– Advertisement – The full 350-page report goes into great detail about the behind-the-scenes negotiations that led to the nonprosecution agreement. It also seeks to rebut certain urban myths that have developed around Mr. Epstein, including whether he had received a light deal because he cooperated in an investigation involving a criminal case involving two former Bear Stearns hedge fund managers or was an “intelligence asset.” The report said it “found no evidence suggesting that Epstein was such a cooperating witness or ‘intelligence asset.’”In a two-page statement issued by his lawyer, Gordon Todd, Mr. Acosta said the review largely vindicated him and “debunks allegations” that he and his office had “improperly cut Epstein a ‘sweetheart deal’ or purposefully avoided investigating potential wrongdoing by various prominent individuals.”Mr. Acosta also said in the statement, “The Epstein affair as understood today is vastly more lurid and sweeping than was known” and involves allegations against a number of prominent people as well as Mr. Epstein.Before releasing the executive summary, Justice Department lawyers met in Miami with lawyers for some of the victims to discuss their findings. The government lawyers said full copies of the report would be provided to any member of Congress who asked for them.Sigrid McCawley, a lawyer with Boies Schiller Flexner who represents several victims, called the review an “anemic accounting of what really happened.” Spencer Kuvin, who represents some of the first accusers who complained to federal and state authorities about Mr. Epstein, said he was glad “the U.S. government is recognizing its own failures regarding its handling of this matter.”The furor over the handling of allegations of sexual abuse by Mr. Epstein led federal prosecutors in Manhattan to take a fresh look into the matter. The new investigation led to Mr. Epstein’s arrest on sex-trafficking charges in July 2019.But his death a month later prompted another round of public outcry, particularly from victims who would never be able to face him in a federal courtroom. Attorney General William P. Barr immediately announced internal investigations to determine how Mr. Epstein had died and said that the Manhattan federal prosecutor’s office would continue to build a human trafficking case against some of Mr. Epstein’s associates. The nonprosecution agreement was part of a deal that culminated with Mr. Epstein pleading guilty in Florida to a single state charge of soliciting prostitution from a minor girl and registering as a sex offender. The terms of the federal agreement, which also safeguarded four named alleged co-conspirators from prosecution, were largely kept hidden for years from his victims.- Advertisement – Coroner’s reports and an investigation by the F.B.I. and the Justice Department’s inspector general ultimately ruled Mr. Epstein’s death a suicide, Mr. Barr said last fall, adding that he personally reviewed security camera footage of Mr. Epstein’s housing area that showed that no one had entered it on the night of his death.The F.B.I. and inspector general investigations led to criminal indictments against two prison guards who were charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States and with making false records. While the guards have pleaded not guilty, the cases against them laid out the official narrative of the negligence that the government said allowed Mr. Epstein the privacy and isolation that he needed to commit suicide.The Bureau of Prisons has also completed an investigation into the circumstances surrounding Mr. Epstein’s death, but it is not expected to be made public.This summer, the U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan arrested Ghislaine Maxwell, the daughter of a publishing magnate and a onetime confidant of Mr. Epstein, on charges that she lured underage girls and groomed them to be abused by Mr. Epstein. The report faulted Mr. Acosta for not being sensitive to the feelings of Mr. Epstein’s victims by not alerting them to the terms of the nonprosecution agreement and making sure they had adequate notice of Mr. Epstein’s guilty plea to the state charge. The report said that omission “presented a glaring contrast with Acosta’s responsiveness to the demands of Epstein’s attorneys, which included the unusual courtesy of allowing them to preview and respond to (federal prosecutors’) draft victim notifications.”The review had followed public outrage prompted by an investigative series in The Miami Herald that examined the events leading up to the nonprosecution agreement and the relatively light sentence Mr. Epstein received from state prosecutors in Florida as a part of the deal. A month after the Herald series, Senator Ben Sasse of Nebraska, who is chairman of the subcommittee with oversight of the federal judiciary, demanded a Justice Department investigation of Mr. Acosta’s handling of the matter.Mr. Sasse said the review’s finding were inadequate. “The D.O.J.’s crooked deal with Epstein effectively shut down investigations into his child sex-trafficking ring and protected his co-conspirators in other states,” he said in a statement.