Al-Biruni Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences

Facebook X Threads LinkedIn WhatsApp Telegram

ABSTRACT
In this paper, we explore the Jeffrey Epstein case from the perspective of Freudian psychoanalysis Using the interaction of libido drives, power structures, and the patterns of episodic deviance of elites as our starting point, we ask how the psychological drive meets the socially produced environment and as a result, the deviant pattern continues.
We conduct a qualitative documentary analysis based on the following court case files, civil litigation records, investigative journalism and other materials of the US Department of Justice. Our work is not a clinical diagnosis, instead it takes certain psychoanalytic terms as hermeneutic devices to understand behavioral patterns in the context of elites.
The theoretical framework is built on the Motivational Dominance Model in Power Contexts, which integrates three dimensions: Freudian motivational structures (id, ego, superego), contextual power dynamics such as political influence and perceived impunity, and psychological defense mechanisms including rationalization and denial.
The findings suggest that the interaction between intense instinctual drives, weakened moral regulation, and enabling power networks facilitated the persistence of deviant behavior. The study contributes a psycho-social framework for analyzing elite deviance and offers a conceptual model applicable to similar cases of power-related misconduct.
which depends on the external reinforcement that diminished the impact of the superego. The psychological defense mechanisms contributed to justify the behaviour and create a moral detachment from the resulting harm.
The research, moreover, conducted a comparative analysis with Harvey Weinstein, shoinwg the similarities in the power influence, the local networks, and the psychological mechanisms, while acknowledging the differences in power dynamics and victims. This highlights the validity of the motivational hegemony model as a multi-level framework for understanding deviance in the various power contexts. Therefore, the research concluded that prolonged sexual deviance in the power settings is not merely the result of internal motivations, but rather the result of a complex interaction between the id, the superego, the power structure, and the institutional cover. This provides a comprehensive theoretical and analytical framework for studying similar cases in the future.

Keywords: Psychoanalysis; Freud; Elite Deviance; Power Structures; Sexual Deviance; Jeffrey Epstein; Political Psychology; Moral Disengagement.

Power, Desire, and Elite Deviance: A Psycho-Social Analysis of the Jeffrey Epstein Case through Freudian Theory

Introduction
The Jeffrey Epstein case represents one of the most controversial scandals in contemporary legal and social history, not only because of the nature of the crimes involved but also because of the networks of political, economic, and social influence surrounding it. This complexity makes the case particularly suitable for multidisciplinary interpretation.
This study analyzes the case through Freud’s psychoanalytic framework, focusing on libido, the structural model of personality (id, ego, and superego), and psychological defense mechanisms. The aim is to examine how internal motivations interact with elite power structures to enable persistent forms of deviant behavior. The study begins from the premise that understanding deviant behavior among highly influential figures requires analysis beyond observable behavior to the unconscious motivational structures which may reform the relationship between the desire and the power.
This study derives its significance from its attempt to connect classical psychoanalytic theory with a contemporary socio-political phenomenon. This allows for a re-reading of the concept of deviance not only as a criminal act, but also as a psychological structure which interacts with social conditions that offer immunity or fuel a sense of absolute power. It also strives to explore the relationship between the potential pathological narcissism, the search for control and the reproduction of dominance via the networks of influence. Nevertheless, it acknowledges its methodological and ethical limitations which is any psychological analysis of a personality that has not undergone direct clinical evaluation remains hypothetical and theoretical, and cannot be considered a medical diagnosis. Therefore, it depends on a documentary analysis of the available general data, and on projecting Freud's concepts as interpretive instruments rather than the definitive judgments.
Accordingly, the main research question revolves around the following:
To what extent can the theory of Freudian psychoanalytic illustrate the overlap between the sexual desire, the exercise of power, and the deviant patterns in the Jeffrey Epstein’s case?
According to this, several sub-questions can be raised, the most important of which are:
The sub-questions of the research:

How do the instinctual motives (the id) interact with the internal moral structures (the superego) in forming Epstein's deviant behaviour?

What role do the psychological defense mechanisms (justification, denial, projection, dissociation) play in supporting Epstein to practice the deviant behavior without feeling guilty?

How has the social and political impact contributed to enhancing the ability to engage in the deviant behaviour on a continuing basis?
To what extent can Epstein's deviant behaviour patterns be illustrated by psychosexual fixation in the early developmental levels?
What are the dynamics of the authoritarian reinforcement loop and how do they impact the escalation of the deviant behavior?
How can the classical psychoanalysis be combined with the social and political aspects to offer a comprehensive explanation of Epstein's behaviour?
What lessons can be learnt for applying this model to other cases of the power-related deviance?

The aim of the research
This study aims to achieve a set of the scientific and analytical goals regarding understanding Jeffrey Epstein’s behaviour from a psycho-social perspective, in view of the theory of Sigmund Freud’s. The research aims are as follows:

Analyzing the interaction between instinctual drives and internal moral regulation in Epstein while defining the influence of the id dominance and superego weakness on the deviant behaviour.
Exploring the defense mechanisms role (such as rationalisation, denial, projection, and splitting) in enabling Epstein to engage in the sexual deviance without experiencing guilt.
Evaluating the influence of power and social and political impact on the ongoing of deviant behaviour, while examining the relationship between influence and the sense of impunity.
Clarifying the psychosexual fixation role in early developmental levels in illustrating the recurrent and the sustained deviant behaviour forms.
Analysing the cycle of the authoritarian reinforcement to show how the deviant behaviour escalates via the interaction between impunity and the reinforcement of feelings of the superiority and the absolute ability.
Providing an integrated analytical model which connects Freudian theory with the social and political dynamics, serving as a framework for understanding cases of power-related deviance more generally.
Suggesting the practical and theoretical recommendations for examining similar cases in the elite, while reinforcing the understanding of the relationship between influence and deviance as well as to make a new academic contribution to the field of the applied psychoanalysis and elite studies.

Research Significance
This study is important from several perspectives; scientific, theoretical, and applied—as it strives to understand a complex phenomenon combining the sexual deviance with the social and political power from an integrated psycho-social perspective, using Sigmund Freud's theory. Thus, the study's importance can be summarised in the following points:

The theoretical contribution to a modern psychoanalysis.

This study expands the scope of Freudian theory to involve cases of the deviance regarding the social and political influence, thus reinforce the understanding of how internal psychological structures affect elite behaviours.

A comprehensive understanding of the deviant behavior

The study offers a framework that connects the individual psychological motives, psychological defense mechanisms and the structural environment of the elite which allow for a multidimensional understanding of deviant behaviour that exceeds the simple individual or the legal analysis.

The practical and applied Importance

The study's results can be used to improve the strategies for preventing and detecting power-related abuses early, especifically in institutions dealing with the economic and political elite.

Enhancing the future studies

The proposed conceptual model provides a scientific basis for complete studies on similar cases, both psychologically and socially. Therefore, enhancing the building of a comprehensive knowledge base on the relationship between the power and the deviance.

The academic and the ethical value

This study highlights the significance of dealing with influential figures in a scientific and ethical manner, by depending on the public and documentary sources and providing an analytical reading that does not constitute a clinical diagnosis, yet rather scientific interpretations based on the academic methodology.

