• takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    16 hours ago

    Yeah:

    • someone reused an existing document and put wrong date
    • the camera observing his cell failed
    • the redundant camera observing his cell also failed
    • the remaining cameras that could capture something apparently turn off for 3 minutes every day (that’s apparently normal for security cameras)
    • they accidentally removed him from suicide watch
    • he managed to kill himself despite cells being designated to prevent that
    • he was missing a cell buddy just for that night
    • three fractures on his neck which are unusual to hanging

    Each of them could be explained somehow through assumptions, but there are quite a lot of assumptions, don’t you think?

    I would imagine that in 21 century, FBI would have system to enter such notices and it would populate it with current date, because why would you want to modify date if you aren’t doing anything shady?

    • BussyCat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      14 hours ago

      The questioning about this article is less about whether he did or did not kill himself but more so whether the date error is evidence he didn’t kill himself

      Even if we were 100% sure he was murdered, why would some lowly typist know about it in advance and pre write a report. Like obviously the admin is incompetent and left so many glaring holes but why would they tell a non essential person?

      At the end of the day it’s basically impossible that he actually killed himself of his own volition but to say that a date error is proof of that is incredibly flimsy

      • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        7 hours ago

        … Or, the message was not drawn up by some random lowly typist, and was drawn up by somebody in a much, much higher position.

        Not sure if you’ve ever worked in any kind of large bureaucratic corporation of other kind of organization, but that happens all the time, when somebody wants to specifically handle something personally, and also have the plausible deniability of ‘random clerk made error.’

        The nature of bureaucracies is to a large extent that those best at establishing as many avenues of plausible deniability as possible, those who can set themselves up with the ability to throw other people under the bus… they tend to ‘win’, persist longer and get promoted higher in said bureacracy.

        • BussyCat@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Them writing the report especially in advance would take away their plausible deniability and just bring more attention to the scene

          The report had no urgency to be done so having it done in advance especially considering in a murder details could have changed seems pointless

          • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            Them writing the report especially in advance would take away their plausible deniability and just bring more attention to the scene

            … assuming that it can be determined conclusively that that happened.

            Which, it often cannot be, in a bureaucratic system that normally has some kind of subordinate to do those things of things, but where sometimes the superior person just directly does it instead.

            So ok, you clearly have not worked in a large bureaucratic organization before, or … this would be very obvious to you.

            The report had no urgency to be done so having it done in advance especially considering in a murder details could have changed seems pointless

            This is just nonsensical.

            The entire … thing here is a statement that was released urgently.

            The entire contention is that it may have been so urgent that it was actually pre-planned and drafted prior to the actual event.

            You are just entirely dismissing this possibility, to prove that this possibility did not happen.

            I am not saying 100% either way that it was a clerical error or a premeditated construction.

            I don’t know for certain either way.

            But you are using very bad logic to argue that it was a clerical error.

      • neatchee@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        13 hours ago

        it’s also plausible that, if it were a murder and not a suicide, everything was prepared the day before but they couldn’t go on time and had to wait a day.

        there are a lot of possibilities. certainly a critical error is one of them. but if we’re going to talk about plausible explanations that isn’t the only one

        • Robust Mirror@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Why though. Why would you prepare the document the day before? Why do you need to have it “ready to go”? There’s literally no logical reason to premake such a document. It doesn’t benefit the murder plan at all.

          • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            6 hours ago

            It absolutely 100% does make sense to do that.

            It is called crafting a cover story.

            Have you ever done something for one reason, but told people you did it for another reason?

            Have you ever been in a scenario where you were considering whether or not you would do something like that, but realized you would need a convincing false narrative for other people first, before you considered actually doing the thing?

            It very much benefits a group of people or an organization that is doing something like this, to get all their stories straight, before they proceed.

            If your cover story works properly…

            … no one will ever know, or at least not untill so much time has passed as to make being caught not really matter any more.

            … This is just the logic of how all kinds of people and organizations who need to maintain one kind of outward public image or reputation, while actually doing things that do not match their outward appearance, how they act.

      • stephen01king@piefed.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 hours ago

        I think he made a point that the date might be auto populated and one who generated it didn’t notice or forgot about it.

      • takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 hours ago

        Occam’s Razor talks about assumptions.

        If we assume that the goal was to kill Epstein then all those events can be explained together with that one assumption.

        If those were just coincidences, it means that those mere chances happening independently and for each of them we need to make a separate assumption (the cameras just happen to broke on that day, the backup ones maybe broke last week, but they didn’t fix it, one of the guards who fell asleep celebrated his birthday until late and didn’t sleep, the other one couldn’t fall asleep last night because neighbor’s dog was barking all night etc a lot of assumptions)