Part 2 is coming out before the end of January with evidence and receipts and one person has already verified his adopted father had licenses to fly every aircraft claimed. As a survivor I believe survivors. I understand there are a few sick and twisted individuals that make false accusations but this??? If he or the interviewer is making these false claims, that would be the most dangerous and insane thing to do!!! I can’t imagine anyone with that kind of death wish!!
They're desperate & we're all well aware that our so called government has used these tactics in the past to discredit people.
I think its very important to proceed with caution. I heard that what's in the Epstein files is so horrific that the American people will not be able to digest & comprehend how evil it is. Well this one certainly fits the bill. Also i think its important to keep in mind that a traumatized/tortured individual's mind can have fragmented memories, so the bits & pieces may not match a time line.
Do any of you remember a show on the History Channel where they had a group of 3 or 4 individuals investigate things like Area 51? I can't recall the name of the show at the moment, but they actually were able to gain access to a place in CA where they held bizarre rituals in the woods near a massive owl. Maybe it wasn't CA, it could've been Washington, but it was a very remote location in the woods. They even interviewed the locals in the area. Unfortunately my memory is terrible, but I do remember that it was politicians and others who met in the woods for this bizarre, yearly ritual in the woods.
Yes. It is critical that evidence is provided publicly so that people can read it and judge for themselves. The truth is never murky, only perspective.
As a victim of childhood SA, it is hard to prove things that happened decades ago. Does that make my assault less credible? The fact that this has been epically covered up and hidden and we knew it was PDF and had to be worse….. this article, while sound from a legal standpoint, also has a slanted tone towards bureaucracy and less towards morality. Either way, Lisa has proven herself to be out for money at the expense of victims safety. Believe survivors 💔
I love the “we’ll see what evidence they have” but we excuse all of these pedophiles. So what you’re saying is believe the pedophiles not the victim. You do realize that all of these victims are in great danger until all of the files are released. Funny how we have these double standards because if I So much as stole a candy bar, I’d be sitting in jail.
All evidence & accusations must get verified before we judge. Unfortunately there are people out there that want the publicity. Believe me, I am the first person who wants to believe immediately, seriously, but once you’ve been burned you pay extra attention to validate the next time!!! If this all comes out validated, I will run to support…loudly but until then I’m paying attention and waiting for the confirmation!
Just want to add… we believe the survivors we know are somewhere in the Epstein files… but don’t have direct evidence yet on 98% of them. Why would we not believe Sascha? We have evidence that his commanding officer has said he did see the CSAM video with Sascha in it. We also know that his adopted father William Kyle Riley does have all licenses to fly every aircraft that Sasha has claimed he did for Epstein. We are even given an aviation website where we can verify ourselves all the aircraft TS licenses to fly. Someone in the main comments on my original post has provided that information. Part two is supposed to be full of evidence and will be coming out before the end of January.
As a victim of childhood SA, it is hard to prove things that happened decades ago. Does that make my assault less credible? The fact that this has been epically covered up and hidden and we knew it was PDF and had to be worse….. this article, while sound from a legal standpoint, also has a slanted tone towards bureaucracy and less towards morality. I respect moral attorneys and I do not know you and do not claim to say you are not one, but Lisa is a moral attorney. Just my American opinion while our country burns.
“Underage” was the part that I was highlighting, because it softens it. Because ½ the country has shown time and time again they’re ok with grape…. But allegedly still have line drawn in the sand on Ped Ophelia.
Also, there’s never an age where it’s magically ok to sexually assault people.
But who has verified it? Much of it is impossible to verify. But any details can be checked. I’ve seen no reputable group verify the details in his story. Maybe some are working on it.
That would be one step toward verification. But perjury prosecutions are extremely rare and hard to prove. Trump has been telling lies under oath in a lifetime of litigation. The real verification would be matching details in his story to available documents insofar as it’s possible. Why is he telling his story to this Canadian woman and not to the FBI, the House or a real fact-checking journalist.
They emailed then submitted his information to the House Oversight Committee Dem Office and met with their aides. It wasnt revealed if he testified in front of them. Did you even read the article and listen to the interview.