Contributing to the integration of scientific disciplines

This study combines the analytical psychology with the social and political philosophy, broadening new horizons for understanding complex human phenomena throughout a multidisciplinary perception.
2. Literature Review
Sociology and political psychology are increasingly focussing on deviance research in elite power structures. Some authors note that powerful persons in the right position often work within contexts with almost no accountability and very loose social rules. That kind of behaviour may be diffidently the one that in the usual situation would be strongly controlled by the law or other institutions [1][2].
One major theoretical view is C. Wright Mills power elite theory that is used to describe how political, economic and other forms of authority tend to be in the hands of the same individuals and the network of their relations. Under such circumstances, a person may acquire the feeling of being above law and unmindful of the probability of being caught doing a morally or legally wrong act [3].
Psychological research has demonstrated that power modifies one's moral choices by, for example, increasing one's willingness to engage in risk, taking and inducing moral disengagement. The impact of this is even greater when institutional settings allow privilege to be the norm and at the same time create situations with little or no punishment [4][5].
To put it simply, Freud's tripartite model of the mind, the id, ego, and superego, serves as a useful tool for explaining how people can do bad things when their instinctual drives are in conflict with their conscience [6][7][8]. In situations of privilege, people are likely to certain defense mechanisms such as rationalizing and denying in attempt to reduce their inner moral conflict and to justify their misdeeds [9][10].
Even though a great deal of research has focused on elite deviance, very few have tried to blend psychoanalytic explanations with sociological analyses of power structures. This paper intends to bridge this gap by looking at the Jeffrey Epstein case through a psycho, social lens, one that integrates Freudian theory and contemporary studies of elite power and deviance.
The research hypotheses
This study starts with Sigmund Freud's psychoanalytic theories and seeks to investigate the case of Jeffrey Epstein as a mere psychoanalytic tool of illustration to the problem of sexual desire, power, and deviant behavior patterns intertwined with each other.
Hypothesis 1: talks about how instinctual dominance and moral regulation interact with each other: the overpowering of instinctual drives (id) which leads to the emergence of deviant behavior even in elite contexts where moral regulation (superego) is either weakened or selectively applied.
Hypothesis 2: ponders on power structures as enabling environments. It argues that elites' power networks, institutions' influence, and the sense of being above the law may work as enabling environments lowering the level of external deterrence and at the same time, making it easier for deviant behavior to persist.
Hypothesis 3: Psychological mediation and behavioral persistence
Psychological defense mechanisms such as rationalization, denial, and projection mediate the relationship between internal drives and observable deviant behavior by reducing moral tension and maintaining behavioral continuity.
The model of proposed conceptual
Drive-Dominance Model in Power Contexts
First: The main variables in the model

The independent variables

The structure of Freudian motivates

Libidinal Drive Intensity

The dominance of the id

The weakness of the superego

The presence of psychosexual fixation

The authoritarian structural context

The level of the social impact

The intensity of the elite networks

The possibility of the impunity

The repeated positive reinforcement of the behaviour

The mediating variable

Psychological defense mechanisms

Rationalization

Denial

Projection

Splitting

The dependent variable

The patterns of the deviant behaviour associated with the authority

The repetitive behaviour

The escalating nature

The association with dominance and control

Figure 3. Defense mechanisms are unconscious protective behaviors that work to reduce anxiety. (Image Source: OpenStax Psychology, CC BY 4.0)
The model of the analytical structure
This model can be represented as follows:

Rationale of the Model

The instinctual motives by itself are not enough to produce prolonged deviance.
The authority and influence provides an "enabling environment".
The defense mechanisms enable the individual to reform the behaviour internally.
The absence of external deterrence results in the erosion of the superego.
The result: the behaviour escalates instead of being contained.

This study suggests a conceptual framework which integrates Freud's psychoanalytic theory with the behavioural patterns noted in the case of Jeffrey Epstein. It aimis to understand the interact between the sexual desire, power, and deviant behaviour. This framework is known as the "motivational dominance model in the context of power," since it provides multi-layered perspectives of the complex behaviours connecting the psychological motivation and the social action.
Fourth: The expected results
The model predicts the emergence of authority-facilitated the deviant behavior which is characterised by:

The recurrence and escalation of sexual exploitation acts.
The utilizing impact to avoid accountability.
The integrating deviant behaviour into social identity and power structures.

Fifth: The interactions and the feedback loops
A key feature of the model is the authoritative reinforcement loop:

This chart explains the cyclical interaction between the psychological motives and the environmental reinforcement, which illustrates the persistence of the deviant patterns.

Sixth: the theoretical contribution
This framework expands the traditional Freudian theory to the modern social and political contexts showing how classical concepts can be used to understand the sexual deviance within the elite by integrating the internal motivations with the external elements. The model provides the followings:

A scheme that is testable and can be qualitatively analysed.
Basis for comparisons between different cases of influence and deviation.
A logical basis for the ethical debate on the psychoanalysis of deceased individuals.

3. Methodology
This study adopts a qualitative documentary analysis approach to examine the interaction between psychological drives and elite power structures in the Jeffrey Epstein case. The research design relies on publicly available documentary sources rather than direct clinical observation.
Data Sources
The empirical material analyzed in this study includes:
• Federal court documents and indictments
• Civil lawsuit records and testimonies
• Investigative journalism reports from major international outlets
• Publicly available legal and institutional documents
These materials provide a structured documentary corpus suitable for qualitative analysis.
Analytical Strategy
The analysis follows a three-stage qualitative coding procedure:

Open coding: identifying recurring behavioral patterns, references to power relations, and descriptions of deviant actions within the documentary sources.
Thematic coding: organizing the identified elements into conceptual categories derived from the theoretical framework, including:
- Id dominance
- Superego weakening
- Power structures
- Psychological defense mechanisms
Framework analysis: interpreting the coded data within the proposed Motivational Dominance Model in Power Contexts.

This analytical strategy allows the study to connect psychological variables with structural power conditions in a systematic manner.
The design of the study

Analysing the available legal documents.
Examining of journalistic speeches and documented reports.
Presenting the relevant public records, letters, and certificates

This design aims to offer a sufficient database for applying the conceptual framework and objectively reviewing the hypotheses.
Data collection
Data were collected from multiple documentary sources, including federal court records, investigative journalism reports, academic studies, and publicly available testimonies. These materials provide a reliable documentary corpus for qualitative analysis of the Epstein case.
The analysis tools
This analysis depends on qualitative coding to classify data into specific categories regarding the conceptual model:

The definition	The code	The variable
All the activities and behaviours which reflect the instinctive motives and the sexual desire	ID-Drive	The Id motives
The attitudes or behaviours which indicate weak moral control or disregard for rules	Superego-Weak	The weakens of the superego
The access level to the social, political, and financial impact networks	Power-Network	The influence and power
The justification, denial, projection, division	Defense-Mechanisms	The psychological defense mechanisms
The documented deviant sexual behaviours or control and domination via authority	Deviant-Behaviour	The deviant behavior

Analysis procedures

The initial data review: a comprehensive examination of all documents and sources to ensure their accuracy and reliability.
The data classification according to qualitative coding: placing each event or behaviour within a particular category according to the conceptual model.
Applying the conceptual framework: connecting the observed behaviours to internal and external variables to determine the relationship between personal motivations and the context of authority.
Analysing of the feedback loops: examining how the deviant behaviour is enhanced throughout a sense of impunity and psychological defense mechanisms.

The ethical considerations
This is due to the fact that this study deals with a deceased person and analyses his behaviour.

This research used theoretical and inductive analysis rather than a clinical diagnosis.
This research relies merely on the publicly available and the reliable sources; no private or confidential information was accessed.
This research adheres to international academic publishing standards according to the postmortem psychoanalysis.
The research aims to understand the phenomenon, not to defame the individual.

The strengths of the methodology

It enables a complete understanding of the relationship between the individual psychology and the structural context of the elite.
The model can be repeated or applied to similar cases to explore the psychological patterns of the deviant behaviour related to authority.
It achieves integration between the traditional psychoanalysis and the sociological analysis in the context of studying the deviance.