- Advertisement – The review was an attempt to close the door on an embarrassing episode for the Justice Department that critics have said allowed Mr. Epstein to largely go unscrutinized in the face of years of allegations that he sexually abused dozens of teenage girls. It also permitted him to continue to socialize with politicians, celebrities, academics and Wall Street billionaires and reinvent himself as a philanthropist and tax and estate adviser to the ultrarich.The decision by Mr. Acosta to pursue a nonprosecution agreement rather than federal charges “was a flawed mechanism for satisfying the federal interest that caused the government to open its investigation of Epstein,” according to a 13-page executive summary of the report. Mr. Acosta, the summary said, erred in giving too much deference to the interests of Florida prosecutors and “his view of the federal interest in prosecuting Epstein was too narrow.” Mr. Acosta defended his 2007 decision making during a news conference soon after Mr. Epstein’s arrest in July 2019. But his explanation did not quell the furor, and two days after that news conference he resigned as labor secretary. A former top federal prosecutor in Miami “exercised poor judgment” by allowing the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein to evade federal child trafficking charges more than a decade ago, a Justice Department review revealed on Thursday, but it found no other wrongdoing, prompting criticism that the department dodged responsibility for its light treatment of Mr. Epstein, who died last year of an apparent suicide after his arrest on similar charges.The department’s Office of Professional Responsibility did not find any professional misconduct by R. Alexander Acosta, the U.S. attorney in Miami who oversaw the 2006 investigation into Mr. Epstein and who later served as labor secretary under President Trump until he resigned last year amid a renewed uproar over the Epstein case.- Advertisement –
Janet Sue Dole, age 70 of Frostproof, Florida passed away at Arbor Grove Village in Greensburg, Indiana on Monday, October 2, 2017. The daughter of Ben and Nora (nee: Crouch) Flannery was born on May 1, 1947 in Sunman, IN. She married Sam Jewell, until he passed away in 1981 and she later married Joseph Dole.Janet was in the class of 1965 at Batesville High School. She retired from GECom in Greensburg after many years. Janet was a member of the 1st United Methodist Church in Frostproof where she was very active.She is survived by her husband, Joseph, daughter Kim Grunkemeyer (Glenn) of Greensburg; two step children, Joe Dole of Corbin, KY and Jennifer Morrow (Jeff) of Greensburg, IN; one granddaughter, Danielle Grunkemeyer; three step grandchildren Conner Dole, Tony Settles and Abby Morrow; plus two sisters, Kathy Amburgey (Delza) of Batesville and Pamela Hunter (Mark) of Greensburg; three brothers Dannie Flannery (Sue) of Mooreshill, IN, Mike Flannery of New Point, IN, and Tom Flannery (Letha) of Greensburg along with many nieces and nephews.In addition to her parents, she was preceded in death by her first husband, Sam, her brothers Donnie, Jame, Larry and Jerry Flannery.Visitation will be Thursday, October 4, 2017 from 5-7pm with 7pm Funeral Service all at Meyers Funeral Home in Batesville, IN. Rev. Jacob Flannery officiating.Flowers will be appreciated.
THE Guyana Football Federation (GFF) is seeking to regulate football played in the country and has thus engaged the support of the Guyana Police Force (GPF) to ensure permits for tournaments are only granted following the GFF’s approval of a given tournament.This entails a promoter getting an approval letter from the GFF, which is given to the police in the respective division in which the tournament is being held, before the police authorises the said tournament.According to the GFF, this initiative follows the actions of some who coordinate tournaments without the secured prize money and other logistical arrangements in place and without the clear guideline and oversight of the Federation.President of the GFF, Wayne Forde, said that regulation is important to preserve the integrity of the game, adding that “While it is important that the footballers are given an opportunity to play as much football as possible, these events must take place in a regulated environment.”“In particular, the GFF Executive Committee’s Constitutional mandate is to control the game in all its forms. As the final adjudicator in all football matters, the GFF has to ensure that the rules, officiating, security etc. comply with the regulations of FIFA, CONCACAF and the GFF. In 2018, tournament organizers will have to undergo greater screening prior to being licensed and approved to organize football competitions,” Forde said.Among the chief concerns of the GFF is the impact of non-approval on the image of the beautiful game with the potential disrepute that may result, including match fixing and other forms of manipulation.This potentially can ultimately lead to an unsafe environment for players and fans, including loss to life and limb. The GFF looks forward to the complete cooperation from the promoters and coordinators of football in Guyana and will provide all necessary support to ensure full compliance is achieved.