“They emailed”. Who is “they”? Anybody can email anybody. I could email the audio files to members of congress as well and I don’t even live in the US. Which aides did “they” meet with and why is the supposed meeting only with aides and not with Congressmen and Congresswhen and where and how do you know it happened? Just asking.
I think the election rigging the Epstein murder Putin I think it’s all connected somehow I think it goes very very deep and there’s a lot of very very wealthy people connected to always
You’re absolutely right, but if you go on to read other articles, Peter T and JD Vance had a relationship that’s how Vance got in to be the vice president Peter T bought his seat
He only said Trump, Andy Biggs, and Jim Jordan abused him. About Clarence Thomas, Lindsay Graham they were at the "after" parties where this sh*t went down. Other notables at the larger parties where none of it happened were the Clintons and MJ. He never mentioned Peter Thiel.
It won’t be popular to be skeptical of this, but thank you. Another point in the interview that caused me to pause was where the interviewer tried to suggest that there was “Satanism” involved, when Sascha did not even hint at such a thing. The interviewer is heavily biased toward Christianity.
That said, I do think this testimony should be treated seriously. I would like to see his allegations vetted where possible.
For a fact I was told by a person who’s Dad worked in the Bush administration that she was brought up as child in Satantonic environment with the powers to be at the time. I was young so it registered but gave it no thought going forward. All this is bringing up memories of a time when things like the snuff films where brought to people’s attention then squashed and life went on. This was the 70’s.
The interview is not in a court of law. It’s an interview and a very credible one. She didn’t interject with her opinions, she was just trying to reveal the many layers to his experience, that’s not bizarre.
I gotta disagree with the term “believe everything and every victim”. I recognize that’s gonna put peoples back up but there’s a reason. 25 year law enforcement and most of it in child sex abuse. My job was to objectively investigate the allegations - not say they were truthful or untruthful. It was - can I prove the allegations. If I could prove them the case moved forward. If I couldn’t prove them I couldn’t prove them and it did not mean anyone was lying. There are numerous reasons why some cases are difficult to prove.
But it does pay to be skeptical because that helps you anticipate potential issues your district attorney or potential jurors might have when cases move forward. Victims do lie - sometimes there is a very good reason for it. Sometimes it’s not so much a lie but issues with perception. It’s the role of the investigator to mesh that out while remaining objective but addressing those questions that aren’t making sense.
Admittedly in the hundreds of cases I investigated I can say less than 5 of those cases were outright lies in which the victims intent was to gain something or in retribution for something. But in a lot of cases victims lied or withheld info for various reason not necessarily with nefarious intent but often out of embarrassment.
When presented with a case it was not about what I believed but what I could prove and in working with victims we often had to overcome hurdles that were uncomfortable. To 100% believe every statement by a victim could result in missing critical information, Information that could help or hinder your case and that’s regardless of the type of crime.
Doesn’t mean you call your victim a liar, you just recognize there may be more that you need to learn.
The best advice I ever got when I started my career in sex assault investigations was never apply logic as these cases are complex, diverse, and often illogical. Just listen and move forward from there.
But if you have doubts or are skeptical about the information being provided - then you can be damn sure the district attorney or a jury will too and if you are doing your job you remove those doubts by asking difficult questions.
These cases are difficult because they are often reported way after the fact with either little to no evidence or eye witnesses. There’s rarely a visible injury making the crime more visceral to lay persons. And victims often have backgrounds that make them unbelievable to a majority of people who lack the understanding of how these crimes impact a victim.
For people to say they are skeptical of some information is not necessarily victim blaming - it’s an honest concern. And if I were going to court - those concerns would have to be addressed to the best of our ability because court proceedings can be incredibly damaging to victims as well if not done correctly.