4. Theoretical Framework: Psychoanalysis and Elite Power
Freud’s structural model of the psyche comprising the id, ego, and superego provides the psychological foundation of this study. The id represents instinctual drives operating according to the pleasure principle, the ego mediates between internal impulses and external reality, and the superego functions as the internalized system of moral regulation that constrains socially unacceptable behavior [11][12].
While psychological motives illustrate the internal predisposition, the framework also incorporates the contextual and structural factors, assuming that the behaviour does not occur in isolation from the environment.
Power and social impact: Accessing to the political and the financial networks multiplies the ability to involve in the deviant behaviour without immediate consequences.
Power and social influence constitute key contextual factors shaping individual behavior. In social psychology, power refers to the capacity to influence others and control resources or institutional decisions. Research indicates that individuals embedded within extensive political or financial networks often face weaker social constraints, which may increase the likelihood of deviant behavior [13]. This ability is seen as a crucial variable in understanding deviant behaviour within human groups [14].
Research indicates that individuals embedded in extensive political or financial networks often face weaker social resistance to deviant behavior, as their position reduces the likelihood of direct punishment or public criticism [15].
Reviews in the literature on the social power have revealed that the historical and behavioural examples indicate that people in positions of greater power have greater control over group outputs and behaviours. This in turn affects their likelihood of deviating in a way that demonstrate less social resistance [16].

A sense of impunity: The repeated enhancement resulting from impunity reduces the impact of the internal moral controls.

The concept of impunity refers to the belief that illegal or deviant acts will not result in tangible consequences, whether due to a weak legal system, networking, or personal impact which obstructs accountability. This sense is one of the most prominent structural contextual element that allow the deviant behaviour to persist and recur. In environments where impunity is frequent, individuals tend to reduce the impact of internal moral controls, which is, personal conscience or moral values become less effective in regulating behaviour [17].
Sociological research indicates that persistent deviance among elites is often associated with high levels of perceived impunity, which weakens the deterrent effect of moral and legal norms [18].
The reference: the recent research indicate that the lack of sanctions reinforces a social environment conducive to additional deviant behaviour and undermines moral norms, weakening individuals’ association between actions and their consequences [19].”

The reinforcement of the network

The network enhancement refers to the approach that the social structures and group ties support or reproduce behaviours within a specific social network. The deviant behavior is understood not only as a result of the individual motives, but as a result of the interaction between the individual and the network environment, that is the relationship network to which the individual belongs. The strong social networks, especially in elite environments, can play a role in normalising the deviant behaviours and improving the opportunities of their continuation [20].
The social networks promote the behaviours throughout several mechanisms [21]:

The social coverage: this is where criticism or reservations about a specific behaviour within the group are reduced, especially when the individual engaging in the behavior is someone with an influence
The mutual enhancement: when the individuals support each other socially, the behaviour that might be considered deviant in a wider context becomes “normal” behaviour within that network.
Concealing the deviation: throughout strong relationships and unofficial agreements which limit the emergence of criticism or official reports.
Studies suggest that social networks can stabilize deviant behavior by reproducing values and relationships that reduce resistance to norm violations within elite groups [22].

The reference: from a sociological perspective on deviance, social networks are considered essential to the survival and perpetuation of deviant behaviours within complex human communities [23].
The summary of the structural explanation

The power and social impact increase the opportunities of engaging in the deviant behaviour by promoting control and reducing resistance.
A perceived sense of impunity undermines internal ethical constraints and promotes the recurrence of deviant behaviors without fear of repercussions.

The network reinforcement functions as a social environment which reproduces the values and behaviours so that they become justified or “normal” within the realm of private relationships.

These factors do not operate in isolation from individual psychological motives, but rather interact with them which makes Deviant behavior emerges from the interaction between internal psychological motivations and structural social environments to which he belongs. This represents the essence of structural analysis within this conceptual framework.
Third: the mediating mechanisms

The justification

Justification is a psychological defense mechanism where people change their interpretation of their deviant behaviors in order to recognize them as reasonable and even socially acceptable. This ultimately helps them bring the level of tension between their instinctual desires and moral restrictions down. In the psychoanalytic light, it can be seen as the ego making an effort of harmonizing the desires of the id and the restrictions coming from the superego [24][25].
The person mentally justifies the deviant behavior by describing it as "a legitimate goal,” "a necessary sacrifice," or "a reaction to social structure". It is a kind of double trick: not only do you fool people around you, you also trick yourself, which leads to a moral conscience getting weaker, and as a result, you are still able to carry out norm, violating behaviors [26]." A research demonstrated that justification is used by the person as a tool of reconciliation their inner motives that do not really bother them internally. There are direct correlations between this idea and episodes of deviation where people have the opportunity to manufacture subjective accounts in order to rationalize their actions [27].

The denial

The denial is a more direct psychological defense mechanism, representing of refusing to acknowledge the existence of an undesirable or painful truth even if it is supported by factual evidence. On a psychological level, the denial protects the ego from the anxiety resulting from direct confrontation with a reality that threatens the self-image or internal moral values [28].
In the context of deviant behavior, denial functions as an internal barrier that prevents the individual from recognising or acknowledging the harm inflicted on others, or even from admitting that their behaviour violates social norms. This might be shown in phrases such as “no harm was done”, or “it’s not a problem”, or even “everyone does it”.
Research indicates that denial is not merely a temporary emotional reaction, but a complex defense mechanism that blocks painful or threatening information from consciousness, allowing the individual to continue their behaviour without real internal disturbance.

The projection

The projection is a psychological defense mechanism whereby an individual attributes internally unacceptable desires or motives to others, rather than confronting them within themselves. In other words, what is causing anxiety within the self is attributed to another person, which enables the individual to alleviate feelings of guilt or moral threat [29].
In instances of deviant behavior, the projection can drive an individual to accuse others the very desires or actions that they strive to conceal or deny within themselves. This mechanism enables the person to avoid confronting the conflict between the id’s impulses and moral controls, by removing the conflict from the self and attributing it to others, which reduces internal psychological pressure [30].
Studies in psychology indicates that projection is associate with the ego identifying the internal threats and externalising them, thereby, diminishes the self-accountability and enables the persistence of behavior deemed socially unacceptable [31].

The dichotomy

The dichotomy is a psychological defense mechanism which involves simplifying the complex moral judgment into straightforward dichotomies such as “good/bad”, “excellent/poor”, or “either all good or all evil”. In this context, behavior is perceived merely throughout one of these two extreme values, leaving no room for gradations or complexities [32].
In cases of the deviance, the individual uses the dichotomy to reduce the complex moral tension, by portraying their actions as either “all good” (if the person protects or enhances them) or “all bad” (if they feel threatened by accountability). This mechanism assists to create a polarised view of moral life, which facilitates the continuation of the deviant behaviour without confronting the complex moral and realistic dimensions [33].
The studies indicate that the split is common among individuals who face a conflict between their internal value system and external pressures or gains, as it offers them with a method to simplify the complex reality into a clear binary without the need for a deep internal critical review [34].
Mediating mechanisms within the conceptual framework
These defense mechanisms shape a bridge between internal psychological motives (the id) and overt behavior, throughout [35]:

Reducing the impact of the superego by falsifying the internal interpretation of behavior.
Creating psychological justifications which reduce the moral tension deriving from the conflict between desires and values.
Protecting the self from internal conflict by externalising motives or reducing them to clear dichotomies.
Sustaining the deviant behaviour within the environments of power and immunity in which these mechanisms become less subject to accountability or critique

These mechanisms illustrate how the internal motives can be transformed into observable behaviour that allows the individuals to defend themselves psychologically while continuing to involve in actions that may deviate from the moral or the social norms.
Connecting intervening mechanisms to contexts of authority and immunity
The evidence from elite case studies and the behavioral deviations suggests that the id's defense mechanisms do not work in isolation from the social and the political context that surround the individual. In the case of Jeffrey Epstein, we find that these mechanisms allow the individual to translate his internal motives into overt behaviour while reducing the impact of internal moral controls. This due to the favorable environment characterised by authority and impact, a sense of impunity, and network enhancement [36].

