Feeding Us to the Monsters

The distraction of Jeffrey Epstein's long-awaited list

On February 27^th, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released files relating to the case of multimillionaire financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The files were released directly to conservative influencers, in the hope that they in turn would relay the info-dump through their respective networks. Since Epstein’s death in 2019 prior to trial, there was a steady drum beat on social media demanding the elusive List, which was supposed to disclose Epstein’s co-conspirators and/or clients to whom he trafficked minors.

What the influencers ultimately received fell short of expectations, however. Far from a smoking gun, much of the information divulged had already been released, such as names from Epstein’s infamous “black book,” publicized after his conviction in 2009 for solicitation of child prostitution under Floridian law. The files released last week, which the DoJ labelled as “Phase One,” had numerous redactions, though some of these were understandable, such as for Epstein’s minor victims… of whom there were at least 250 discovered thus far!

The public’s faith in the value of such a List was misplaced from the start, however. People seemed to think that authorities would serve a piping hot list of names on a silver platter, complete with entries corresponding to crimes and doxing the perpetrators, but there was no way such a list could be released. Firstly, as with the latest release of names, their culpability has not been determined. From a name alone, we may not know whether John Doe is some celebrity’s gofer bringing a check for deposit into an investment account which Epstein managed, or whether Doe was knowingly involved in Epstein’s heinous crimes. Guilt is determined at trial, with every defendant presumed innocent until adjudication to the contrary. Trials by definition are public events, so by the time of adjudication the public would know who these offenders are, and what degree of responsibility they bear in Epstein’s long-running conspiracy to traffic minors.

Secondly, even if it were possible to release a list of Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirators, persons whose guilt was beyond all reasonable doubt, such disclosure may deny justice to his victims. Epstein had arranged what has been termed a “pyramid scheme” of minor sex trafficking, with one young victim procuring the next to procure the next and so on. He abused them at his home and even transported them to other locations which he owned or of which he had use. He was so wealthy that he purchased no fewer than two adjacent U.S. Virgin Islands (oh, the irony!) to thwart surveillance of his misdeeds. These young girls, purposely selected due to their socioeconomic vulnerability, were in some cases plied with gifts and drugs, then figuratively dumped at the roadside, strung out and traumatized for life after Epstein had gotten all he wanted from them. Any person with a conscience who reads about Epstein’s crimes would want to lynch those involved, if darker truth be told. That is the base instinct which many people may feel, but after a moment’s gratification, Epstein’s victim is left no better off than the moment before. Effectively that lynching may preclude that victim from getting damages at law which will be needed for things like lifelong counseling and rehabilitation. If the DoJ really wants to help Epstein’s victims, then it should avail the DoJ’s formidable resources to prosecuting Epstein’s co-conspirators to the law’s fullest extent, but seeking criminal restitution for the victims, who otherwise may have no wherewithal privately to sue the powerful perpetrators for that money.

There is another list related to this case, however, which deserves greater attention. The citizenry needs to know which agents of the DoJ were obstructing the inquiry into Epstein’s unspeakable crimes. On the ground, there were DoJ agents reviewing the extensive evidence uncovered during the investigation into Epstein’s activities, who refused to connect the dots obvious to any observer. Dots which would have been connected had this been any other child trafficker. DoJ agents with a keystroke at a computer and a few phone calls could have retrieved flight logs and may have seen Epstein shuffling funds to different accounts. Maybe the agents’ supervisors told them not to connect these dots. In either case, if any list needs disclosure, it is the list of the DoJ agents whose obscene dereliction of duty enabled Epstein’s abuse of kids for another ten years.

Of course we know that Epstein’s conviction under state law in 2009 was the result of a plea deal cut between him and U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta for Florida’s Southern District. Allegedly Epstein traded dirt on bad actors within the financial sector during 2009’s Great Recession in exchange for a sweetheart deal which pinned exploitation of only one minor (despite evidence substantiating abuse of about fifty) on him and allowed him to serve his sentence under conditions of unbelievable luxury and leniency. All this was in barter for info which led to the conviction of, what, Kareem Serageldin of Credit Suisse, the sole financier to serve time for malfeasance relating to the Great Recession (and it’s unknown whether Epstein’s tips had anything to do with that conviction). If around fifty girls’ innocence was traded away for these paltry results, then our government struck a horrible deal.

Combined with Epstein’s mysterious demise at one of the USA’s securest facilities, it is this kid-glove treatment by law enforcement which has spawned a vortex of “conspiracy theories” about Epstein. The term is quoted because such theories have a nasty habit of becoming headlines, given time. For the present, the citizenry deserves to know why federal and state law enforcement defied multiple protocols when dealing with Epstein (like NYPD ignoring him as he missed the periodic check ins required for sex offenders). Either government exists to serve us against the monsters in our midst, as it often claims, or it exists to serve us to such monsters, if they can broker a good enough deal.