I know I’m going to get a lot of hate for this, but people keep asking me to talk about the whole Sascha thing. So here it is:
The problem with all of the Sascha material is that none of it has been able to be corroborated. It is just one person putting out all of this information with no corroboration. So until an outside neutral source is able to corroborate at least some of it, it is all just their word. Yes, it’s very compelling but legally it’s nothing but one person’s word. For example if he really wanted to, Sascha (assuming that’s his real name) could easily request copies of the police reports and records from all of those agencies. There is an image going around with a post supposedly written by him saying that he filed police reports in Oklahoma and elsewhere, and that others should ask for those police reports. However he is the ONE person who can do that. He could request the reports and release them, he can request his records and release them. So unless and until he does that, I have to reserve judgment because none of it is legally defensible at the moment. 
Source
10 comments
Allison Strouse Evanitz
They have posted adoption records, and contacts with whom they spoke to at the FBI. They have posted that they are willing to release Hippa information we should be able to verify some information.
Sandra Su
I didn’t realize some 3rd party couldn’t get the police reports and other documentation in an attempt to verify or disprove what he said. I was hoping someone would come along who would do that. He had me going (sort of) until the Jane Goodall mention. That sounded just too improbable. Lots of people want to believe because too many people have dismissed real victims, but that doesn’t mean every accusation is true, either.
Mimi Louise
See Rachel Hurley’s in-depth analysis of his situation. It seems it may be intentionally misleading in order to discredit Epstein victims, according to discrepancies in the timeline that Hurley figured out.
Linda Ng
I would need to see police reports and documentation that back up the narrative.
Kay Underwood-Gray
I hope he does.
Thalie Ramirez
I understand it being hearsay at this point and nothing is currently collaborated. BUT just hearing about Dr. Harold Bornstein in connection with 47. It’s highly suspicious.
Mind you, I am not what I would consider a conspiracy theorist but too many things are coming out for it not look like a something that *could* be true.
Mark Hendy
100% with you on this. While we must all “believe the victim”, in the sense that we should listen and investigate in a supportive and professional way. But that means we need to look for evidence, cortobiration, other supporting witness, the contextual timeliness, etc. … I’ve seen two polarised sides to this, “trust him explicitly” and others saying it is blatant disinformation to not just taint the wider pool of victim statements and evidence, but also discredit current news outlets and commentators who too eagerly might jump to support this without adequate checking. I’m glad to see all of the commenters I follow are being super professional on this!!!
Christi Keith
He’s talking about Putin when Putin wouldn’t have been a topic. And mentions ghislane when she wasn’t even in the country yet. We are so horrified but things aren’t adding up already
Annabelle Caldwell Bradshaw
Thank you for addressing this and letting us know where the legal starting point is.
Peggy McDermott
Another distraction?
Comments are closed.