Just an important point of clarification: the victim’s sworn testimony is evidence, and often the only evidence of the alleged crime of child sexual abuse because child abusers generally take great pains to abuse their victims in private. That’s what is so striking about this interview. Much of the alleged abuse involved multiple perpetrators, multiple victims, and occurred in front of a large number of people. All those present who were not victims would likely be both witnesses and face potential criminal charges, assuming the allegations are true, even if they didn’t personally assault or rape a victim or victims. All those present obviously share a strong interest in secrecy, too. However, given the potential for a co-conspirator to talk, whether to avoid prosecution, in a plea bargain to obtain a reduced sentence, or otherwise, the horrifically disgusting behavior alleged involves a heightened assumption of risk beyond one’s own individual misconduct. That type of risk-seeking (and the cruelty) seems consistent with what we do know about Trump’s history of sexual misconduct as alleged under oath and proven in court in the E. Jean Carroll case. Finally, whether a victim’s testimony alone is enough to prosecute or convict presents an entirely different set of issues, but there is never “no” or “little” evidence when a victim gives sworn testimony except in rare cases when the victim is shown to be lying under oath. Here, if the allegations are true, there were numerous witnesses and co-conspirators present for much of the alleged abuse.
I would agree for the most part but you still require some type of corroborating evidence of a victims statement. Proof people were living at a location, house description, other little nuances to show some level of corroboration. I would argue a victims allegation alone is insufficient evidence without some type of corroborating info - could be as simple as a gel perpetrator used that you are able to show was sold or accessible at time or is such a product a child would have no way of legitimately knowing its existence - if that makes sense. Something to show victim and offender could reasonably have had contact due to proximity - there are so many other small ways to obtain corroboration. I would never go to court on a victims statement alone regardless of crime. We still have a responsibility to investigate and ensure the subject we are putting behind bars absolutely belongs there. Disclosures child/victim made to anyone right after assault etc. are imperative if they exist
You are spot on about abusers taking great pains to silence their victims or create an atmosphere of distrust around victims
But you always need some type of corroborating evidence to support a victims allegations. Failure to try to obtain that is detrimental to the victim if a case fails in court because we couldn’t at least corroborate aspects of the allegation. We also need to make sure we are not putting the wrong person in jail or putting an innocent person in jail or allowing a person to be acquitted because we failed to find any corroborating. We have a huge responsibility when investigating these cases that should not be determined/clouded by our personal judgement but by being objective, thorough and responsible in our authority to investigate these crimes.
Edward, until ALL the people involved with the abuse of children and women through and by Epstein, your statement holds no water. The cover up goes to far, wide and deep. So, unless full transparency of these files are released you come across as someone who may be part of a cover up. Wait until we have more evidence and people. All of this is disgusting in itself. Your feelings aren't facts.
That’s just stupid. Why would he be part of a cover up by asking that people be cautious moving forward to ensure accuracy and truthfulness so as to not discredit all the other victims testimonies?! Sounds like great advice to me! Use your critical thinking. Something very rare these days. Jumping the gun because you want it to be true doesn’t make it true. If you really want justice, then you want TRUTH and thoroughness, not just what you wish to be true.
I listened to allllll of the Audio recordings. Did you?? Maybe that’s why I’m being annoyed….Exaggerated??? Huh? Well I’m not trying to impress or surprise so- bye.
The allegations are credible especially given all we know about Trump and the other individuals, especially given the known behavior of some prominent individuals, especially given the behavior of known sex traffickers, especially given the consistency of the witness statements.
There are enough details that an unbiased investigation could be thoroughly conducted. The claims should be taken seriously.
Thoughtful honorable people should always be willing to reexamine their beliefs and follow the facts.
The implications are of such gravity they should not be ignored nor should we think we already know, based on the outcome we desire.
I don't want to be another person to just write this allegation off. But I'm also going to be cautious and see what can be found out legitimately. From the report, it didn't come across serious, and just seems a bit suss is all.
I hope it is not true, I wouldn't wish that on anyone. But I also hope that if it is, we actually see some accountability
I never claimed that the military CSAM event proved anything to do with the politicians. I said it proves that he was trafficked and forced to make CP videos. It’s all part of establishing the credibility of the narrator.
Next, Sascha said they were abused from ages 8-13. Since they were born in 1973, that would put the majority of the abuse from 1981-1986, not stopping in 83. I’m curious where you got those dates.
