Submitted by Blood__Rivers t3_z59iqb in news
Seriously. Stating lenders are responsible for the actions of those they lend money too would pretty much end capitalism.
Which I understand that the Reddit mob would probably applaud, but most people would recognize as a bit of problem.
Banks are not allowed to engage in money laundering, so yes, to some degree lenders are in fact responsible for those they lend money to. In fact, being a money mule is illegal even if you don't know you're doing it, so if a bank is facilitating illegal activity even without knowing it it can in fact be held responsible for it. Doesn't mean it will, of course, but it could be.
Laws are for the poors exclusively and always have been.
[removed]
[removed]
Dude, the entire C-suite of Deutsche Bank and JP Morgan were clients of Epstein, and likely took part in the murders of the underage girls out at sea.
Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself.
Murders of underaged girls? Is this an actual fact? Just wondering where the articles are stating this or if it’s a conspiracy theory, etc.
Considering it would probably have gotten a lot more publicity with everything else, I'm going to assume its a conspiracy theory.
lots of conspiracy facts flying around these days, now that you mention it...
Well I suppose that's true. Still it feels like something like this wouldn't need to be something you find out from an anonymous source on reddit.
facts being suppressed is nothing new imho...
Sure that's nothing new, but this case has been in the media spot light for three years at this point.
If the only claim about it comes from an anonymous post on reddit with no source or much information, then its probably a good sign its not actually true.
>Jeffrey Epstein didn't kill himself.
Reading through everything, he probably did.
Nearly everything they've been able to claim was suspicious turned out to have pretty mundane explanations. Most along the lines that underfunded American prisons are utterly awful.
Amazing isn’t it that Ghislaine Maxwell is serving time for all of Jeffrey’s crimes, yet the murder of underage girls was never brought up. Not one charge related to harm other than providing 4 women for sex that were underage at the time.
>Amazing isn’t it that Ghislaine Maxwell is serving time for all of Jeffrey’s crimes
I mean technically she's serving for her's, she was the one who made sure his ring actually ran and regularly abused the women as well.
But yeah, its hard to believe that wouldn't have come up at some point.
[removed]
[removed]
Can you provide evidence for your claim that the C-suite of JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank were clients of Epstein and killed girls at sea?
That’s some pretty bold claims. Is there strong evidence to back it up?
[deleted]
[removed]
unforgivable scum
It’s like suing the usps for drug trafficking.
Does the USPS have ZERO obligation to ensure laws are being followed by the citizens using the service?
No. Of course they have such obligation.
There's a big difference between having an obligation and having a tortable obligation.
Im suing Reddit because people made racist comments towards me and they didnt delete the comment. Reddit allows hate crimes. /s
To be fair, I’m sure UPS has thorough measures to make sure drug trafficking is not happening through their services knowingly. It’s totally different if the banking executives were in on it and knew Epstein was using funds to operate this kind of business. In fact, I’m pretty sure that could lead to prosecution if there is substantial evidence.
Dunno about UPS, but for the USPS you are indeed correct.
For people sending stuff: https://www.uspis.gov/combating-illicit-drugs-in-the-mail
For employees doing stuff with drugs: https://www.uspsoig.gov/investigations/narcotics
L take.
Money laundering is absolutely prosecuted when it is detected, a situation where lenders are held accountable for the actions of those they lend money to.
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[deleted]
The journey from holding corporations and executives accountable for enabling high level clients to sex traffic children to ending capitalism seems very purposefully worded…
Accountability wouldn't end capitalism, it would save it. Capitalism and free trade are slowly dying from mass corruption.
Problem is, the pillars of the current system are so rotted out that holding them accountable now would hurt everyone. We've gone septic and our only options are "let it die" or "accept that this is gonna HURT".
Capitalism can't survive without corruption. Taking the excess of labor is corrupt. If everyone acted in their rational self interest, the whole system would implode immediately.
If everyone acted in their shortest-term self-interest, which is I think what you're describing, lots of stuff would implode.
They are saying the banks have deep pockets and will probably settle to minimise exposure to their dealings with a paedophile/ sex trafficker
because they would rather pay a pittance and admit no guilt than confess the truth of their crimes and go to prison for it
and the system as it stands currently will allow them to do it
No I think they are stating " that is where the money is " , we should get some
[removed]
Probably just a matter of time.