The justification in the power environment

In Epstein’s case, his access to the extensive political and financial networks enabled him to find convincing interpretations for his actions, which is, to justify deviant behaviour both internally and externally. Thus, the presence of impact and power created a sense of immunity as there were no direct or tangible repercussions for his behaviour.
The justification, in this study, not only alleviates the internal psychological conflict, but is also used as a tool to mitigate the social or legal criticism from the outside world.
The studies show that the elite, who enjoy financial and political immunity, usually use the justification to legitimize their behaviour, therefore enhancing the ongoing of the deviance repeatedly.

The denial and a sense of impunity

For Epstein, it was the realization that the denial becomes more effective in the environments that foster a sense of impunity in which his financial and social power reduced the likelihood of being held accountable. This allowed him to [37]:

Refuse to acknowledge the harm he caused to others.
Ignore the moral or legal responsibility.

I n this study, the denial is not just a psychological protection, but it enhances the sense of immunity and becomes part of an individual strategy to maintain control over his environment and social surroundings.

The projection and network enhancement

In Epstein's social networks, which included influential figures and accomplices, the projection employs in conjunction with network reinforcement. Thus, it became possible to [38]:

Attributing unacceptable motives to others (projection) to relieve internal tension.
Creating a social environment that supports the ongoing of the deviant behaviour, as these networks reproduce values or cover which enables the behaviours that violate social rules without accountability.
The network structure acts as an intermediary, giving the deviant behaviour legitimacy within its group, while projection enables it to avoid confronting its own impulses or personal moral pressures.

The division and simplification of moral judgment in an environment of immunity

The mechanism of splitting becomes particularly pronounced in the contexts characterised by impunity and the reinforcement of authority, where the individual may [39]:”

View his actions as “perfectly good” within the logic of his group or network.
Set aside the complex ethical constraints to simplify self-governance.
Construct a rigid binary (self vs. others; right vs. wrong) that minimises the guilt and mitigates internal psychological conflict.

Such simplification facilitates the continuation of the deviant conduct without a critical reflection, showing how splitting as a defense mechanism operates in direct conjunction with social dominance and legal or symbolic immunity.
The summary of the connection

The psychological defense mechanisms (justification, denial, projection, dissociation) represent the mediator that enables the id to act without strong constraints from the superego.
The structural environment of behaviour, involving the power, impact, impunity, and social networks, reinforces the effectiveness of these mechanisms.

In the Jeffrey Epstein’s case, the interplay among the intrinsic motivations, power, and immunity led to the ongoing of complex deviant behaviour, which appeared coordinated and was socially and legally protected. This makes the study of this relationship an ideal model for understanding influence-related deviance.
Model of the Motivational Mechanism in Delinquent Behavior

Mediating Mechanisms
Excitation Reinstating the urge to act
Denial Refusing internal constraints
Projection Blaming others’ motives
Splitting
Good/bad duality

Contextual and Environmental Factors (Right Column)

Impulsivity and Strength → Entry into high-risk situations
Escape from Punishment → Feeling invulnerable
Peer Reinforcement → Supportive environment for deviance

Psychological Drives

Higher Self → Moral standards
Ego → Rational mediator

The Outcome: the deviant Behavior
Psychological Drives (Left Column)

Higher Self → Moral standards
Ego → Rational mediator

Mediating Mechanisms (Center Column)

Excitation → Reinstating the urge to act
Denial → Refusing internal constraints
Projection → Blaming others’ motives
Splitting → Good/bad duality

Contextual and Environmental Factors (Right Column)

Impulsivity and Strength → Entry into high-risk situations
Escape from Punishment → Feeling invulnerable
Peer Reinforcement → Supportive environment for deviance

Outcome (Bottom)

Deviant Behavior

5. Case Analysis: Jeffrey Epstein
The goal of this section is to apply the conceptual framework and the motivational hegemony model in the context of power to the case of Jeffrey Epstein, concentrating on the interaction between the psychological motives, deviant behaviors, and the surrounding social environment. The analysis draws on the publicly accessible documentary sources to provide a precise scientific reading of the behavior while avoiding direct clinical diagnosis.
5.1 The case analysis: the motives of the id and libido in the context of power

The dominance as a main motivational structure

In Freudian theory, the id represents instinctual drives operating according to the pleasure principle and seeking immediate gratification. Interpreted through this framework, the repetitive pattern of behavior attributed to Epstein may reflect the dominance of instinctual drives combined with limited internal moral restraint. The temporal continuity and systematic repetition suggest that the behavior formed a stable pattern rather than isolated impulses, similar to what psychoanalytic literature describes as excessive libidinal investment in specific object [40].
The compulsive repetition and the structure of gratification
Psychoanalytic theory highlights compulsive repetition as a process in which drives are repeatedly enacted even in the absence of immediate pleasure. This concept helps explain how deviant behavior may evolve into a stable and structured pattern rather than remaining an isolated act [41]. In the current case study, the documentary evidence suggests that the behaviour was not merely a search for sexual gratification, but a repetitive practice bearing the character of a ritual or system. It consistent with the idea that the drive, when not reorganised by the ego, turns into a repetitive structure that reproduces itself. This understanding is consistent with the modern perspectives which view the deviant behaviours as patterns with the complex internal organisation, not just random impulses [42].

The libido and Power: The Fusion of Drive and Domination

Some recent analytical approaches indicate that libido is not directed exclusively toward the sexual objects in the narrow sense, but may also be invested in relations of the power and control. Accordingly, the association of the sexual behaviour with the controlling and structural practices (victim selection, organising encounters, network management) reflects the redirection of libidinal energy towards enhancing the dominance. In this context, the gratification is no longer limited to the sexual act itself, but extents to involve the sense of the control and subjugation of the other, making power part of the cycle of gratification. This perspective intersects with the arguments positing that some forms of the deviance are associated with a narcissistic structure aimed at consolidating the self through control over others [43].

The weakness of the superego and erosion of moral restraint

The conceptual framework assumes that the dominance of the id only translates into overt behaviour when the superego is weak or relatively ineffective. The superego, as describing the internal standards and moral conscience, usually acts as an internal constraint on illicit gratification. Nevertheless, the long-term repetition of the behaviour in the absence of a clear internal deterrent may show the erosion of this constraint or its reshaping in a way that enables the action to be justified. The literature indicates that some personality structures with narcissistic or psychopathic traits may exhibit patterns of selective or instrumental conscience, where the moral standards are applied to others but not to the self. [44].

The organisational structure of behaviour: from motive to system

It is not enough to explain the behaviour as an expression of raw motivation; this case study shows the elements of institutional organization (networks, intermediaries, specific places, temporal continuity), which suggests the transfer of motivation from an internal psychological level to a stable social behavioral pattern. From a psychoanalytic perspective, the ego may function as an organizational mechanism that facilitates instinctual drives rather than restraining them. Thus, rational regulation becomes a tool for facilitating gratification, not for controlling it [45].

The convergence of narcissism and authoritarian libido

Some studies demonstrate that the overlap between the pathological narcissism and exploitative behaviour may lead to a pattern in which the other is redefined as a tool for self-gratification. In this context, some of the practices attributed to Epstein can be understood as an expression of an objective relationship regarding reducing the other to a means, which is consistent with what the literature describes as a disturbance of objective relationships in extreme narcissistic structures. In this study, the sexual drive is enhanced via a feeling of superiority and the ability to control the fate of others, which deepens the cycle of internal reinforcement [46].