Regarding 1sgt *Balis, at the top of my chat with him, I mention CSAM material, which would mean Riley wasn’t of age when it was made. The other soldiers were arrested for having CP on their computers.
This rang of (un)controlled opposition to me from the jump. Put a crazy story out there, debunk it easily, and boom - the credibility of all victims has taken a blow.
We have a DOJ that would never investigate this case. They will protect these people at all costs. The following of this cult is so strong that they would give a pass on everything. Morals of America has gone down the drain. These people have so much hate towards black/brown people they wouldn’t even consider it.
Well I'm sure I don't know, but I believe the victims first. Always.
As a survivor of abuse myself, and after having looked back at my situation, who was iunvolved, what they were thinking/believed as well as my own perception of it, how ever many people were present is how many versions there are of what really went down. There is a lot to consider. I don't blame the OP for putting this out there. Facts need to be checked.
The thing is though, that we are currently and continuing to see just how FAILED the system really is. Part of my abuee happened in the church. I was silenced and then gaslit to both protect the people in charge and also to discredit my accusations. And I believed what I was told and that I was responsible. Well I wasn't and after years of therapy, I am even now finding new things and realizations in my further recovering process that show me more objective ways to see how things really went down. And there is ALWAYS truth to the survivor. ALWAYS.
Do I believe Jim Jordan was present? I don't know. Is the timeline correct? Probably not. But Sascha even states that his memory is bad. He flat out gives multiple instances where he tells the interviewer that he can't trust his memory. So don't elude that.
Do I personally believe that any of this happened? YES. I believe all of it happened. A victim knows a real testimoey from an "Exaggerated" story. And I'll just end by saying that while we ABSOLUTELY SHOULD proceed with caution, we can also leave that to the analysts. Right now the message we should all be sharing is to believe the victim and do our parts to make absolutely certain that nothing like this could possibly happen again.
Part 2 is coming out before the end of January with evidence and receipts and one person has already verified his adopted father had licenses to fly every aircraft claimed. As a survivor I believe survivors. I understand there are a few sick and twisted individuals that make false accusations but this??? If he or the interviewer is making these false claims, that would be the most dangerous and insane thing to do!!! I can’t imagine anyone with that kind of death wish!!
There are moles who are paid to spread wild stories to sow disinformation and spoil the truth. Time will tell.
They're desperate & we're all well aware that our so called government has used these tactics in the past to discredit people.
I think its very important to proceed with caution. I heard that what's in the Epstein files is so horrific that the American people will not be able to digest & comprehend how evil it is. Well this one certainly fits the bill. Also i think its important to keep in mind that a traumatized/tortured individual's mind can have fragmented memories, so the bits & pieces may not match a time line.
Do any of you remember a show on the History Channel where they had a group of 3 or 4 individuals investigate things like Area 51? I can't recall the name of the show at the moment, but they actually were able to gain access to a place in CA where they held bizarre rituals in the woods near a massive owl. Maybe it wasn't CA, it could've been Washington, but it was a very remote location in the woods. They even interviewed the locals in the area. Unfortunately my memory is terrible, but I do remember that it was politicians and others who met in the woods for this bizarre, yearly ritual in the woods.
Thank you! Yes, that’s the place in the History Channel show with Brad Meltzer.
Sounds pretty speculative to me.
Yes. It is critical that evidence is provided publicly so that people can read it and judge for themselves. The truth is never murky, only perspective.
The evidence needs to be made public. So may deniers
Someone just said they are scrubbing it off everywhere and so people that can save it, need to!!!!
Lisa has pulled out of the story.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/11/jim-jordan-house-speaker-ohio-state-wrestlers-abuse
Update: Part 2 is never coming out. Lisa Voldeng has fired Sascha Riley.
💯
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/11/jim-jordan-house-speaker-ohio-state-wrestlers-abuse?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Not surprised this has been buried!!
As a victim of childhood SA, it is hard to prove things that happened decades ago. Does that make my assault less credible? The fact that this has been epically covered up and hidden and we knew it was PDF and had to be worse….. this article, while sound from a legal standpoint, also has a slanted tone towards bureaucracy and less towards morality. Either way, Lisa has proven herself to be out for money at the expense of victims safety. Believe survivors 💔
🧠 Neutral Summary of the Claim
• The speaker alleges:
• A wooden tent stake was present in the room.
