Crime

A lot of hay is being made about people whose names appear in “the Epstein files.” I have seen people screaming that, if someone’s name is on the list, they should be summarily tossed in prison for pedophilia. I think that is wrong on so many levels.

Simply knowing Jeffery Epstein is not evidence of illegal activity. Flying to his island on Epstein’s personal plane? Still not evidence that the person was breaking the law. Do you know what would be? Evidence of a person actually breaking the law by having sex with children.

The government, to the best of anyone’s knowledge, doesn’t have that evidence. Epstein maintained contact books listing hundreds of names—politicians, academics, celebrities, business leaders. Again, inclusion does not equal criminal involvement. Most names in Epstein-related documents appear because of:

• Flight logs
• Address books
• Deposition mentions
• Social contact

That is not the same thing as evidence of sexual conduct, criminal conduct, evidence of sex with minors. Even if they did have such evidence, there are some major issues with a case like this.

• Being in flight logs or address books ≠ evidence of criminal conduct.
• Epstein is dead → the central cooperating witness is gone, which is why he was killed to begin with, in my opinion.
• Most alleged conduct dates to 2000–2005, so many potential state-level charges likely expired under 2005-era statutes of limitations.
• Memories fade, witnesses die, evidence deteriorates.

High-profile people circulate in overlapping elite social networks. Presence alone proves proximity — not participation, knowledge, or criminal intent. Demanding punishment purely on that basis ignores:

• Presumption of innocence
• Burden of proof
• The need for specific criminal acts

This entire Epstein debacle has become a political football, with each party using it as a cudgel with which to beat the other team over the head. It’s political theater, nothing more. There are hundreds of names on those lists, a who’s who of the rich, powerful, and politically well connected. Everyone who was anyone- from Ronald Reagan, to Cher, Princess Diana, Steve Bannon, all three of the Clintons, and even the Pope appear in those lists. It’s unlikely that all of them committed crimes. At the same time, it’s unlikely that none of them committed crimes. The rub is separating out which is which, and that is not ever going to happen.

Each side can highlight names inconvenient to opponents, ignore names inconvenient to allies, imply guilt through association without meeting evidentiary standards. That creates an information environment where association is framed as implication, lack of charges is framed as cover-up, and legal nuance is discarded for outrage value. That’s political theater dynamics, not prosecutorial analysis.

You’re parked at the mall and Kevin approaches, yelling, cursing, begins kicking your door. You’re scared because he seems unhinged and dangerous. You film him and call the police. Kevin’s behavior begins to draw a crowd. What’s his problem? Is he this upset over a parking space? https://t.co/pRM65sMaZk pic.twitter.com/UfpBB9oMOC

— Blonde of War (JJ) (@jnicolem) February 10, 2026

He becomes a “lessons learned” chapter in someone’s concealed carry class.

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”

Over a year ago, I was involved in a case where a patient attempted to punch a pregnant doctor. I stepped between them and took the punch instead. I pressed charges. After a year’s time, where I was served with no fewer than 5 subpoenas and had at least two depositions taken, as well as giving a written statement, and a few calls and visits involving the police and the prosecutor’s office, the case is done.

One of the depositions was legendary. It went like this:

• Did you restrain my client? Yes.
• Were you aware that he is disabled? No.
• Are you allowed to restrain patients? Yes, under certain circumstances.
• What circumstances? If a doctor orders it, or if a patient is an imminent threat to themselves or someone else.
• Did the doctor at any time ever ask you to restrain the patient? No.
• Are you saying that you restrained my client using your professional judgement? Yes.
• What are your qualifications? (We cover my licensure, college, training, and experience. It sounds rather impressive when listed like that, if I might say so myself.)
• Is the training provided by your employer in compliance with Florida law? I don’t know.
• Why don’t you know? You are asking me to draw a legal conclusion, and that isn’t my area of expertise. If you want to know about the compliance of this training with state law, I suggest you contact my employer.
• Let’s get back to the subject. In your professional opinion, can you give me an example of a person who is presenting an imminent threat to someone else? Sure. One that comes immediately to mind is when a grown man is trying to punch a pregnant woman in the back of the head.
• Ok, let’s move on to another line of questions. (I smirked. The prosecutor had to cover her face with her hands for a moment)

Since he was arrested in my incident, he has been arrested at least half a dozen times for attacking people, burglary, domestic violence, and flagging down a motorist to attack them. That doesn’t sound like he is too disabled to attack anyone. In fact, at the time of my last deposition, he was on probation for an assault charge from March of 2025.

Anyhow, the case has ended with a plea agreement. He got a year’s probation. He still has charges pending in another case, but we all know that nothing will be done to him. The courts have done nothing. Again, and again. Attack, arrest, probation. Wash, rinse, repeat.

Sooner or later, someone will punch this guy’s ticket. I just hope that it won’t have to be me. I don’t need the hassle.

I did learn an important lesson here. This case cost me hours of my time and was a major inconvenience. This guy? His lawyer was free, and he faced no real consequences. I won’t press charges next time, it just isn’t worth my time.

Why am I seeing so much of the “Where is your warrant?” bullshit on social media. Cops don’t need to show a warrant while arresting someone, especially not to anyone who demands to see it.

Hopefully they did have a warrant seeing how they went into a home without permission or exigent circumstances.

— Beerus3.0 (@Beerus57lt1) December 29, 2025

I’m to the point where I think it should be legal to enter your home and clear it out by force.

A man sprayed his own HIV positive blood into the eyes of two hospital staff members. He was given time served- just 91 days in jail.

Criminals are being permitted to attack people with impunity. I’ve been attacked at work twice in the last 5 years, and they got away with it in both cases.

Imagine finding out at 45 years old that you are on the missing and endangered child list, and were abducted more than 40 years ago. Even more surprising, your mother was the person who abducted you and is now under arrest for the crime.

That’s what happened when Debra Newton was arrested in The Villages, Florida this week. She stands accused of running away with her daughter, changing their names, and going into hiding back in 1983. It was confirmed by DNA testing:

You’re not who you think you are. You’re a missing person. You’re Michelle Marie Newton,

The entire thing began when Debra Newton abducted Michelle, who was three years old when she and her mother left Louisville, Kentucky to begin a new job in Georgia and prepare a new home for the family.

I know that there are those who would claim that, being the child’s mother, she can’t have abducted her. My response to that is that the Father of that child has rights, and those rights were taken from him when his wife ran off with the kid. I’m glad they finally brought him closure, and did it in a way that he isn’t getting screwed into paying child support.