Men's Rights Lawyer Eyed in Shooting of NJ Judge's Family

[SummerMadness]

'Anti-Feminist' Suspect in Killing of Judge’s Son Is Tied to 2nd Slaying

The two killings on opposite sides of the country were strikingly similar. A gunman showed up at the front door, posing as a delivery man, and opened fire.

One of the victims was Marc Angelucci, 52, a men's rights lawyer who was killed on July 11 outside his home in San Bernardino County, Calif. Eight days later, a shooter approached the New Jersey home of Esther Salas, a federal judge, killing the judge’s son and leaving her husband seriously injured.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

'Anti-Feminist' Suspect in Killing of Judge’s Son Is Tied to 2nd Slaying

So an anti-feminist targeted both a judge and a men's rights lawyer? (seems like the latter would've been on his side)

I can't get to the full article as it's trying to make me register for an account with NYT and already get enough spam email lol.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Well no Rob, obviously none of that is relevant to the conversation. I said nothing about the general violence in prisons. Here's the statement of yours I was responding to:

It is relevant...if a member of Zetas/Crips/Aryan brotherhood/1% MCs/etc... can have someone knocked off in prison (much of the prison murder is gang related), and can have people killed on the outside as well, then likes of Epstein affiliates would certainly have those kinds of resources at their disposal.

The evidence isn't supporting the conspiracy theories at the moment which is why I'm not on that side of the debate...

However, it's disingenuous to suggest that the theory of "Rich/Powerful person with a lot to lose could have someone killed" should be given the same level of "Tin Foil Hattery" criticism that one may give to an anti-vaxxer or flat-earther or moon landing truther.

Of course, it just pours gasoline on the conspiracy fire when prominent people on both sides initially try to deny being more than an acquaintance of him, and then pictures showing otherwise come out.

 

[Subduction Zone]

So an anti-feminist targeted both a judge and a men's rights lawyer? (seems like the latter would've been on his side)

I can't get to the full article as it's trying to make me register for an account with NYT and already get enough spam email lol.

Yes, it was a rival group of men's rights activists. From the article:

' Mr. Angelucci was the vice president of the National Coalition for Men, a men’s rights group. About a decade ago, Mr. Den Hollander had approached the coalition and asked its support for his causes and lawsuits, but he was turned away, according to the group’s members.

“We rejected him because we all thought and, it turns out he was, a nut job,” said Al Rava, a lawyer in San Diego who was previously a secretary for the coalition. '

It looks like their assessment was right on the money.

 

[Tanj]

It is relevant...if a member of Zetas/Crips/Aryan brotherhood/1% MCs/etc... can have someone knocked off in prison (much of the prison murder is gang related), and can have people killed on the outside as well

...then there'd be some evidence to back it up maybe.

then likes of Epstein affiliates would certainly have those kinds of resources at their disposal.

Seriously? You think because a bunch of murderous, psychopathic thugs have at their disposal other murderous psychopathic thugs then rich people do too? Do you know any? I sure don't. How the heck is a rich person supposed to source a hitman without leaving a trail a mile wide to follow?

However, it's disingenuous to suggest that the theory of "Rich/Powerful person with a lot to lose could have someone killed" should be given the same level of "Tin Foil Hattery" criticism that one may give to an anti-vaxxer or flat-earther or moon landing truther.

Until there's a shred of evidence to prove it ever actually happened, that's exactly where it belongs.

Of course, it just pours gasoline on the conspiracy fire when prominent people on both sides initially try to deny being more than an acquaintance of him, and then pictures showing otherwise come out.

If you say so. Sounds more like human nature 101 to me.

The reason I know this is a tin foil hat conspiracy is because it has the 2 main hallmarks of tinfoil hattery. Those are:

1) Super competence simultaneously with super incompetence.
The evil mastermind is such a super villain that even after all this time, not a hint of a shred of a mention is made of who they are, but at the same time like some bumbling cartoon idiot they left behind sloppy evidence which a child can see is "suspicious". This applies in this case, the 9-11 was a bomb thing, the moon landing was a hoax thing.

2) Show me the middle man!
Any hints of a shred of a whiff of the name of the person that tightened the cord around Epstein's neck? No? Didn't think so. Howsabout the people that laid the 9-11 charges, or actually did the rigging on the moon landing. Nothing there either? Hmm.

 

[durangodawood]

Its more exciting to believe Ep was murdered.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

...then there'd be some evidence to back it up maybe.

You're asking for evidence of whether or not organized crime can have people killed both in and out of prison? Or you're referring to powerful people at the top of the economic food chain?