• He used it as an improvised weapon during an assault.
• The act caused severe injury to the alleged attacker.
• He believes this resulted in the attacker being airlifted for emergency care.
• This moment is framed by the speaker as:
• An act of desperation and self-preservation
• Occurring immediately after witnessing extreme violence
• Followed by retaliatory abuse from others present
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/11/jim-jordan-house-speaker-ohio-state-wrestlers-abuse
I love the “we’ll see what evidence they have” but we excuse all of these pedophiles. So what you’re saying is believe the pedophiles not the victim. You do realize that all of these victims are in great danger until all of the files are released. Funny how we have these double standards because if I So much as stole a candy bar, I’d be sitting in jail.
All evidence & accusations must get verified before we judge. Unfortunately there are people out there that want the publicity. Believe me, I am the first person who wants to believe immediately, seriously, but once you’ve been burned you pay extra attention to validate the next time!!! If this all comes out validated, I will run to support…loudly but until then I’m paying attention and waiting for the confirmation!
Just want to add… we believe the survivors we know are somewhere in the Epstein files… but don’t have direct evidence yet on 98% of them. Why would we not believe Sascha? We have evidence that his commanding officer has said he did see the CSAM video with Sascha in it. We also know that his adopted father William Kyle Riley does have all licenses to fly every aircraft that Sasha has claimed he did for Epstein. We are even given an aviation website where we can verify ourselves all the aircraft TS licenses to fly. Someone in the main comments on my original post has provided that information. Part two is supposed to be full of evidence and will be coming out before the end of January.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/11/jim-jordan-house-speaker-ohio-state-wrestlers-abuse
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/11/jim-jordan-house-speaker-ohio-state-wrestlers-abuse?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Now go figure
You can see a lot of evidence here https://bustertoks.substack.com/p/sascha-riley-an-independent-investigation
As a victim of childhood SA, it is hard to prove things that happened decades ago. Does that make my assault less credible? The fact that this has been epically covered up and hidden and we knew it was PDF and had to be worse….. this article, while sound from a legal standpoint, also has a slanted tone towards bureaucracy and less towards morality. I respect moral attorneys and I do not know you and do not claim to say you are not one, but Lisa is a moral attorney. Just my American opinion while our country burns.
I have other court documents that ChatGPT
Says provides some backing
https://medium.com/@willmartell/why-silence-enables-abuse-documented-audio-transcripts-shared-for-public-awareness-780a077f4084
https://youtu.be/JmPrP7dw9hU?si=hvCHjVFlYfxKRezu
https://medium.com/@willmartell/court-documents-backing-up-sascha-riley-claims-1af0e249c410
The proof is that Trump isn’t threatening to sue. Trum has had over 2,000 lawsuits. But none against people who accused him of SA.
You seem, like many, uncomfortable admitting that boys are also graped.
And the term isn’t “underage girls” the term is children. They were children. The people who run the US government engage in Ped Ophenia.
Terms matter. Language matters.
Thanks for letting me know. I’m now following you.
“Underage” was the part that I was highlighting, because it softens it. Because ½ the country has shown time and time again they’re ok with grape…. But allegedly still have line drawn in the sand on Ped Ophelia.
Also, there’s never an age where it’s magically ok to sexually assault people.
People believe every single bit of it’s not just about Trump. It’s about Clarence Thomas Peter T Jim, Jordan, Lindsey Graham
As they should believe him, instead of assuming he's lying. Too much of his story is verifiable if one just takes the time to do that.
But who has verified it? Much of it is impossible to verify. But any details can be checked. I’ve seen no reputable group verify the details in his story. Maybe some are working on it.
That would be one step toward verification. But perjury prosecutions are extremely rare and hard to prove. Trump has been telling lies under oath in a lifetime of litigation. The real verification would be matching details in his story to available documents insofar as it’s possible. Why is he telling his story to this Canadian woman and not to the FBI, the House or a real fact-checking journalist.