Testing the first hypothesis in view of the analysis

Considering the aforementioned indicators, the systematic repetition, the investment of libido in power, diminished moral inhibition, the rational organisation of behavior to serve drives, and narcissistic traits, supports the consistency of the first hypothesis of the model: which id dominance, when paired with a weakened superego, permits the formation of stable deviant behavior. Nonetheless, this analysis constitutes a theoretical interpretation grounded in documentary sources, not a clinical diagnosis. Methodological literature in forensic psychology underscores the necessity of differentiating structural behavioral explanations from direct pathological assessments to uphold scientific rigor [47].
5.2 An extensive analysis of the Jeffrey Epstein case in view of the motivational dominance model within the context of power.
Methodological Note: This analysis depends on the documented evidence from the court records, investigative journalistic reports, and official data which provide a theoretical interpretive reading without claiming a direct clinical diagnosis.
First: The temporal structure of the situation as an ascending trajectory of motivational dominance

The level of the social establishment and positioning within elite networks

The facts demonstrated that Epstein moved from the modest educational background to high-level financial circles in New York, where he built a network of relationships with influential political, academic, and economic figures. This position was not simply a professional success; it also offered him with highly valuable social capital. From the perspective of the conceptual model, this level can be explained as the construction of an enabling environment that allows internal motives to move within a low-risk space. Power, in this study, is not understood merely as financial resources, but as a relationship structure that provides symbolic protection and produces informal immunity [48].
In this context, the social position becomes a psychological container that enhances feelings of superiority and exceptionalism, the feelings that are associated in the literature with high narcissistic structures, where self-esteem overlaps with the social privilege. Thus, this makes it easier to redefine moral rules as flexible or transgressible.

Regulating the behaviour and transforming it into a stable pattern

The court documents show that the actions were not random, but rather took an organized form [49]:

The presence of the assistants and intermediaries.
The frequent arrangements within specific locations.
A systematic summons pattern.
A sustained period of time expanding over years.

This pattern reflects the shift of the motive from the level of individual impulse to a micro-social system that serves its gratification. Thus, the ego intervenes in its executive function, but it does not act as a restraint; rather, it serves as an organisational tool in favor of the idIn this context, rational planning appears to sustain rather than restrain instinctual drives.
This transformation exemplifies what the model describes as the rationalisation of deviance: higher-order cognitive capacities are harnessed to maintain behavior that fulfills instinctual drives, thereby deepening the gap between the superego’s moral function and the ego’s operational conduct [50].
Second: The intersection of the libido and power — from sexual gratification to the gratification of control

The power as an extension of libido

The testimonies indicate that the behaviour was not limited to the sexual act itself, but involved obvious factors of control [51]:

Choosing the victims
Imposing the conditions
Controlling the spatial context
Utilizing the intermediaries to facilitate access

This suggests that libido is not merely invested in the body, but also in the act of the domination itself; domination becomes part of the structure of gratification. In the psychoanalysis, this can be understood as a transformation of the instinctual energy into an act that asserts dominance, which provides the actor a sense of superiority and sovereignty.
Within this framework, the other is treated a functional object rather than an independent self, indicating a disturbance in object relations, where the other is reduced to a mere instrument. In this context, the cycle between narcissism and power-driven libido is enhanced [52].
5.3. Exploiting the age and social differences
The court records demonstrate that many of the victims were minors or from vulnerable social backgrounds. This factor is highly significant analytically, as it uncovers that the gratification was rely not only on the sexual desire, but also on an imbalance of power.
The selection of relatively weak individuals enhances the hypothesis that a sense of the dominance was an essential component of the behavioural structure. The wider the power gap, the stronger the sense of control. This brings us back to the model's central premise: when the instinctual motives converge with the social structure that enables for unchecked control, a stable, deviant pattern emerges.
Third: Impunity as a form of psychological enhancement
a) The plea agreement of 2008
One of the most significant turning points in the case was the 2008 plea agreement in Florida, which resulted in a relatively lenient sentence compared to the seriousness of the charges. From a psycho-behavioral perspective, this event shows a powerful reinforcement point.
Partial impunity leads to:

Reduce the impact of the superego (because the system did not punish severely)
Reinforce the sense of exceptionalism
Strengthen the belief in immunity

In this context, experience fails to generate deterrence and instead strengthens the behaviour. Within the framework of the motivational dominance model, the absence of the external checks permits the id to operate with increased assurance, given that the environment implicitly confirms that potential risks can be managed.
Fourth: the social networks as a normalisation mechanism
1. The presence within the political and academic circles
The images, reciprocal visits, and relationships with the influential figures shaped a strong symbolic cover. This presence at formal events or within prestigious academic institutions lent an implicit social legitimacy.
In this framework, the network functions as the follows:

A mechanism for concealment
A source of legitimacy
A deterrent to victims
A means of redefining reality

As the network extends, the deviance becomes less visible and more integrated into the social structure. This aligns with the concept of "network enhancementt" in the conceptual model.
Fifth: The mechanisms of defense in the practical application
1. Justification
In some testimonies, the narratives showed that the downplayed the seriousness of the acts or redefined them as "consensual" relationships. This reflects a reshaping of the action within a subjective logic that reduces the sense of guilt. Thus, the justification acts as a bridge that enables the id to move without a direct clash with the superego.
2. The denial
Continued of public denial or downplaying of accusations represents a form of psychological denial that protects the self-image from collapse. The complete admission means confronting the contradiction among the elitist self-image and actual behavior, a contradiction that threatens psychological cohesion.
3. The division
The dualistic lifestyle (high-status social actor/accused of serious deviance) can be illustrated by a mechanism of splitting, in which the two contradictory images are kept separate without being merged. This enables for the continuation of the high social functioning without internal collapse.
Sixth: The peak and collapse
1. Federal arrest in 2019
Reopening the case and his arrest in New York represented a collapse of the previous protective structure. For the first time, the federal judicial system became a direct party. Thus, the dominance of motives collides with a greater legal authority.
2. Death inside prison
Epstein’s death in a Manhattan detention center (officially ruled a suicide) ended up the procedural process, yet it did not end the questions about the networks and structures surrounding the case. From the model perspective, the end can be understood as a sudden collapse of the control structure, in which the self has moved from a dominance position to a complete helplessness position.
3. A comprehensive analytical conclusion
In the case of collecting the data:

Intense instinctual drives (id dominance)
Weakness or relative inactivity of the superego
Employment of the ego in regulation rather than inhibition
Repeated enhancement throughout impunity
Networks that offer legitimacy and protection
Defense mechanisms that reduce moral tension

A stable, multi-level skewed pattern is formed.

The case is not limited to an individual deviation, yet rather represents a complex interaction between:
Internal psychological structure
An empowering social context
An authoritarian structure that offers immunity
Defensive mechanisms which ensure continuity

This confirms the validity of the motivational hegemony model in the context of power as a multi-layered explanatory framework.
4. First: The motives of the id and libido
A review of the documents and records shows that many of Epstein's actions can be illustrated from the id dominance perception:

The systematic and repetitive sexual behaviours demonstrate a persistent instinctual motive, reflecting a desire unrestrained by moral or social norms.
The practices related to victim control and abuse of the power show that the libido was not channeled throughout the ethical means, yet rather employed to promote the personal and social control.

This confirms the first hypothesis: the dominance of the id and the weakness of the superego enable for the establishment of the deviant behaviour.
5. Second: Weakness the superego and moral dissociation
The documents indicate that Epstein acted with near-total disregard for the ethical standards and laws:

Continuing the exploitative practices in spite of the widespread suspicions and scandals
The ability to reshape the behaviour internally as a "business activity" or "social network".

