Stephen Hawking (8 January 1942–14 March 2018; age 76) was a noted scientist who formerly held the Lucasian Chair at Cambridge University in England. Diagnosed at age 22 with Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (also known as Motor Neurone Disease and Lou Gehrig's Disease), he used a wheelchair for the majority of his life, and communicated by means of an electronic vocal synthesizer. He was famous for formulating several theories regarding the nature of black holes, often working with colleague...
When he was one of the 21 world-famous scientists who were at an Epstein-funded conference on gravity in March 2006
Trying to not be a dick here: that article doesn’t really say anything other than what I said - and from what I can tell it’s pretty sensationalized (shock, right?). The lawsuit claims an ‘underage orgy’ (not the language used in the suit, but maybe a fair paraphrasing) happened at around the same time as the conference and lists the attendees of the conference, it doesn’t make the claim that Hawking himself participated, which is what it’s presented as claiming by that article (which, maybe that’s a fair interpretation and I’m just reading it wrong? I haven’t slept in a while).
It’s a bit cliche to ask, but since when is Epstein a reliable source?
No but really, the evidence implicating Hawking seems like people are stretching to even claim they’re accusations, and if they exist, they haven’t been made public (by someone who has made clear she has no moral problem making justified accusations public just because of someone’s reputation (fuck yeah get their asses)).
It seems not unreasonable, if we take Epstein’s email as legitimate, to conclude that the accusations wouldn’t have been included in Ms Giuffre’s public releases because they could be shown to be false. If Epstein was the one to tell them this was the case, or if they disproved it themselves, or if it was just tenuous enough it might have damaged the case so they opted to exclude it, I don’t that we’ll ever know. At this point though, and judging by what’s been released, it looks a whole lot like tabloids blowing up a story out of it’s contextual bounds because someone famous’ name was mentioned in connection to something truly horrifying.
He went to a conference Epstein held once (like thousands of other people), he wasn’t fucking kids.
He was accused of participating in an “underage orgy”.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/us-news/everything-know-stephen-hawking-underage-31804722
Not commenting on whether the accusations have any merit. But I wouldn’t blanket deny things just because he seemed cool.
Trying to not be a dick here: that article doesn’t really say anything other than what I said - and from what I can tell it’s pretty sensationalized (shock, right?). The lawsuit claims an ‘underage orgy’ (not the language used in the suit, but maybe a fair paraphrasing) happened at around the same time as the conference and lists the attendees of the conference, it doesn’t make the claim that Hawking himself participated, which is what it’s presented as claiming by that article (which, maybe that’s a fair interpretation and I’m just reading it wrong? I haven’t slept in a while).
(edit: typo)
But an email by epstein explicity states Virginia Guffe (one of the epstein victims) made that accusation.
Tho she never went public with it so idk what exactly that means.
It’s a bit cliche to ask, but since when is Epstein a reliable source?No but really, the evidence implicating Hawking seems like people are stretching to even claim they’re accusations, and if they exist, they haven’t been made public (by someone who has made clear she has no moral problem making justified accusations public just because of someone’s reputation (fuck yeah get their asses)).
It seems not unreasonable, if we take Epstein’s email as legitimate, to conclude that the accusations wouldn’t have been included in Ms Giuffre’s public releases because they could be shown to be false. If Epstein was the one to tell them this was the case, or if they disproved it themselves, or if it was just tenuous enough it might have damaged the case so they opted to exclude it, I don’t that we’ll ever know. At this point though, and judging by what’s been released, it looks a whole lot like tabloids blowing up a story out of it’s contextual bounds because someone famous’ name was mentioned in connection to something truly horrifying.