Please do, our justice system is shit.
I'm fairly certain we can drop the "alleged" regarding the sex trafficking operation. Maxwell has been convicted and Epstein would have been convicted had he not been murdered.
Edit- "Allegedly" murdered? Nah, they killed him.
I think allegedly refers to the banks' role in the trafficking operation, not Epstein
That's not how I read the sentence. "...the late financier's alleged sex trafficking operation..."
Solve… what psh order did do anything ever word to??
>!Psh… what did word order ever do to solve anything??!<
(I had a lot more fun writing this than I thought I was going to have.)
[removed]
In journalism, you have to say "allegedly" if there is no conviction. Which there wasn't, as he died before trial, and nobody was implicated in his (alleged) murder.
Yeah, I get it. But I'm not a journalist and those banks benefitted from their relationship with the murdered sex-trafficker, Jeffrey Epstein.
Come at me, bro. ;-)
[removed]
Virginia Giuffries settled, without making an announcement as to how much. She was the most steadfast accuser of Epstein and she STFU. Not saying he didn’t do horrible things, but apparently moral obligation goes out the window when you get an undisclosed amount of money.
What was the timeline for this relative to Epstein's alleged murder? (I am seriously asking) could intimidation play a role?
It happened three years afterwards, it had nothing to do with Epstein's death.
Andrew Winsor's lawyers just offered her enough money to agree cause he was clearly going to lose.
Sorry, I misspoke. Prince Andrew paid her off around March 8, 2022. I’m not victim blaming here, but this circle deserves the worst that can come at them. It’s unfortunate credible victims flip.
>It’s unfortunate credible victims flip.
She's never flipped. She's still carrying on telling everyone who will listen that he raped her.
Her accepting the money out of court doesn't mean she got a hush payment.
It was a civil trial, not a criminal one.
The only outcome if she had won, was that she got the money.
Why the heck shouldn't she accept the payment if they were offering her what she was going to win in damages?
Why is that so hard to understand? People act like she took a bribe.
A civil trial can become criminal if criminal wrongdoing can be proved within statute of limitations. He was ordered to testify.
Sure it can. But that was never going to happen in this particular trial. Everyone involved knew that from the start, including Virginia Giuffries.
Even if Andrew had testified it wouldn't have mattered, it not being a criminal trial their is no chance of perjury charges even if he was proven to be lying.
Unfortunately everything they could prove he'd done, simply wasn't illegal either in New York or in Britain.
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
>Epstein killed himself in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center on Aug. 10, 2019, while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. His longtime associate, British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell, was sentenced to 20 years in prison for helping to recruit and groom underage girls over the course of at least a decade, filing an appeal in July. > >In the lawsuits filed Thursday, the plaintiffs accuse the banks of "providing the requisite financial support for the continued operation of Epstein’s international sex trafficking organization" in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), a U.S. law used to target illegal conspiracies that originally was designed to target organized crime
EPSTEIN DIDN'T KILL HIMSELF
Eh, he probably did.
After three years no one's been able to find any real evidence to suggest he didn't and most of the original evidence that is repeated turned out to be untrue.
So there was a film of his cell? (Camera was reported broken)
And the guards were awake and watching him? (They testified they were asleep)
And Bill Barr never visited the prison? (He did).
>So there was a film of his cell? (Camera was reported broken)
No. Their were no cameras in his cell or any of the cells, cause the prison doesn't put cameras in the cells. There were cameras outside in the hallway. Three of them turned out to be broken (one was technically working, but the footage was in such poor quality it was deemed effectively useless), but the rest were fine (including the one's watching the enterance), and the footage of all of them has been examined.
Likewise in the 2015 review of the prison, it was discovered that up 15% of the cameras throughout the prison were not working and a large number of other were in poor quality, and said prison has since been shut down for repairs as the conditions inside have become to intolerable even for an American prison.
The idea that the film of him miraculously broke right before he died was a joke that started on twitter.
>And the guards were awake and watching him? (They testified they were asleep)
Nope. They were supposed to check in on him every thirty minutes as he had recently been taken off suicide watch (due to him trying to slit his own throat). But cause they were working 20 hour shifts all week for minimum wage, they decided to take a nap rather than babysit a rich paedophile.
