Summary
Former Abercrombie & Fitch CEO Mike Jeffries, facing sex trafficking and interstate prostitution charges, has been diagnosed with dementia and late-onset Alzheimer’s, according to court filings.
Jeffries, 80, and co-defendants allegedly ran an international sex trafficking ring from 2008 to 2015, coercing young men, some financially vulnerable or with ties to Abercrombie, into sex acts for career opportunities.
Prosecutors claim victims were intimidated, drugged, and paid large sums.
Jeffries, under house arrest since October, has pleaded not guilty, with a competency hearing scheduled for June.
They literally weaponize ethical applications of the law by slowing their court proceedings to basically a standstill. Probably with bribes or other “technically legal” means.
Then they can live their life of luxury all the way up until they’re too fucking old to be held accountable for their crimes.
It never ceases to amaze me how much more disgusted I am capable of becoming. Wow.
“Sir, how many women did you kidnap and force to be raped”
“idk, I can’t remember”
Dude looks like he’s wearing Gary Busey’s face as a mask.
This weak and frail… mass sexual predator.
How convenient.
Yeah, the Weinstein defence.
Then he won’t remember why he’s in prison. Big deal.
This the guy who said that ugly people shouldn’t wear his clothes?
The brand shreds and burns out of season designs so that the poors can’t thrift it often either - that’s why it’s not in places like Burlington or other post season/overstock retailers
He’s only half right. No one should.
Yes It is.
#CEOLIVESMATTER
I’m 90% sure you’re /s-ing. However, is this an actual hashtag being used? If so…oy vey.
the whole media coverage of this event has been equivalent to spamming this hashtag.
I guess it really is necessary because there are so many morons now.
Really weird how all these old rich fucks only ever get "discovered’ as pedophiles and rapists at the exact same time they become “mentally unfit to be tried”.
This guy was exposed as a problem decades ago.
But he wasn’t charged decades ago, point still stands.
Just a series of entirely unrelated coincidences, for sure.
Was thinking the same.
I have a modest proposal.
It’s unjust to jail someone for someone else’s crimes - that’s why we don’t punish family members…
But it wouldn’t put his family members at any sort of disadvantage if we just gave them the same opportunities as average Americans by taking away all their money.
I know it’s a thin justification but we as a society really need to kill wealth inheritance.
I know it’s a thin justification but we as a society really need to kill wealth inheritance.
That’s why we have a tax on inheritance in the first place. It’s the only tax that’s explicitly confiscatory, and for good reason (to prevent the establishment of an aristocracy).
And of course there is a loop hole for that. If I recall correctly it works like this if you have enough money to have to pay inheritance tax (or it would be a sizeble value) you put it in a trust or company and done, no more tax when your heirs receive the company.
Well everyone who earns money and becomes a millionaire+ deserves every penny so surely if they’re so worthy and great people they can rebuild that wealth again!
For real, if they are so smart and hard working they can rebuild their wealth as a felon with no help from family or friends. They will have millions in no time!
Collective Punishment is a crime against humanity
“I do not recall.”
Does not mean, “I am innocent”
Good thing knowledge of the law is not requisite to being punished for breaking it…
It’s not, but being able to understand the charges against you is.
It also challenges the justification for incarceration.
Some jurisdictions have policy specifying incarceration should be preserved to protect community safety, clearly not an issue for an individual who suffers from this disease. Although clearly there are also sentencing guidelines and the community would want this individual sentenced. However, it makes it clearer that the sentence is punitive, which feels justified but does nothing to undo the harm and has a limited impact on future offending by other individuals.
If only public policy served to prevent victimisation in the first place.
Some jurisdictions have policy specifying incarceration should be preserved to protect community safety, clearly not an issue for an individual who suffers from this disease.
I’m sorry, not sure if I read this right.
Are you suggesting that having dimentia makes someone inherently not dangerous? Someone with a history of sex trafficking?
Because that’d be pretty absurd.
No I’m not suggesting it doesn’t make them dangerous. Obviously that’s a matter of how serious dementia is.
If it’s mild it’s possible they could be more dangerous not less.
I’ve lost family members to dementia and when it’s quite severe they’re unable to even eat, so then obviously they’re no danger to society.
I’m simply reflecting on how ineffective our current criminal justice system is. By all means, lock up sex offenders. I just wish we could stop the victimisation from occurring in the first place.
I’ve also had family members who were victims of child sexual assault, and police just don’t give a fuck, let alone social services.
If it’s mild it’s possible they could be more dangerous not less.
Yeah that was my knee jerk reaction to what I’d read. But I agree with more information fleshing that out :)
Can’t remember bring a cunt
