That was not Stallman's statement.
In fact, Stallman's argument rests on the foundational belief that the girl was forced to service Minsky.
He reasons that because it would have been in the best interest of Epstein not to disclose the harm that's being done to the girl, she would have been convinced to present herself to Minsky as willing. Thus it is argued that Minsky might have had a sexual encounter without having realized that the girl is being forced to do this. In such a scenario, it is proper to accuse Epstein of harm, but wrongful to accuse Minsky of sexual assault.
All participants of the discussion should refer to the original MIT email thread and not base their opinions on secondary information. There is also a quote from a scientist who names himself as an eyewitness and clears Minsky of wrongdoing. He was not listed by the girl as present during the event and it may be too early to accept his words as the truth. However, if the girl's account corroborates his, then even the harshest critic should be obliged to exonerate Stallman's statement.
It reminds me of the role of the lead in "Twelve Angry Men".
No. Comparing the two acts is uncharitable. The 17 year old was exploited and faced a much worse wrong. Stallman was wronged in my opinion but of course it isn't comparable to it.
Honor the facts please. First Minsky was approached by Guiffre at the island, and Minsky turned her down. Guiffre was already 18 at that time according to one statement.
So both accusations on Minsky needed to be defended, which RMS did.
There was no sex, no rape, no violation of age of consent, just a lot of slanderous allegations by folks who had no idea about the background, and didn't read about it.
On the other hand the students allegations on their Facebook event had a proper basis, against MIT management. But this had nothing to do with RMS defense of Minsky.
