Because there have been too many cases where women have been proven to have lied. (Which isn't to imply that people are lying about Epstein. This is a general point.)
Let people have due process and release the Epstein files.
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)
Political Memes
9413 readers
4622 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There's a huge amount of women plus Trump's comments about women. It makes sense to believe them
I like the version "Take all women seriously" over "Believe all women".
It addresses both problems - some women false report, but if you take all of them seriously, nobody (theoretically) gets away with committing a crime.
I guess it's not as catchy, though.
You can believe women and tend to their psychological trauma while also waiting to condemn the accused until they are convicted in court.
Now, the Epstein stuff is very different, there's overwhelming evidence and it's very obvious. But as a general rule otherwise, just ruining a life based on someone's claim shouldn't be okay.
I was going to lead with a snide comment like "Amber Heard has entered the chat", but here's the thing... A close friend of mine got absolutely fucked over this way.
One day, out of the blue, his wife went psycho. Divorced him, accused him of abusing the kids, coached the kids to say they were abused, the works.
He lost custody, had court battle after court battle, dealt with the most evil, vile shit said about him, none of which was true.
When he attempted the court mandated visitation she would literally attack him and deny visitation. When he recorded her, she broke the video camera.
Then she up and died from a brain tumor.
He goes to court with the medical evidence for her bizarre behavior, and you'd think that would be it, right? Nope. Court tries to give custody of the kids to HER parents, who are of an age that they can't care for teenagers.
So her parents have to travel from 4 states away to testify that there's no evidence to support the accusations, that he should have custody of his kids.
Whole process took 7 or 8 years and he finally got custody just as one of his kids turned 18 and could do what they wanted anyway.
I’m sorry to hear that happened to your friend. I had a family member who went through uncharacteristic and risk taking behavior before they ultimately passed from a brain tumor. It happens and it is very confusing for everyone involved. Especially since that person, a very accomplished (decorated officer) intelligent person (genius IQ) randomly started on hard drugs, which just confused the situation further. We got them away from that life just in time to get them a diagnosis. The strain and chaos with that type of illness can be devastating.
That being said, I think the number of women in this case, and the context clues, are sufficient that we can conclude that this guy isn’t innocent. We have multiple different testimonies and his own words about young girls and his own daughter to conclude he was involved in that lifestyle at a time when he was high on money, power and a circle that was judgment free. He ran pageants in the 90’s which just… ewww. Also, I mean who calls Epstein at 5am in the morning and leaves messages? Not exactly normal operating hours. If he wasn’t insulated with limousines and a real estate empire this guy would have been drug through the mud in any podunk town for being a total creep. No one would be questioning when word came out, they’d be saying, “oh yeah, that guy, I can see it”
Your friend has told you a very unusual set of circumstances that sounds awful. Has he had as many women accused him of abuse as Trump has?
Nope, just the one. He since passed away himself. 😟
His kids ended up being pretty maladjusted for several years, but came out the other side OK. I did lose track of them after he died though, I would imagine that hit them hard. Like their mom it was equally sudden.
What a tragic childhood. I can't imagine living with the mom would've been easy either. 😞 Rest in peace, both mom and dad. I hope the kids take solace in the (perhaps fact?) that it was the tumor that caused this mess, and that they don't think it was in any way their own fault.
Can I ask what your friend/their dad died of?
Yeah, that's anecdotal. And irrelevant.
Look, that sounds like a terrible situation. However, if you're suggesting his experience is an acceptable excuse to assume women are lying if they accuse a man of sexual assault, then go fuck yourself. I'm not even kidding.
And if you think anyone, without even considering gender should just be believed without any evidence, then you too, should go fuck yourself.
A judicial system does not function on feelings or beliefs. It functions on science. You need evidence in order to consider a position fact. Potentially ruining people's lives because of personal feelings, is fucking evil.
Edit. The person you replied to mentioned nothing about assuming women are lying, all they said was that they are capable of doing so.
For all the rapist defense rhetoric fucks out there in these comments, and there are a lot of you.
Circumstantial evidence is valid evidence. Let’s maybe consider that, maybe, just maybe, of at least 28 women coming forward, with one confirmed rape conviction, that he has raped multiple women/girls. Just fucking maybe. This isn’t about your brother’s/cousin’s/dude from high school’s crazy ex-wife with a brain tumor, it’s about the president of the United States, maybe hold it to a different standard and stop painting everything with the same brush.
No one here is in defense of rapists. Your accusations is exactly why we don’t just “believe women.” Accusations aren’t proof of guilt.
Also, there’s a thing in law that’s called “precedent”.
If you allow accusations to be accepted as legal proof of a thing, the floodgates open to allow this precedent to be applied to ALL things.
We don’t like our boss? Let’s all accuse him of rape! Boom! Prison.
We don’t like the head of our HOA? Let’s all accuse her of embezzlement! Boom! Prison!
There’s a reason proof is required. And it protects everyone. Even the bad guys.
In your scenarios, all of the plaintiffs are related to the accused in a similar way and would have a common incentive to make the accusation. That kind of situation naturally raises concerns about collusion or bias. By contrast, when multiple independent and unconnected individuals come forward with similar accusations, the evidentiary weight is very different. Courts recognize that corroboration from unrelated parties strengthens credibility, because it reduces the likelihood of a coordinated or self-serving motive.
For example, in United States v. Bailey, 581 F.2d 341 (3d Cir. 1978), the court noted that corroborating testimony from independent witnesses could significantly enhance credibility and probative value. Similarly, Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) allows prior bad acts to be admitted in limited circumstances, precisely because independent, consistent reports can establish patterns that are unlikely to result from mere coincidence or collusion.
Thanks for bring up an example of precedence. It helps a lot.
And look at that statement:
could significantly enhance credibility and probative value.
could significantly enhance credibility.
It’s not evidence to lead to conviction.
Can testimony alone lead to a conviction?
Yes, “expert witness” testimony sends people to prison all the time. If you don’t know what that is, they are state lackeys labeled experts in whatever field by the prosecuting attorney to go up and lie about why the defendant is guilty in their “expert” opinion.
“Great job, that definitely shows he’s a rapist, but we still can’t say he’s a rapist!” - You, that’s what you sound like.
I thought you said you were going to block me, whatever happened to that?