the idiom, "on paper" actually means.

"On paper" means in theory but not in reality. By using it the way you did, you inferred Maxwell didn't really do anything wrong.




So, you think rape victims are motivated to come forward by money

https://www.foxnews.com/us/ghislaine...y-evil-epstein
"A woman who claims Ghislaine Maxwell raped her dozens of times – beginning when she was just 14 years old – says she is willing to take the stand and testify against Jeffrey Epstein’s ex-girlfriend. In an exclusive interview with Fox News, Jane Doe, who wishes to protect her identity, said Maxwell sexually abused her beginning in 1991 in Florida. She said the abuse continued until she was 16.

Maxwell was arrested Thursday on federal charges for facilitating and participating in sexual abuse acts with minors,

“She did rape me. I would say it’s more than 20 or 30 times,” she said. “She is just as evil as Jeffrey Epstein … She is a rapist.”

Jane Doe claims years of sexual abuse came to an end only after she became pregnant with Jeffrey Epstein’s baby. At age 16, she had an abortion.
A virgin and a child at the time, Doe explained, Maxwell would use toys and penetrate her with her fingers.

“When this started, she told me that Epstein was getting upset because I kept bleeding, and that she was helping so that it wouldn’t hurt so much because it should be satisfying.”


And you think these girls just made up stories for money

https://www.foxnews.com/media/jeffre...axwell-arreset
The attorney for Jeffrey Epstein accuser Jennifer Araoz told "The Story" Thursday that his client is relieved at the arrest of former Epstein girlfriend and longtime Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, who the attorney described as the "ringmaster" of Epstein's child sex ring.

"Ghislane Maxwell is a monster and she's now in custody. And that's a very good thing," Daniel Kaiser told host Martha MacCallum." "My client, Jennifer, is relieved -- as [are], I'm sure, all the victims of of Jeffrey Epstein and Ms. Maxwell.

"Ms. Maxwell was the ringmaster, she was the architect of Jeffrey Epstein's sex ring," Kaiser went on. "She hid it. She maintained it. If not for her, the ring wouldn't have persisted for as long as it did and it would not have victimized as many people as it did, as many young girls, including my client."
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th April 2021, 05:42 PM   #493
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 47,165
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I understand that point. However, we were discussing psychological and physical harm. I was interested in understanding why it would be more harmful for a 'call girl' to be seventeen than eighteen in the USA, yet in the UK a seventeen year old is a consenting adult?
You keep on saying this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosti...United_Kingdom
Quote:
it is illegal to buy sex from a person under 18 where the perpetrator does not reasonably believe they are 18 or over. [5]
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2021, 01:16 AM   #494
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 21,584
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Playing devil's advocate, that qualifying clause, would be Prince Andrew's defence in court, were he to ever be charged. Bear in mind, he could also claim he didn't know Giuffre was a sex worker, given all of his life he has had women throwing themselves at him for free.
__________________
Blott en dag, ett ögonblick i sänder,

vilken tröst, vad än som kommer på!
Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th April 2021, 03:26 AM   #495
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,485
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Playing devil's advocate, that qualifying clause, would be Prince Andrew's defence in court, were he to ever be charged. Bear in mind, he could also claim he didn't know Giuffre was a sex worker, given all of his life he has had women throwing themselves at him for free.
Yes and once again it seems the thread is populated by moral high grounders rather than a scruffy Dickensian parade. Maybe it really is so. We are all an ethical cut above.
I know I am.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2021, 09:55 PM   #496
timhau
NWO Litter Technician
 
timhau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Looks like Finland. Smells like Finland. Quacks like Finland. Where the hell am I?
Posts: 14,512
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
If you look at the statistics, in 2018 only eleven people got 'life' and in 2019, this figure was 20. As there were apx. 65 homicides in 2019, this tells you they did not all get 'life' but a fixed term sentence, in accordance with what I stated earlier.
That means that only eleven people were convicted of murder. Murder is not the only kind of homicide. If you want to include manslaughter convictions, then don't talk about just murder.
__________________
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
- Emo Philips
timhau is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:36 AM   #497
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 24,325
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Frustrated pulp-fiction writer-cum-researcher in a scratchy fair isle sweater uses knowledge from their Accounting 102 class to take down a Sex Ponzi scheme. Definitely needs more murder, but it's a start.
If you're going for streaming media you'll need plenty of scenery porn, actual porn, a lead who can brood on screen and bizarre and gory murders. Perhaps sex-toy themed? Dehydrated with Hitachi, choked with a dildo, castrated by a cock cage, strangled with a single-tail......
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:17 PM   #498
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 22,929
Originally Posted by carlitos View Post
Whooosh.
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
Do people seriously believe that a seventeen-year-old is in the same arbitrary category as an eight-year-old? Is it really correct to call someone attracted to a seventeen-year-old a 'paedophile' and should be subjected to the same penal code as someone who really is attracted to children and acts on it?
I'm convinced, carlitos is a time lord.
__________________
Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa

If I had a pet panda I would name it Snowflake.
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:26 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.