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.

  • JovialMicrobial@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 day ago

    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.

      • Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 day ago

        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.

        • foggy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 day ago

          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.

          • Hawk@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 day ago

            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.

  • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    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”.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 days ago

    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.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      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).

      • Coriza@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        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.

    • imPastaSyndrome@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      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!

      • Doomsider@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        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!