Jeffrey Epstein: Stinkreich

Epstein could not have done what he did without the backing and support of his associates in high and powerful places. In fact it's a fact that strings were being pulled to let him off the hook repeatedly.

It actually sickened me to see the likes of Dershowitz, Ghislaine Maxwell, Clinton and Randy Andy not even having to get on the witness stand, face their accusers and be cross examined. The rest of us get dragged into court for disputing a parking fine or Jay walking. Yet these people were involved in one of the most depraved and cruelest crimes imaginable, robbing young girls of their innocence and childhood and leaving them scarred for life, and their response? A TV interview, a blanket denial and a wall of lawyers trying to make the case disappear or cut deals.

With Epstein gone Ghislaine Maxwell should be targeted for a thorough investigation. She should be dragged in with handcuffs for questioning and forced to appear in court. Until she is cleared in a court of law she is should be considered a fugitive.

Honestly there was more to expose. In my opinion to friendly for the royal, the politicians like Clinton. He was there 20 times. Why this is not investigated and exposed? Was there a warning for censorship?

What an evil creep Epstein was, and this documentary covers the rise of this sleaze-ball reasonably well. Where it is lacking is in not EXPLAINING well enough how he got away with so much - several times he was credited with being a great salesman, but that can't be all. There are several disappointing omissions. To name a few:-

• How did he get the teaching job at Dalton (from AG Barr's father, no less - not mentioned here. Why?)?
• No real explanation for the sweetheart deal he got from Acosta in Florida. Incredible deal, that even gave immunity to all his associates! There is a book just in that deal.
• his death. Probably, they were just about finished with the documentary when he died, so the end feels rushed. They cover the doubt about his "suicide" (virtually no one believes it was). Could they have done more digging?
• they didn't really dig deep enough into all his enablers. It was hinted he had "kompromat" on lots of people he provided girls to (they said his house was extensively covered by CCTV, inside & out)
• "collaborators" like Dershowitz were allowed to give their version virtually unchallenged

Very well made, but the analysis & investigation seemed to pull their punches. Were they afraid of lawsuits?

No matter their reasons for being in that situation these girls were minors and are victims of two deeply conniving and charismatic psychopaths.

Allowing the victims to speak their truth is invaluable and thus is an incredibly important service the filmmakers have done buuuutt ... there should be a different category for these than, 'documentary'. This film, the R. Kelly one, the Michael Jackson one are all just basically 5 hour long victim impact statements. To me the term, 'documentary', means someone does the arduous work of zooming out through research research research and more research and then more documents and more research and then presents the facts without an emotional heavy hand leaning one way or the other. It documents. Victim impact statements are one of the most important parts of any story but I'm not sure it should be considered the whole story or 5 hours of it. Overall though, this is impactful and definitely worth watching.