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?
Your friend’s anecdote or the victims testimony… That’s a tough one.
The victim’s testimony that has been debunked
How do you justify that claim with that link? What in that article supports the idea that it was debunked?
Aren’t “anecdote” and “testimony” technically the same level of trustworthiness?
No…
Anecdote: “he’s a nice guy who didn’t have a childhood so he hung out with children, he couldn’t have possibly done anything wrong, I know him” -> opinion
Victim testimony: “he took advantage of my trust and innocence and molested me. I didn’t realize I’m being abused and it has given me a lifetime of mental suffering” -> data
You can say you don’t trust the victims, but it isn’t the same as proclaiming someone definitely didn’t commit a crime because I have a positive experience with them.
Hmm, point taken. I think they’re both equally valid data points in theory, which is what I was trying to convey, but to your point, “he didn’t molest me” has much less determining power than “he molested me” when trying to determine if he molested someone. I see what you’re saying now.