They emailed then submitted his information to the House Oversight Committee Dem Office and met with their aides. It wasnt revealed if he testified in front of them. Did you even read the article and listen to the interview.
“They emailed”. Who is “they”? Anybody can email anybody. I could email the audio files to members of congress as well and I don’t even live in the US. Which aides did “they” meet with and why is the supposed meeting only with aides and not with Congressmen and Congresswhen and where and how do you know it happened? Just asking.
Thiel was not mentioned.
Yes, you’re absolutely correct. JD Vance and Peter T were messing with each other. That’s why Peter paid so much to get Vance the VP
Vance is still Thiel's boy and puppet-to-be.
I think the election rigging the Epstein murder Putin I think it’s all connected somehow I think it goes very very deep and there’s a lot of very very wealthy people connected to always
You’re absolutely right, but if you go on to read other articles, Peter T and JD Vance had a relationship that’s how Vance got in to be the vice president Peter T bought his seat
He only said Trump, Andy Biggs, and Jim Jordan abused him. About Clarence Thomas, Lindsay Graham they were at the "after" parties where this sh*t went down. Other notables at the larger parties where none of it happened were the Clintons and MJ. He never mentioned Peter Thiel.
It won’t be popular to be skeptical of this, but thank you. Another point in the interview that caused me to pause was where the interviewer tried to suggest that there was “Satanism” involved, when Sascha did not even hint at such a thing. The interviewer is heavily biased toward Christianity.
That said, I do think this testimony should be treated seriously. I would like to see his allegations vetted where possible.
I heard it more that she was asking if it was ritualistic or just a perverse desire. And he said the latter
For a fact I was told by a person who’s Dad worked in the Bush administration that she was brought up as child in Satantonic environment with the powers to be at the time. I was young so it registered but gave it no thought going forward. All this is bringing up memories of a time when things like the snuff films where brought to people’s attention then squashed and life went on. This was the 70’s.
I heard the interviewer ask if satanism was involved, and he said it was not.
She didn't suggest Satanism was involved, but she did make some alignments to some similar practices. Go listen to it.
The interview is not in a court of law. It’s an interview and a very credible one. She didn’t interject with her opinions, she was just trying to reveal the many layers to his experience, that’s not bizarre.
She's a lawyer, what would you know in comparison exactly?
What do we know about her?
I gotta disagree with the term “believe everything and every victim”. I recognize that’s gonna put peoples back up but there’s a reason. 25 year law enforcement and most of it in child sex abuse. My job was to objectively investigate the allegations - not say they were truthful or untruthful. It was - can I prove the allegations. If I could prove them the case moved forward. If I couldn’t prove them I couldn’t prove them and it did not mean anyone was lying. There are numerous reasons why some cases are difficult to prove.
But it does pay to be skeptical because that helps you anticipate potential issues your district attorney or potential jurors might have when cases move forward. Victims do lie - sometimes there is a very good reason for it. Sometimes it’s not so much a lie but issues with perception. It’s the role of the investigator to mesh that out while remaining objective but addressing those questions that aren’t making sense.
Admittedly in the hundreds of cases I investigated I can say less than 5 of those cases were outright lies in which the victims intent was to gain something or in retribution for something. But in a lot of cases victims lied or withheld info for various reason not necessarily with nefarious intent but often out of embarrassment.
When presented with a case it was not about what I believed but what I could prove and in working with victims we often had to overcome hurdles that were uncomfortable. To 100% believe every statement by a victim could result in missing critical information, Information that could help or hinder your case and that’s regardless of the type of crime.
Doesn’t mean you call your victim a liar, you just recognize there may be more that you need to learn.
The best advice I ever got when I started my career in sex assault investigations was never apply logic as these cases are complex, diverse, and often illogical. Just listen and move forward from there.
But if you have doubts or are skeptical about the information being provided - then you can be damn sure the district attorney or a jury will too and if you are doing your job you remove those doubts by asking difficult questions.
These cases are difficult because they are often reported way after the fact with either little to no evidence or eye witnesses. There’s rarely a visible injury making the crime more visceral to lay persons. And victims often have backgrounds that make them unbelievable to a majority of people who lack the understanding of how these crimes impact a victim.