All of these reflect a weakness of the superego, which is consistent with the fifth hypothesis about the erosion of the superego due to a sense of immunity.
6. Third: the power as a narcissistic compensation mechanism
Evidence indicates that Epstein built a vast network of the political and social impact:

His relationships with prominent political and artistic figures.
Using impact to secure legal immunity.
Exploiting wealth and reputation to strengthen his position

These observations support the second hypothesis, which views the power as a modern mechanism for internal narcissism, and enables for the practice of the deviance without any external resistance.
7. Fourth: the psychosexual fixation and the impacts of the early childhood.
The theoretical psychological analyses indicate that some patterns of persistent the deviant behaviour can be illustrated throughout a psychosexual fixation at an early stage:

Repeated exposure to the same types of the sexual exploitation over many years
The significant difficulty controlling the sexual impulses
Exploiting positions of power to enhance the immature desires

These phenomena are consistent with the third hypothesis and explain the persistence of incomplete motivational patterns in the adult personality.
8. Fifth: The psychological defense mechanisms
The documents enhance the idea that Epstein employed a set of psychological defense mechanisms to reduce his feelings of guilt or moral anxiety:

The justification: describe his behaviour as a social network or an investment in "young talent".
The denial: ignore the harm done to the victims or the laws.
The projection and division: blame the victims or the environment for events, and reducing the moral judgments to an extreme dichotomy.

These mediating mechanisms illustrate how the id was able to exert its impact effectively without interference from the superego.
8. Sixth: The influence of the structural and network environment
The network the of social, economic, and political impact offer an enabling environment for the deviant behaviour:

Limited media coverage of specific events.
Partial legal immunity.
Alliances with economic and political elites.

These observations support the fourth hypothesis regarding the normalisation of the deviance throughout the structure of the power and highlight the key role of the environment in enhancing the persistence of the behaviour.
9. The authoritarian reinforcement loop
The case of Epstein applies the authoritarian reinforcement loop model:

The analysis demonstrates how each point in this series enhanced the next, leading to an escalation of behaviour that continued for many years.
10. The analytical Summary
It can be argued that Epstein's case represents a vivid example of the interaction between the internal motivations and the authoritarian environment; the analysis shows the following:

How the instinctual motives can be turned into effective social behaviour.
How the immunity and influence can erode internal moral controls.
The role of psychological defense mechanisms in enhancing the ongoing of the deviant behaviour.

Therefore, this study provides a practical application of the conceptual framework as well as it proves the usefulness of using Freud's theory to understand cases of the sexual deviance related to the power.

Methodological introduction
This chapter is depended on federal court documents, civil lawsuit transcripts, the 2008 plea agreement, and the 2019 federal indictment. Furthermore, it is based on extensive investigative reports in reputable international newspapers. The analysis adopts a psycho-social explanation approach without claiming a direct clinical diagnosis, while adhering to the facts founded in public records [53].
First: the structural path of the social mobility and the building of symbolic capital
Epstein began working as a teacher in a private school in New York. Shortly afterward, leveraging his personal connections, the young man was able to make a career switch into the financial sector. In due time, he got in touch with the most elite financial institutions, and even set up a company for managing the assets of the most wealthy. Such a position gave him the chance to establish relations with the highest circles of political and academic fields, thus firmly consolidating his image as a businessman of a very high level of influence. Going up the ladder of success, in this particular case, was not only a matter of a change for the better of the professional situation. On the contrary, it also meant the construction of a huge symbolic social immunity, serving as a positive scenario and making the chances for the even earlier accountability minimal [54].
Second: the initial incidents and investigations in Florida
(2005-2007)
The government investigation was officially launched in 2005 in Palm Beach, Florida after a news report told that some younger girls were brought to his house for a money as a reward. Therefore, local law enforcement documentation has shown several evidences of girls who made complaints of hostile and sexual molestation. In addition, the probes brought out the evidence of a constant scheme of middlemen that selecting victims, thereby demonstrating the existence of an organized network rather than a few isolated individuals [55].
Third: plea agreement for the year 2009
In 2008, Epstein entered into a plea agreement with the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida in which he conceded two charges at the state level of soliciting prostitution. As a result, the federal cases against him were dismissed and several of his collaborators were given immunity. He was sentenced to a fairly light sentence in prison which gave him the possibility of work release every day outside of jail. This negotiation however faced a lot of criticism mainly after it was revealed that the victims were not properly informed.
Fourth: reopening of the case and the legal appeals
Back in 2018, a federal court ruled that the 2008 non, prosecution agreement was a breach of victims' rights as per the Crime Victims' Rights Act. The main reason for the court ruling was that the victims had not been adequately informed about the matter. This decision led to the reopening of the case and the coming down of the procedural protection which had earlier kept Epstein away from a wider federal prosecution [56].
Fifth: the 2019 Federal Indictment
According to July 2019, Epstein was charged with federal sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy charges based on alleged events from 2002 to 2005 in New York and Florida. In addition, the indictment described a structured recruitment operation with the financial transfers, meeting schedule, and victims' transportation across state lines that were the most visible signs of its existence. Apart from the individual acts, these elements indicate a certain organizing and methodical side of the behaviour, which is even pointing towards a more established pattern of the activity [57].
Sixth: the property and spatial structure of behavior
According to the investigations, Epstein had multiple luxurious residences in New York Florida Paris, as well as a private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands. Court papers uncovered that a number of these locations were exploited in the offenses committed by him. Such geographical scattering indicates an adaptable modus operandi which allows the prolongation of the criminal activity at the same time the highest level of secrecy is preserved [58].
Seventh: the civil certificates and acknowledgments
In later civil lawsuits, several victims gave very detailed testimonies outlining the recruitment pattern, the role of middlemen, and the means through which silence was enforced, including the use of financial confidentiality agreements. These testimonies evidence the fact that such conduct was based on the repeated forging of trust and the taking advantage of social vulnerability [59].
Eighth: the arrest, detention, and death
Epstein was taken into custody on July 6 2019 at Teterboro Airport, New Jersey and was brought to the Manhattan Detention Center. On August 10 2019 he was found dead in his cell and the New York City Medical Examiner's Office determined the cause of death as suicide by hanging. This event sparked a lot of concerns about monitoring methods, however the official inquiries found no evidence of any criminal act [60].
Ninth: the psycho-structural analysis of the case
The sequence of events demonstrates a complex interaction between the internal motivations and an enabling power context. The temporal continuity, the networked organisation of the activities, and the partial impunity resulting from the 2008 agreement all enhance the hypothesis that the social and political environment contributed to the prolongation of the behaviour. Furthermore, the way of targeting minors in the contexts of the social vulnerability reflects a structural imbalance in power in which the desire for domination is intertwined.
From the perspective of the motivational dominance model, it can be argued that the psychological structure (intense motives) met with a social structure that offers protection, and with legal procedural loopholes, to produce a stable pattern that expands over the years.
Tenth: the synthetic conclusion
The case study shows that the phenomenon cannot be illustrated as an isolated individual deviation, yet rather as the result of a multi-level interaction between [61]:

1. Internal motivation structure
2. High economic resources
3. Influential social networks
4. Controversial prosecution decisions
5. Gaps in the application of justice

