I have seen this before. I can't make out names from this pic.
I have some issues with this. Because I can't see clearly, be careful here, I may be wrong.
But this is one of the pilots personal flight logbook. I have no doubt of its accuracy, but this evidence would not hold up in any court. It appears, that the person would log in "notable" passengers on his airplane?? That column would be labeled "Remarks."
Without supporting evidence . . . anybody could make that up. Now it could be matched up with the "airplane logbook." I would expect to see same date and times. This same person would have had access to the flight manifest. Unless he took a copy of that, yeah this not worth much
I know I am getting to technical. The next question is what FAR Part Reg were they flying under. If Part 91 there will not be any passenger list. If part 135, that list is required to be kept for 90 days and then throw it away.
Ok, I will take my work hat off and take a break. 555
Ok I see that link. Yes thats a personal flight log of one the pilots.
In my opinion this is meaningless. Doing the search on Scribd, Alan D name comes up twice.
Upon further review those flights took him from Bedford, MA to Montreal Canada and back same day (pg27) on pg (47) He was flown Bedford, MA to Teteboro. Hardly unusual in corporate flying. Was he on Epstein's airplane. Yes, but all that does . . . makes a connection.
For sure, these flight logbooks DO NOT put him on pedo island.
There is a column labeled points of Departure and Arrival. If one wants to chase other leads, go to goggle, type in "airport identifier" and then the 3 or 4 letter code and it will take you to the answer.
You all will see Bill Clinton's name in that list. According to the log, he was flown to London. Pretty sure thats not a crime.
I noticed in the wriiten version, last page says "insurance." I am sorry . . . I am LMAO. It has no meaning or significance by itself. Together with more evidence . . . maybe.
Sorry folks. Not there.