For people to say they are skeptical of some information is not necessarily victim blaming - it’s an honest concern. And if I were going to court - those concerns would have to be addressed to the best of our ability because court proceedings can be incredibly damaging to victims as well if not done correctly.
Just an important point of clarification: the victim’s sworn testimony is evidence, and often the only evidence of the alleged crime of child sexual abuse because child abusers generally take great pains to abuse their victims in private. That’s what is so striking about this interview. Much of the alleged abuse involved multiple perpetrators, multiple victims, and occurred in front of a large number of people. All those present who were not victims would likely be both witnesses and face potential criminal charges, assuming the allegations are true, even if they didn’t personally assault or rape a victim or victims. All those present obviously share a strong interest in secrecy, too. However, given the potential for a co-conspirator to talk, whether to avoid prosecution, in a plea bargain to obtain a reduced sentence, or otherwise, the horrifically disgusting behavior alleged involves a heightened assumption of risk beyond one’s own individual misconduct. That type of risk-seeking (and the cruelty) seems consistent with what we do know about Trump’s history of sexual misconduct as alleged under oath and proven in court in the E. Jean Carroll case. Finally, whether a victim’s testimony alone is enough to prosecute or convict presents an entirely different set of issues, but there is never “no” or “little” evidence when a victim gives sworn testimony except in rare cases when the victim is shown to be lying under oath. Here, if the allegations are true, there were numerous witnesses and co-conspirators present for much of the alleged abuse.
I would agree for the most part but you still require some type of corroborating evidence of a victims statement. Proof people were living at a location, house description, other little nuances to show some level of corroboration. I would argue a victims allegation alone is insufficient evidence without some type of corroborating info - could be as simple as a gel perpetrator used that you are able to show was sold or accessible at time or is such a product a child would have no way of legitimately knowing its existence - if that makes sense. Something to show victim and offender could reasonably have had contact due to proximity - there are so many other small ways to obtain corroboration. I would never go to court on a victims statement alone regardless of crime. We still have a responsibility to investigate and ensure the subject we are putting behind bars absolutely belongs there. Disclosures child/victim made to anyone right after assault etc. are imperative if they exist
You are spot on about abusers taking great pains to silence their victims or create an atmosphere of distrust around victims
But you always need some type of corroborating evidence to support a victims allegations. Failure to try to obtain that is detrimental to the victim if a case fails in court because we couldn’t at least corroborate aspects of the allegation. We also need to make sure we are not putting the wrong person in jail or putting an innocent person in jail or allowing a person to be acquitted because we failed to find any corroborating. We have a huge responsibility when investigating these cases that should not be determined/clouded by our personal judgement but by being objective, thorough and responsible in our authority to investigate these crimes.
Corroborating information will come with the full release of the Epstein files.
Amen to that - release the files!
Child porn is readily available to a wide audience. This level of perversion is sought by wealthy individuals who believe they are above the law.
Going to remote locations with individuals willing to sell children plays into their impervious mentality of ever being connected to the crime(party).
The flight logs are available unless they landed in bum f-d nowhere!
Thank you for posting this.
Edward, until ALL the people involved with the abuse of children and women through and by Epstein, your statement holds no water. The cover up goes to far, wide and deep. So, unless full transparency of these files are released you come across as someone who may be part of a cover up. Wait until we have more evidence and people. All of this is disgusting in itself. Your feelings aren't facts.
That’s just stupid. Why would he be part of a cover up by asking that people be cautious moving forward to ensure accuracy and truthfulness so as to not discredit all the other victims testimonies?! Sounds like great advice to me! Use your critical thinking. Something very rare these days. Jumping the gun because you want it to be true doesn’t make it true. If you really want justice, then you want TRUTH and thoroughness, not just what you wish to be true.
Neither are yours
ok now the comments are leaning insane.
WTF ??? where are you coming from.
The post is simple.
Proceed with caution.
This whole story is starting to make the hairs on my neck stand.
And I have a strong intuition.