The integration of these factors contributed to the formation of what could be called a "temporary immunity structure," until it collapsed under the pressure of federal review in 2019.
6. Comparative Analysis: Epstein and Weinstein
6.1 The methodological introduction
This section evaluates the explanatory validity of the Motivational Dominance Model by comparing the Epstein and Weinstein cases. Although they occur in different fields—financial–political networks and the film industry both cases reveal similar patterns of power concentration, deviant behavior, and institutional protection mechanisms, yet the share various characteristics such as: (1) a high concentration within the hierarchy of power, (2) a pattern of sexually deviant behavior extending over time, (3) the presence of networked or institutional protection mechanisms, and (4) a sudden collapse following legal and/or media shifts. Thus, the analysis is based on the federal indictments, judicial rulings, and documented investigative reports [62].
First: the power structure and the type of social capital
In the case of Epstein, the power was consolidated throughout financial-political capital and cross-sectoral elite networks, which offered him with the ability to move within highly secure, closed spaces, involving the relationships with the prominent political and academic figures. This positioning enhanced a “symbolic immunity” which reduced the likelihood of early accountability, especially in view of the 2008 agreement that dropped potential federal prosecutions and granted immunity to the collaborators [63].
In contrast, the Weinstein's power rested on the corporate capital within the film industry, in which he held pivotal positions in influential production firms, granting him decision-making power over employment, funding, and awards. This type of power created direct professional dependence for potential victims and fostered an environment of silence supported by financial settlements and confidential agreements prior to 2017. [64]
Second: the behavioral and organisational patterns
The federal indictment against Epstein (2019) showed an organised form of recruiting minors between 2002–2005, including intermediaries, scheduled meetings, financial transfers, and the use of various properties (New York, Florida, and others). This reflects a stable operational structure that exceeds individual impulsivity to a sustained systemic pattern [65].
While, in the Weinstein case, the testimonies and convictions in New York (2020) uncovered a recurring way of luring adult women to hotel rooms or private offices under the guise of professional meetings, then exploiting the imbalances of power. Despite the fact that there was no network of intermediaries in the same sense, the institutional structure of the industry performed an equivalent allowing function throughout the fear of professional exclusion [66].
Third: the age differences and vulnerability
Epstein’s case was distinguished by the presence of underage victims, as pointed out in the indictments and civil lawsuits, an element that doubles the imbalance of the power and introduces a more serious legal dimension (sexual trafficking of minors). Within the framework of the model, this structural imbalance of power is considered as an amplification of libido throughout the control over socially vulnerable groups [67].
In the case of Weinstein, the victims were usually adults, but in positions of apparent professional dependency (aspiring young actresses, female employees), in which the control over employment opportunities represented a mechanism of pressure. Therefore, the control is not relied on merely the age but on professional capital, which confirms that “motivational dominance” may feed on any severe imbalance of power, even in the case of reaching the legal age of majority [68].
Fourth: the protection mechanisms and the impunity
The 2008 Florida agreement marked a turning point in the case of Epstein; the non-prosecution agreement has granted him broad immunity, with a relatively lenient sentence. This was then illustrated by the legal scholars as a procedural failure to notify the victims in accordance with the Victims’ Rights Act. This event is offered a structural 'reinforcement' of impunity which resulting in weakening the effect of external deterrence [69].
Whereas, In the case of Weinstein, the collapse was preceded by a wave of financial settlements and secret agreements (NDAs) which contributed to the perpetuation of silence. With the establish of the (MeToo) movement in 2017, the mechanisms of protection broke down gradually under the increasing media and judicial pressure which reflects a shift in the environment from empowerment to accountability.
Fifth: the collapse period and the procedural shift
Epstein was arrested on July 6, 2019, at Teterboro Airport on new federal charges, and he died on August 10, 2019, at the Manhattan detention centre; the medical examiner ruled his death a suicide. The federal arrest marked a shift from localised immunity to broad national accountability.
On the other hand, in 2020, Weinstein was convicted in New York iand sentenced to prison. Later, in 2022, he convicted in California. This final judicial conviction (with subsequent appeals) reveals a complete breakdown of the institutional authority that had long provided cover [70].
Sixth: the comparative structural psychoanalysis
The comparison indicates that the instinct by itself does not explain the temporal persistence as the behavioral stability requires a structure of enablement. In Epstein’s case, elite networks and procedural arrangements acted as an 'external amplifier' that reduced the cost of risk. In Weinstein’s case, the professional institution and its role in controlling opportunities played a similar function, thoughout with a various medium (profession rather than money–politics) [71].
From the perspective of the motivational hegemony model, the two cases converge in: (1) the organisational use of the ego to emply the motive, (2) the disabling of the superego by external reinforcement, and (3) the operation of defense mechanisms (denial, rationalisation, silencing) within the power environments. They differ in the nature of the power field (closed elitist versus relatively open industry) as well as in the composition of the victims (minors versus professionally dependent adults) [72].
Seventh: the synthetic summary
The comparison ensures that the sexual deviance that expands over time in the power context is not understood as an isolated individual act, rather as the result of a three-way interaction as follows [73]:

1. Condense internal pressure
2. A power structure that generates a severe imbalance of power
3. Protection mechanisms that reduce the likelihood of accountability until the moment of environmental transition (legally/media).

Accordingly, the comparative analysis enhances the validity of the motivational dominance model in the power context as a multi-level framework that illustrates the structural similarity across different fields of power, while retaining sensitivity to contextual differences.
6.2 The legal supplement to the case of Jeffrey Epstein
The legal trajectory of the Epstein case provides an important institutional context for the psycho-social analysis presented in this study. The Palm Beach investigation initiated in 2005 revealed testimonies from underage victims and evidence suggesting the existence of a recruitment network involving intermediaries [74][75].
A major turning point occurred in 2008 with the controversial non-prosecution agreement reached with federal prosecutors in Florida. The agreement resulted in the dismissal of potential federal charges and granted immunity to several associates, which later became the subject of extensive legal and public criticism [76].
In 2019, a federal court determined that the earlier agreement had violated the Crime Victims’ Rights Act because victims had not been properly informed, reopening legal scrutiny of the case [77-78]. Subsequently, Epstein was indicted in July 2019 on federal charges related to sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy based on incidents alleged to have occurred in New York and Florida [79-80].
These developments illustrate how institutional responses evolved over time and how earlier procedural decisions may have contributed to the temporary persistence of the deviant behavioral patterns analyzed in this research.
7. Discussion
This section presents the explanations of the results from the analysis of Jeffrey Epstein’s case, and connecting them to the conceptual model and Sigmund Freud’s theory, while highlighting the psychological and social dimensions of power and deviance.
First: connecting the internal motivations with the overt behavior
The study revealed that the dominance of the id and repressed libido, along with a weak superego, shaped a psychological basis for the deviant behaviour.
This confirms that the sexual deviance connected to the power is not solely a conscious choice, but rather the result of an interaction between:

Second: The impact of the power and the structural environment

The findings suggest that environments characterized by influence and perceived immunity weaken internal moral regulation and enable deviant behavior to persist and escalate.
It enhances the senses of narcissism and superiority.

This interaction between the impact and behaviour reveals that examining the deviance in the elite requires connecting the psychoanalysis to the social and political context, and not limiting it to merely the individual.
Third: Psychological defense mechanisms as a mediator
Psychological defense mechanisms played a central role in enabling Epstein to reduce feelings of guilt, reinterpret his behavior, and maintain deviant behavioral patterns. This highlights the importance of incorporating psychological mediators into analyses of power-related deviance.
Fourth: the nutritional cycle of the deviant behavior
The authoritarian enhancement loop explained how the deviant behaviour can become frequent and sustained thanks to the interaction between impunity and the reinforcement of a sense of absolute power.
This finding highlights the role of external reinforcement in sustaining deviant behavior within power structures.
Fifth: Theoretical contribution
This study contributes to the literature in three ways:

It applies Freudian psychoanalytic theory to contemporary cases of elite deviance.
It integrates psychoanalytic analysis with sociological perspectives on power structures.
It proposes a conceptual framework applicable to other cases of power-related deviance.

8. Conclusion
This research identifies that sexual deviance at high echelons of power cannot be explained purely in terms of psychological deficits of the individual. It is rather viewed as the outcome of the interplay between psychological dynamics and structural factors associated with reduced accountability.
Jeffrey Epstein is an example of how extreme primal urges, diminished conscience, and powerful networks that support can come together to create a long, term deviant pattern of behavior.
The Motivational Dominance Model outlined here offers a theoretical structure for discussing other cases where the psychological needs and the institutional power overlap. By combining psychoanalytic insights and sociological viewpoints on power at the top, this paper has made a contribution to the cross, disciplinary study of political psychology and the deviance of the elite.
The Future Recommendations

Carrying out comparative studies of more influential cases to see how far the conceptual model can be used.
Broadening the range of the research to include the cultural and institutional elements that cause the continuation of deviance.
Creating the qualitative measurement tool that links the single psychoanalytic interpretation with the societal and environmental context of the elite.