They then faked the logs after they found he died to try to get the heat off. But the camera's footage confirmed they lied so they were caught, admitted to falsifying the logs and they've since been fired.
>And Bill Barr never visited the prison? (He did).
Never heard about that one, so I can't comment. If he did, then I guess there is perhaps one thing suspicious that hasn't turned out to be untrue, but that's pretty much it.
[removed]
Frankly this all seems like evidence he didnt. Gross negligence on this level doesn't happen by chance.
Yeah, I'd recommend reading a few reports of what goes on in other prisons in America and then tell me what you think about gross negligence in underfunded, uncaring institutions.
Right because everyone knows the ol three year rule, if you don't find evidence in three years it didn't happen!! /s
Nah there is no rule. It doesn't matter when the evidence comes out.
I'm just saying after all this time, with literally the whole world focused on this case, no one's found anything. Doesn't that imply there isn't anything to find?
That implied that the powerful people who killed someone to keep their secrets are very good at keeping it a secret.
Well its Occam's razor now isn't it?
There are two possibilities: either we assume these people are so powerful and competent that they were able to pull off the nigh impossible of managing to break into a federal prison, past numerous guards, cameras and computer controlled doors into the most restricted area, and kill a grown man in a way that left no marks anywhere on his body that weren't inconsistent with him hanging himself, and then manage to get out without leaving any evidence whatsoever they were there, after doing all of this on the mere possibility that Epstein would blab despite up to this point showing no signs of it whatsoever (and that if he did, he'd also somehow be able to prove it).
Or we assume no one broke in, and the old narcissistic paedophile who had spent the last forty years living like a king and was now stuck in an abysmal prison, knowing he had nothing to look forward to but a miserable life inside with everyone knowing he was an utter failure, who'd tried to kill themselves a mere month previously and only just gotten off suicide watch, decided he'd rather take the cowards way out.
Well when you lay it all out, you have to admit one sounds a lot more plausible, doesn't it?
[removed]
Deutsche, that's the bank which funded the former president, isn't it?
noddles, after a big influx of cash from russian investors.
They're notorious for Russian ties and their money laundering operations. Friend of me works for a European bank (not going to dox him) and he says they are fully aware of certain "interesting" payments being processed.
Yes and the bank that was caught helping Jho Lo rob the Malaysian Sovereign Wealth Fund dry.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1Malaysia_Development_Berhad_scandal
This is a fantastic book written about the scheme: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billion_Dollar_Whale
It will be thrown out. Unless they have emails or people to testify that they new what he was doing I don’t see how it could move forward. Plus it would open up banks to be sued for any Criminal activity by their clients. Bill cosby’s banks, Harvey Weinstein’s banks, Bernie Madoff’s banks, etc.
Banks that serve as custodians for funds get sued ALL THE DAMN TIME if they fail to implement anti-money laundering “know your customer rules.” They aren’t being sued because their customers are violent criminals or rapists. They are being sued because they are the custodian of a financial fraudster.
So, for instance, Madoff’s banks WERE sued:
Cosby and Weinstein are rapists. They weren’t laundering money. So their banks weren’t sued.
I can see how madoffs banks could be held somewhat responsible given that he was in finance and laundering Ill gotten gains for his personal use. And I see that Chase had to pay $1.7Billion to victims but Epstein wasn’t charged with money laundering. I know he should be in jail for his own financial schemes in the past. He was charged with sex trafficking. How are banks supposed to know a client is sex trafficking? They’d have to hire PIs to follow all their clients looking for illegal activity.
It’s not the sex trafficking. You are hung up on that. It’s the financial transactions. It falls under anti-money laundering (AML) “know your customer” rules that banks MUST follow.
Let’s say I have an account at chase as my clearing/client funds account. And a bank I’m a solo/small shop lawyer or a banker.
If all of my “clients” I have are all Swiss bank accounts and cayman accounts and I’m sending and receiving tens of millions of dollars…it sets of various “know your customer” red flags. And the custodial bank (Chase) should be observant of them.
Epstein was engaging in financial transactions that were unexplained by his purported “financial advisory” business.
That’s what these types of suits are about. That the custodial bank missed AML red flags.