The gentleman you are questioning is a professional and deserves respect.
So have an opinion but I don’t think you are credible.
As a 30 yr Law Enforcement Investigator, I believe EVERY word and shame on you for victim blaming!!!!
There is no BLAMING?
30 yrs?
Are you questioning my credentials?
He didn’t blame the alleged victim😏.
You don’t know ANYTHING about Surviors and your caption shows it all. I won’t even bother in clicking.
I listened to allllll of the Audio recordings. Did you?? Maybe that’s why I’m being annoyed….Exaggerated??? Huh? Well I’m not trying to impress or surprise so- bye.
I agree Ayisha Elliott.
Shocking, a white man doesn’t believe an account of sexual abuse. Never heard of that before. 🙄
The allegations are credible especially given all we know about Trump and the other individuals, especially given the known behavior of some prominent individuals, especially given the behavior of known sex traffickers, especially given the consistency of the witness statements.
There are enough details that an unbiased investigation could be thoroughly conducted. The claims should be taken seriously.
Thoughtful honorable people should always be willing to reexamine their beliefs and follow the facts.
The implications are of such gravity they should not be ignored nor should we think we already know, based on the outcome we desire.
His accounts are very truthful and any SA victim would also believe this. DT is a sick sick soul. And he should NOT be the president
This is the most sensible thing I've seen written about it yet . It's a red herring a blue q if you will .
I don't want to be another person to just write this allegation off. But I'm also going to be cautious and see what can be found out legitimately. From the report, it didn't come across serious, and just seems a bit suss is all.
I hope it is not true, I wouldn't wish that on anyone. But I also hope that if it is, we actually see some accountability
I'd encourage you to check out the evidence I've collected so far. https://bustertoks.substack.com/p/sascha-riley-an-independent-investigation
I look forward to seeing what you send over.
I never claimed that the military CSAM event proved anything to do with the politicians. I said it proves that he was trafficked and forced to make CP videos. It’s all part of establishing the credibility of the narrator.
Next, Sascha said they were abused from ages 8-13. Since they were born in 1973, that would put the majority of the abuse from 1981-1986, not stopping in 83. I’m curious where you got those dates.
Regarding 1sgt *Balis, at the top of my chat with him, I mention CSAM material, which would mean Riley wasn’t of age when it was made. The other soldiers were arrested for having CP on their computers.
This rang of (un)controlled opposition to me from the jump. Put a crazy story out there, debunk it easily, and boom - the credibility of all victims has taken a blow.
People need to be more discerning.
Yup.
He says in the recorded statement that Gym Jordan was young, college-aged.
We have a DOJ that would never investigate this case. They will protect these people at all costs. The following of this cult is so strong that they would give a pass on everything. Morals of America has gone down the drain. These people have so much hate towards black/brown people they wouldn’t even consider it.
Well I'm sure I don't know, but I believe the victims first. Always.
As a survivor of abuse myself, and after having looked back at my situation, who was iunvolved, what they were thinking/believed as well as my own perception of it, how ever many people were present is how many versions there are of what really went down. There is a lot to consider. I don't blame the OP for putting this out there. Facts need to be checked.
The thing is though, that we are currently and continuing to see just how FAILED the system really is. Part of my abuee happened in the church. I was silenced and then gaslit to both protect the people in charge and also to discredit my accusations. And I believed what I was told and that I was responsible. Well I wasn't and after years of therapy, I am even now finding new things and realizations in my further recovering process that show me more objective ways to see how things really went down. And there is ALWAYS truth to the survivor. ALWAYS.
Do I believe Jim Jordan was present? I don't know. Is the timeline correct? Probably not. But Sascha even states that his memory is bad. He flat out gives multiple instances where he tells the interviewer that he can't trust his memory. So don't elude that.
Do I personally believe that any of this happened? YES. I believe all of it happened. A victim knows a real testimoey from an "Exaggerated" story. And I'll just end by saying that while we ABSOLUTELY SHOULD proceed with caution, we can also leave that to the analysts. Right now the message we should all be sharing is to believe the victim and do our parts to make absolutely certain that nothing like this could possibly happen again.