It’s a movie starring his nephew in the lead role, approved by his estate, and by all accounts it just feels like an attempt to whitewash him. This is a man who was accused of being a serial child molester, settled with a family out of court for $25 million just to avoid a trial (Chandler), and openly admitted he slept in the same bed as kids while he was an adult (Bashir interview), among other things. I don’t really see what there is to debate.
Anything pointing this out gets backlash on movie-related subreddits, which I find wild. It makes me wonder, if Epstein could sing and dance, would he have gotten a biopic too? Would people be defending him like this?
It matched the description of his dick, except for the question of whether he was circumcised. Prosecutors also raised concerns that Jackson may have altered his dick during his “media break” in Europe, when the allegations of molestation emerged. During that time, he went into hiding for several months. There is also uncertainty about whether Jordan mentioned circumcision at all, since none of the sources that confirmed the match refer to it. Lauren Weis, who took the original description and is now a judge, later confirmed the match on the Telephone Stories podcast. Lead investigator Bill Dworin also confirmed it. Dermatologist Dr. Strick, who examined Jackson during the strip search, documented the presence of unusual markings. District Attorney Tom Sneddon also confirmed it.
Lol, you sound like a conspiracy nut. Sure, it matches the description of a penis, just not one of the most easily noticeable features of his penis. And that’s easily explained by a ‘modification’ that has been asserted by people known to lie to win cases. Iron clad logic there, Sherlock.
The fact they only “raised concerns” about it, despite nothing of the sort being mentioned in the autopsy, should tell you all you need to know. If he had surgery to alter his dick, they wouldn’t have left out that shit, especially since his penis was going to be a subject of interest for this exact reason. Prosecutors can ‘raise’ whatever concerns they like, that does not mean the concern has any merit aside from trying to shape the narrative.
To expand on this point, do you think Renee Goode was trying to run over the ice officer just because that’s the way the state portrayed the event? Was Alex Pretti a threat to the officers when they disarmed and murdered him?