Here are several common AML red flag indicators, and note how NONE of them talk about rape or trafficking. It’s all about the financial aspects of the transactions:
Firms should have Know Your Customer (KYC) and customer due diligence (CDD) procedures in place when onboarding new clients. If a customer refuses to answer questions about themselves, firms should consider whether this is suspicious, especially if they have criminal associations, or know an unusual amount about the money laundering process.
Customers trying to launder funds may carry out unusual transactions. Firms should look out for activity that is inconsistent with their expected behavior, such as large cash payments, unexplained payments from a third party, or use of multiple or foreign accounts. These are all AML red flags.
Transactions involving large amounts of cash or private funding could indicate money laundering, and if cash deposits or complex crypto assets are involved, identifying the source can be difficult.
The size, nature or frequency of transactions, or repetitive instructions involving common features, are all AML red flags. Firms should be particularly alert if a transaction appears unusual for the customer’s profile, or if there is unexplained urgency.
If a firm is not local to the customer, why are they using it? Unexplained connections with – and movement of money between – jurisdictions should also raise suspicions.
Individuals – and their family and associates – in high positions are more vulnerable to corruption and could pose a higher risk of money laundering for quid-pro-quo favors or kickbacks. While no standardized global definition exists, PEPs typically include heads of state, senior politicians or government officials, judicial or military officials, senior executives of state-owned corporations, or important political party officials.
Ultimate beneficial owners are the people who ultimately own or manage a company. Complex ownership structures, or the use of shell companies, could be an attempt to disguise criminal activities and carry out financial crime.
Some countries or jurisdictions have high levels of corruption, unstable governments, or are known as money laundering havens. They could also have inadequate AML/CFT regulatory and judicial frameworks, or be subject to economic sanctions. Transactions that involve these countries should be carefully monitored as AML red flags.
It is important that firms review relevant international sanctions lists to ensure that customers are not sanctioned themselves, or involved, or transacting with, a sanctioned entity. As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has demonstrated, sanctions lists are subject to change at short notice. This means firms need to ensure they have a real-time plan for managing rapid changes.
Additional checks may also be needed if the customer is a subject of negative news media in any part of the world, as this could increase AML risk. Firms should ensure their adverse media screening is appropriately aligned with common predicate offenses.
Will be settled outside court
“Your honor, Trump’s Deutsche bankers all killed themselves.”
With the same gun yet we can’t seem to find it…
And all the cameras were broken except for one and the quality of that was so bad it was deemed to be unusable.
[removed]
When they're done with that they can go after them again for laundering Mexican cartel money.
I think that case was settled.
Anddddddd... they're dead.
Eh we'll see.
They cut ties with Ye and kept ties with Epstein...
>things that make you go hmmmmm
[deleted]
Fucking good job!!! Us normal people need to do as much as we can to expose these rich fucks for how terrible they actually are
Any time someone tries to sue a bank we should all be cheering them on. For any reason at all. All the banks are terrible.
Thats just suicide with extra steps.
Eh we'll see.
Oh damn. I'm tunning in for this.👀
Should probably say her name in the title, just for referencing the obituaries in a couple weeks.
Eh we'll see.
[deleted]
Not even the worst human trafficking loan paid out by Chase. Why do these people exist.
It will be interesting to see how this will play out. Hopefully she has enough evidence and a really good lawyer to see this through.
Fun fact JP Morgan w other Republicans tried to overthrow FDR in a fascist military coup 1934 /the war hero they wanted to b dictator revealed their plot choosing democracy & the New Deal was passed (they fear “socialism”) JPM chase is still funding fascists today
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
[removed]
They still in charge of his money
[removed]
[removed]
Im suing Ducati because someone hit me while i was on my motorcycle. They knew i coukd get in an accident and still sold me my bike. Im suing the dealership too. Im suing my motorcycle instructor from 10 years ago because he shouldve prevented the accident from happening.
[removed]
Gun makers benefit from the sale of every gun used to murder in the United States but you don’t see anyone going after them.
NachoNinja19 t1_ixuve34 wrote
Are they saying the banks were aware of what Epstein was doing with his money? If anyone should be sued it’s the state of Florida. They knew what he was doing and made back room deals to reduce the charges and fake a prison sentence and allowed it to continue.