lol
Good point. Iām also doing exactly what Iām chastising others for by engaging in pure speculation. 
Weāve known for like 14 hours he was not on suicide watch yet this thread and the entire internet is still filled with āhow does he kill himself on suicide watchā posts.
I donāt think you know what lol means.
2 Likes
Seems like a pretty rational choice here. Epsteinās life was going to be a nightmare going forward. A trial would surely be a humiliating spectacle. Suicide would prevent that humiliation and as a bonus make millions of people who wanted the spectacle angry, which surely appealed to Epstein.
People are seeing headlines, maybe a sub-headline, and rushing in here asking questions based on that. None of them are maintaining that NO HE WAS on suicide watch etc, which is what theyād need to be doing for āimpervious to factsā to apply.
It never stops you, but you might consider that you havenāt exactly been covering yourself in glory ITT, so maybe relax a bit, OK?
Being humiliated (or potentially humiliated) as a rationale for suicide is a specious and potentially dangerous argument to make. I have no sympathy for Epstein and if there is a hell I hope heās in it, but no one is served by this type of speculation and rationalization.
1 Like
I donāt understand your point. Why is it specious and dangerous?
I dont think its wrong to be somewhat suspicious of this happening. Im not saying a couple of assassins walked into the jail and killed him but I do feel like someone along the line fucked up to allow this to happen. Definitely possible that it was a genuine fuck up but i wouldnt be shocked if it wasnt.
Clovis,
Youāre really bad at the internet bud. Arrogantly wrong about everything is not a great way to approach things.
1 Like
You seem to be arguing that it was a āpretty rational choiceā for someone murder themself when they felt humiliated (or the anticipation of humiliation). Would say this not rational at all and to suggest that it is could be potentially dangerous who was not indeed thinking clearly
1 Like
Simply stating I am wrong is not evidence of me being wrong. Where am I wrong, specifically?
Itās amusing that some of you think a counter argument consists of ad hominem attacks only.
For the record I donāt care if people think Iām wrong because Iām disagreeing with the majority. I care if Iām wrong based on actual facts and evidence. When I am shown to be I am the first to change my opinion. Iāll do so here as well.
1 Like
If the DOJ wanted him alive, heād still be breathing.
Heād already made one attempt. There was a credible, imminent threat to his life, from himself, and whomever pulled the levers from behind the curtain to remove him from suicide precautions did so for the express purpose of silencing JE.
She was on suicide watch for three days, not six months.
1 Like
Breathtaking stuff from the man who brought you āYouāre all /the_donald lolololā.
In the specific case of Epstein I do think that avoiding humiliation is a rational secondary motivation (secondary to avoiding a life in prison) for suicide. There was no way out for Epstein ā he was going to live a terrible life in prison and he was going to be humiliated at trial. Avoiding humiliation by suicide in a truly hopeless situation seems rational to me.
umm. Pointing out the factual and demonstrable similarities between posts itt and TD is not an ad hominem attack. Itās called a fact.
2 Likes
(S)He was put on suicide watch as a form of torture, Epstein had just made an attempt on his own life.
Ugg canāt believe I said he. My apologies. That was gross.
Do you really want to do this? Are you sure?
Motive is irrelevant because we will never really know.
What is important is who made the ultimate decision to remove Epstein from suicide precautions?