Could probably empirical Bayes this pretty well with body cam footage data or whatever but I’m too lazy.
1 Like
The simplest explanation is usually right and the simplest explanation here, given all the known facts, is a massive fucking conspiracy.
8 Likes
I’m at the point where I think a massive conspiracy to convince people there’s a massive conspiracy still seems more likely than no conspiracy at all.
1 Like
It’s bizarre to me that peoples default isn’t to automatically think he’s been murdered. Seriously bizarre. It’s almost like some people still have faith in the justice system and think the rich and powerful get punished in the same way that the average American does. Plus being rich and powerful is hardly a good indicator of a sound moral base.
5 Likes
The Chief Examiner’s finding of suicide put the brakes on my conspiracy theorizing a little, I mean I don’t think it’s likely that this woman who has been in that position for years (since Feb 2013) has signed on to the conspiracy, so I guess I provisionally don’t think it’s murder, but I’m keen to see the full report, if we ever get to see it.
I continue to think that the circumstances surrounding his suicide (you know, let out of suicide watch, put in a cell with no cellmate, no guard checks, cameras malfunctioning etc) are suspicious and may have been engineered to allow him to commit suicide. Simple incompetence is possible too. I’m not sure how to evaluate the probabilities there.
1 Like
Yeah I mean hyperbole aside, basically this. I will say that mere incompetence is lower now than the 7/10 I rated it upthread. How much lower, I can’t exactly say.
1 Like
Who is her boss? Like isn’t she the boss of that department or whatever? Genuine question, idk how it’s structured.
I agree that the report might be like “well here’s how it was reported to me that he was found and his injuries are consistent with suicide, so boom suicide” which is why I want to see the full report. From the scant reading I did it does seem that there are ways you can fairly reliably distinguish suicide and strangulation though, so we’ll see.
1 Like
I dont think you really understand the logical concepts you are trying to apply here
1 Like
I’ll elaborate because I’m sure it’ll be purposely (or maybe obtusely) misconstrued. What you originally said is along the same absurd line that people who believe in god take:
“Well, do you have any evidence he DOESN’T exist?”
No, I don’t, because that’s impossible. I can ask you what hard evidence you have that there isn’t a man on some distant planet somewhere masturbating furiously to pictures of your mother. The fact you can’t (and never could) provide hard evidence of that does not imply anything at all about his existence. You are taking the same approach with that post I first replied to. It’s a stupid and silly question that doesn’t have an answer and the fact that there is no answer implies nothing at all.
2 Likes
Funny you say this Mr. Logic Bro cause your posts itt have been pretty light on logic as well. One of many, many neat and curious coincidences in this magical world we live in
1 Like
Care to point them out? I’ve only made a handful of posts here. Or you can just keep running your mouth like an idiot.
None of us are actually in disagreement about what’s going on, as was demonstrated earlier. This thread seems like it’s just for dbags to try to dunk on each other, so carry on.
1 Like
liar! you love dunking on ppl, it’s your weakness and why you succumb to the siren song of 22 occasionally
1 Like
Of course there is evidence for things not existing. I mean that’s a preposterous take. Did you mean proof and not evidence?
Let’s maybe not argue about random abstractions rather than eeAWW’s actual post, which was not correct:
This is just obviously not true, because from an Occam’s Razor point of view the suicide theory has less moving parts, and from an empirical point of view suicide is far and away the leading cause of death in jail. None of this requires any assumptions about Epstein’s case in particular. Given the information “a guy died in jail of asphyxiation, how did he likely die” the answer is “suicide” ainec. That’s the default answer. The question is how we reconcile that with the particulars of Epstein’s case, which include his prior case already having been enmeshed in shadowy conspiracy, the fact that people predicted ahead of time that he would die in jail, etc etc.
Wonder how the Q folk react to a report which will most likely say suicide and incompetence. They think Clinton had him killed.
With absolutely no information whatsoever, it should be 50/50. You wouldn’t know anything about leading causes of prison death or what causes asphyxiation. Everything we evaluate is based very heavily on priors which I believe was his initial (and correct) point.
1 Like
That’s a ridiculous and pointless way of looking at anything though. Like without any priors whatsoever it would be 50/50 whether Epstein’s native language was English or Lithuanian. In fact, it would be equiprobable that Epstein was a human being, a kitchen appliance, or a neutron star. So what?
It’s reasonable to assume that things don’t exist if there’s nothing to suggest they do, since the vast majority of things which can be imagined don’t exist. (A teapot orbiting Jupiter is the usual example).
This is just wrong because there isn’t any reference to the particulars of the Epstein case here. In the case of a random person dying in jail, it’s ridiculous to suggest that starting from the assumption that there was no conspiracy is a bad starting point. The point in the Epstein case is that there’s much to suggest that a conspiracy is a good possibility. The point is not that it’s bad to start from reasonable priors.
It’s 50/50
He either killed himself
Or he didn’t
4 Likes
Epstein’s lawyers claimed in court that his injuries are “far more consistent” with murder than with suicide and said this was the conclusion of an expert they hired. They did not offer any specifics. I’m not sure what their aim is in arguing this.
1 Like
Cui bono? They want to sue to prison/government and it’s more damages that way? Life insurance?