Persistence for victims

Dear Editor,

For several years now, I have been troubled by the Jeffrey Epstein story — not because it was sensational, but because it never truly felt resolved. Too many questions were left unanswered. Too much silence followed. That is why the recent work of the United Nations, through independent experts appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, matters. Earlier this month, they began examining the Epstein files in a way that finally takes the scope of the harm seriously.

What these experts describe confirms what many have long suspected: this was not just the behavior of one powerful individual. They point to patterns of abuse that suggest a global criminal enterprise sustained by corruption, extreme misogyny, and the routine dehumanization of women and girls. The experts were careful in their language, but they did not minimize what they found. They stated that, if substantiated, the documented abuses may meet the legal threshold of crimes against humanity under international law. That should give all of us pause.

The United Nations has now called for an independent investigation into how this could have gone on for so long and who helped make it possible. I hope this effort can finally unravel the full extent of the crimes and expose the systems that protected them. This is not about reopening old wounds for the sake of outrage. It is about refusing to accept a version of justice that leaves the most uncomfortable truths untouched. Some stories demand persistence. This is one of them.

Douglas Hearn,

Warren

Keeping voters away

Dear Editor,

In reference to the “SAVE America Act,” columnist Star Parker’s big omission in her Feb. 17 edition was that the Act has been well proven that it is unnecessary. There is no evidence that migrants or any non-citizens have been a voting problem anywhere.

Due to this Act being a serious deterrent for on the fence voters and people less fortunate especially those of color, it is being more accurately called “The Voter Suppression Act,”

the main reason the Republicans sponsored it.

This election process is properly discussed by Marc Elias on YouTube’s Democracy Docket podcast. The other and more important reason the act is of no purpose is the Constitution provides that all election matters are only administered by the 50 states with no Federal interference.

Star needs instruction in voting material and also the proper function of a democracy.

Charles Merroth,

Warren