Seriously? You think because a bunch of murderous, psychopathic thugs have at their disposal other murderous psychopathic thugs then rich people do too? Do you know any? I sure don't.

You don't think a group of wealthy men, traveling to a private island, for the purposes of sexually exploiting and abusing underage girls are psychopathic and are willing to commit felonious behavior?

Seems to me like if a multi-millionaire was willing to do that with their money, paying a thug to shut someone up would be small potatoes.

 

[Tanj]

You're asking for evidence of whether or not organized crime can have people killed both in and out of prison?

Good grief Rob why do you keep bringing this up? how many times do I have to say I am not talking about violent criminals doing violence?

Or you're referring to powerful people at the top of the economic food chain?

There you go.

You don't think a group of wealthy men, traveling to a private island, for the purposes of sexually exploiting and abusing underage girls are psychopathic and are willing to commit felonious behavior?

I don't think they have the wherewithal to sanction a hit and leave 0 trace behind. There's a difference between "felonious behaviour" and having someone murdered.

Seems to me like if a multi-millionaire was willing to do that with their money, paying a thug to shut someone up would be small potatoes.

And cover it up 100% completely? Sounds more like a B grade movie with Bruce Willis sleepwalking through yet another role.

 

[ArmenianJohn]

Roy Den Hollander’s divorce fueled women-hating crusade, ex’s lawyer claims

He was a crazy incel type

 

[ThatRobGuy]

I don't think they have the wherewithal to sanction a hit and leave 0 trace behind. There's a difference between "felonious behaviour" and having someone murdered.

And cover it up 100% completely?

Having to cover up your crimes to avoid jail time is for poor criminals, rich guys can do what Epstein did the first time he got busted for underage girls, which was to use connections to strike a backroom deal with Trump's boy Acosta (back when he was a prosecutor) to get a slap on the wrist and prison accommodations that most would consider laughable.

Known as a "sweetheart" deal, Epstein got a 13 months sentence (which he was allowed to leave the jail for 12 hours a day), immunity from all federal criminal charges to Epstein, along with four named co-conspirators and any unnamed "potential co-conspirators"...a deal that was struck at a hotel between Epstein and his attorneys, that was 70-miles away from his office, which also involved written agreements that the prosecution team wasn't allowed to share any details with the media or the victims.

Acosta later said he offered a lenient plea deal because he was told that Epstein was "above his pay grade," and to "leave it alone".

After having several consistent eye witness accounts, and raiding his condo and finding that he had no only illegal images laying around, but even had disks where he categorized his illegal images by age and girls' names...a US Attorney being told "leave it alone" sounds like Epstein must have known some powerful people, wouldn't you agree?...combined with the fact that they insisted on negotiating a hotel 70-miles away from his office (likely because they didn't want to risk having whatever was being discussed recorded by Acosta at the time if they weren't sure he'd "play ball" so to speak)

 

[Tanj]

Having to cover up your crimes to avoid jail time is for poor criminals, rich guys can do what Epstein did the first time he got busted for underage girls, which was to use connections to strike a backroom deal with Trump's boy Acosta (back when he was a prosecutor) to get a slap on the wrist and prison accommodations that most would consider laughable.

So who got slapped on the wrist for murdering Epstein? Haven't seen that news article.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

So who got slapped on the wrist for murdering Epstein? Haven't seen that news article.

I don't think Epstein was murdered...so probably nobody (apart from the guards who were brought up on charges for neglecting their duty to do routine check-ins).

...but this is one of those topics where people can't have it both ways. Either rich, powerful men are capable of committing egregious acts (and getting away with it) or they aren't.

Meaning, people who write off certain Epstein theories relating to the Clintons as "tin foil hat", but are perfectly willing to entertain ones pertaining to Epstein and Trump (and vice versa) are engaging in selective outrage...especially when it's specifically for the purposes of fitting a particular political narrative.

I've seen republicans zero in on the Clinton-Epstein connections, but seemingly ignore his connections to Trump, and I've seen democrats do the inverse.

Much like we've seen the "believe all women" movement be selectively applied based on which political entity is being accused. (Biden vs. Kavanaugh)

It would seem that many are willing to jump on board with flimsy accusations based on whether or not the accused shares their own political affiliation, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Tanj]

I don't think Epstein was murdered...so probably nobody (apart from the guards who were brought up on charges for neglecting their duty to do routine check-ins).

That's all I was saying. And since that specific instance was my sole interest in this thread, I'll say bye bye for now