Share ESI Digital – No Drama Please… Esports growth should be treated as business as usual August 20, 2020 Share Alexey Khobot on the evolution of odds calculations August 13, 2020 Related Articles BetInvest: The benefits of separating esports betting markets August 7, 2020 StumbleUpon Submit In 1995, Alexey Khobot designed his first software for FONBET, which included the use of bots to assist in oddsmaking. The operator looks at why this artificial intelligence has been key, but points out that the human touch still remains king.The most important part of the bookmaking process is the formulation of odds. It’s no secret that bookmakers rely on the accurate calculation of odds to turn a profit. As a result, more and more bookmakers are relying on AI to assist them in their efforts.Alexey Khobot designed the very first software used by the FONBET betting company. Now he is fully engaged in the development of computer programs for use in the sphere of bookmaking. That being said, can we expect AI to replace traditional oddsmakers in the near future?How do bookmakers come up with odds?A person without experience and an aptitude for mathematics will never be able to devise the exact odds for a sporting event. To do this accurately, you need to process all of the available information concerning each of the teams or participants taking part in the event. Statistics, form, results from previous meetings, injuries, suspensions – all of this must be taken into account. Then there’s also public opinion, and the bookmaker’s margin to consider. But what if some kind of force majeure suddenly takes place mid-event? How is all of this data handled?Many companies don’t see the point in bothering to work out the odds they offer, they buy ready-made b2b solutions instead. In essence, they relay the data found on their sites from an external supplier. However, large companies prefer to employ their own professional bookmakers.Robots in the betting industry. Why are they needed and will they replace people?“Nowadays, we use robots for live betting at Fonbet, but matches are still overseen in semi-manual mode. What I mean by that is, each match is monitored by a responsible bookmaker, he revises the computer’s odds and is ready to react in case of force majeure,” said the company’s Marketing Director Alina Yakirevich.What kind of force majeure situations are we talking about? VAR is an easy example. The referee may initially signal a goal, but then a few minutes later could change his decision after reviewing footage of the incident. VAR can influence the awarding of penalties and players being sent off.But what if there is a fight among the fans in the stands or something like that? A bot doesn’t take this type of situation into consideration, but it could certainly influence the outcome of an event. In this case, bookmakers are able to temporarily suspend the acceptance of bets until the situation is clarified.Alexey Khobot used to be a bookmaker himself. These days, he develops IT solutions for the betting industry, for example, bots that formulate odds and keeps them automatically updated as the match takes place. He created his first software for FONBET in 1995.Khobot developed bots for the betting industry. These are programs that analyse incoming statistics and devise live odds for hundreds of options at the same time for one match. His first bot was for working out volleyball odds, and since last year he has been developing bots for esports.Robots in esports – the spirit of the timesEsports is gaining popularity, and during a pandemic with real sports being suspended, the rate at which its audience is growing is impressive. Alexey Khobot wrote his first esports odds-bot for CS:GO. This game has an older audience compared to Dota2. In addition, this game is easier for a beginner to pick up.Writing a bot for calculating esports odds is no easy task. There is an even larger amount of events to consider in CS than in classic sports. Each of them can affect the game. All of this must be calculated, with the probability of each event set. In addition, a team’s in-game economy is a very important factor. Which weapons a team buys, how it uses its budget, etc.. If one of the teams gains an advantage at the start of the game, it doesn’t at all guarantee that it will hold onto it.Another additional difficulty to contend with is that the game is constantly updated, new maps are added, and this means the bot must also be frequently updated. It’s akin to the rules of football being changed every two months.It took about a month’s work to create the bot. During this time, Alexey studied the game and watched dozens of Twitch streams. Testing the bot took another few weeks. Khobot invited a esports bookmaker to assist him. The specialist used Khobot’s program, feeding back with even the smallest of inaccuracies discovered in the odds it calculated. The CS:GO bot allows a single bookmaker to rule over several events simultaneously, while reducing the risk of human errorAlexey Khobot’s next goal is to devise a bot for live betting on Dota2. New meta is released monthly for Dota, making this a much more complicated task. Each update brings a huge change in the powers and abilities of the characters, and there are more than 100 of them in Dota. In addition to that, there are a huge amount of events that can take place in Dota, with many of them unique to the 10 individual characters on the game map.”There is also an issue with data and analytics. As far as Dota2 is concerned, is difficult to find a reliable provider of data and reliable data is precisely what any bot needs to function correctly. Alexey firmly believes that these problems will be solved as esports continues to develop. Once this is done, he will be able to write his program for Dota2 and other esports. There is no way that AI can completely replace people in the betting industry. At least not any time soon.Machines will not completely replace peopleHowever things turn out, it’s unlikely that we shall see a person completely replaced by AI in the near future. Bookmaking concerns bets between players and traders. There is often a large amount of data that computers still struggle to analyse and digitise, especially with the biggest events. This could include rumours surrounding the fitness of players, or an athlete’s mindset coming into the event.This is precisely the sort of data which AI is incapable of processing on its own.