• floofloof
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    They could be destroying evidence of weaknesses in their security procedures, or evidence of strong security procedures that were not followed around the time of Epstein’s death. They could be destroying evidence that indicates who was around, who was responsible for his oversight, maintenance records for security cameras that “failed”, or any number of things. It could just be “we fucked up and the FBI are going to be looking into everything, so destroy everything that might suggest we’re incompetent.” Creating unclarity by destroying documents can hinder an investigation in many ways. It certainly merits attention.

    • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Except that we have all those records. We know who was responsible for him, who was on duty, when the cameras were last supposed to be serviced, his medical records, his transfer records, the access records for the facility and his ward in particular, the list goes on. Shredded documents don’t take up that much space - to produce remarkably large amounts would require a ton of documents to be shredded, and I’m struggling to figure out what documents could be plausibly contributing to both that excess volume and at the same time be part of the coverup.

        • Warl0k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 days ago

          We don’t have much of his correspondence from prison, no - if that’s because it was shredded, didn’t exist or just haven’t been released who knows, but that wouldn’t account for several bags of additional shredded documents. But this group was tasked with document preservation - so of course they destroyed documents, that’s literally their job. What is there to be gained from investigating if documents we can’t know existed have been shredded - instead of just looking at the documents we do have?

          • youcantreadthis@quokk.au
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            2 days ago

            We already know literally every single billionaire and every politician youve heard of who didmt get shamed for hiring a sex worker or assassinated for not being fasch enough is part of a pedo island cabal. If that’s not enough to act on, what is?

            You want the fucking details? You want to know what orifices they liked to penetrate or specific ages of victims? How do more details help? What could possibly be in there that changes anything? It’s just voyeurism at this point. Act or don’t.