References

References
1. Robin Gomila, Elizabeth Levy Paluck, The Social and Psychological Characteristics of Norm Deviants: A Field, Study in a Small Cohesive University Campus, Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2020, https://d-nb.info/1229755772/34?utm
2. Cedric Michel , Public Knowledge and Sentiments about Elite Deviance, University of South Florida , USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 2014, https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6271&context=etd&utm
3. John Schopler, (10 April 2008)Social Power, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,Volume 2, 1965, Pages 177-218, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60106-9
4. Liu Z, Dong Y. Unveiling the formation mechanism of workplace deviance among front-line star nurses. Sci Rep. 2025 Dec 3;15(1):43063. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-27135-1. PMID: 41339646; PMCID: PMC12675748. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-27135-1
5. Lee MY, Badura KL, Baker B, Sherf EN. Perceived personal and contextual impunity: Conceptualization, antecedents, and implications for workplace misconduct. J Appl Psychol. 2024 Sep;109(9):1377-1396. doi: 10.1037/apl0001196. Epub 2024 Apr 15. PMID: 38619471. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001196
6. Kim, L. Id, libidinal economy, and social media: a hypothetical model. Psychoanal Cult Soc 30, 875–886 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41282-025-00575-4
7. Vaillant GE. Ego mechanisms of defense and personality psychopathology. J Abnorm Psychol. 1994 Feb;103(1):44-50. doi: 10.1037//0021-843x.103.1.44. PMID: 8040479. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-843x.103.1.44
8. Qiong, L. (2024). Superego. In: Kan, Z. (eds) The ECPH Encyclopedia of Psychology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7874-4_98
9. Bailey R, Pico J. Defense Mechanisms. . Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559106/?utm
10. Cramer, P. (2015). Defense Mechanisms: 40 Years of Empirical Research. Journal of Personality Assessment, 97(2), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2014.947997
11. Qiong, L. (2024). Superego. In: Kan, Z. (eds) The ECPH Encyclopedia of Psychology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-7874-4_98
12. Westen D. The scientific status of unconscious processes: is Freud really dead? J Am Psychoanal Assoc. 1999 Fall;47(4):1061-106. doi: 10.1177/000306519904700404. PMID: 10650551. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000306519904700404
13. John Schopler, (10 April 2008)Social Power, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,Volume 2, 1965, Pages 177-218, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60106-9
14. Robin Gomila, Elizabeth Levy Paluck, The Social and Psychological Characteristics of Norm Deviants: A Field, Study in a Small Cohesive University Campus, Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2020, https://d-nb.info/1229755772/34?utm
15. Cedric Michel , Public Knowledge and Sentiments about Elite Deviance, University of South Florida , USF Tampa Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 2014, https://digitalcommons.usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=6271&context=etd&utm
16. John Schopler, (10 April 2008)Social Power, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology,Volume 2, 1965, Pages 177-218, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60106-9
17. Liu Z, Dong Y. Unveiling the formation mechanism of workplace deviance among front-line star nurses. Sci Rep. 2025 Dec 3;15(1):43063. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-27135-1. PMID: 41339646; PMCID: PMC12675748. doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-27135-1
18. Lee MY, Badura KL, Baker B, Sherf EN. Perceived personal and contextual impunity: Conceptualization, antecedents, and implications for workplace misconduct. J Appl Psychol. 2024 Sep;109(9):1377-1396. doi: 10.1037/apl0001196. Epub 2024 Apr 15. PMID: 38619471. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0001196
19. Cribari-Neto, F., Santos, M.A.F.L. An empirical analysis of worldwide impunity. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11, 1285 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03803-x
20. MA. Do Minh HoangMA. Pham Phuong Lan, 2024, Impact of Social Network Use on Deviant Behavior of Young Workers, August 2024International Journal of Social Science and Human Research 7(08), DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i08-94
21. Jancsics, D. (2026). Policy Implications of Family Corruption. In: Family Corruption in Business and Public Administration. Political Corruption and Governance. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-08298-5_8
22. Goetz, R., Marco, J. Social networks, norm-enforcing ties and cooperation. J Econ Interact Coord 20, 371–412 (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-024-00435-x
23. Michelle Inderbitzin, Kristin A. Bates and Randy R. Gainey,August 2020, Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological Perspective, Sage Edge, Study Site Homepage, Link: https://edge.sagepub.com/inderbitzin3e?utm
24. Bailey R, Pico J. Defense Mechanisms. . Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK559106/?utm
25. Freud and the Psychodynamic Perspective,Learning Objectives, OpenStax, https://openstax.org/books/psychology-2e/pages/11-2-freud-and-the-psychodynamic-perspective?utm
26. Saul McLeod, Id, Ego, and Superego, Psychology » Freudian Psychology, March 6, 2026, Simply Psychology, Link: https://www.simplypsychology.org/psyche.html?utm
27. Tony Ramos, Rationalization as a Defense Mechanism, cognitive Psychology News Journal, Feb 2025, https://journalofcognitivepsychology.com/rationalization-as-a-defense-mechanism/?utm
28. Cramer, P. (2015). Defense Mechanisms: 40 Years of Empirical Research. Journal of Personality Assessment, 97(2), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223891.2014.947997
29. Cramer, P. (2006). Protecting the self: Defense mechanisms in action. The Guilford Press. Link: https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2006-08215-000
30. Vaillant GE. Adaptive mental mechanisms. Their role in a positive psychology. Am Psychol. 2000 Jan;55(1):89-98. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.89. PMID: 11392869 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.89
31. Vaillant GE. Adaptive mental mechanisms. Their role in a positive psychology. Am Psychol. 2000 Jan;55(1):89-98. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.89. PMID: 11392869 . DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066x.55.1.89
32. Kernberg, O. F. (1975). Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism. Jason Aronson, Link: https://www.scribd.com/document/698740528/Otto-F-Kernberg-Borderline-Conditions-and-Pathological-Narcissism-2000-Jason-Aronson-Inc-libgen-lc-1-001-094
33. Kernberg, O.F. (1995). Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism. Lanham: Jason Aronson, Inc.. Retrieved February 26, 2026, from http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9798216436638
34. Kernberg, O.F. (1995). Borderline Conditions and Pathological Narcissism. Lanham: Jason Aronson, Inc.. Retrieved February 26, 2026, from http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9798216436638
35. Lingiardi V, Madeddu F. Revisiting defense mechanisms in contemporary clinical practice: evidence and perspectives. Res Psychother. 2025 Dec 31;28(3):877. doi: 10.4081/ripppo.2025.877. Epub 2025 Dec 22. PMID: 41427644; PMCID: PMC12878825. doi: https://doi.org/10.4081/ripppo.2025.877
36. Vaughan, D. (1997) The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press, Chicago. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226346960.001.0001
37. John Braithwaite, Restorative Justice and Responsive Regulation, Publisher: Oxford University Press, January 2002, Link: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/304475970_Restorative_Justice_and_Responsive_Regulation
38. Ronald S. Burt, The Network Structure Of Social Capital, Research in Organizational Behavior, Volume 22, 2000, P 345-423, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(00)22009-1
39. KERNBERG, O. (1986). Severe Personality Disorders: Psychotherapeutic Strategies. Yale University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt32bf53
40. Westen, D. (1998). The scientific legacy of Sigmund Freud: Toward a psychodynamically informed psychological science. Psychological Bulletin, 124(3), 333–371. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.333
41. Kernberg, O. F. (2004). Aggressivity, narcissism, and self-destructiveness in the psychotherapeutic relationship. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300211993/aggressivity-narcissism-and-self-destructiveness-in-the-psychotherapeutic-relationship/
42. Gabbard, G. O. (2005). Psychodynamic psychiatry in clinical practice and the problem of narcissistic pathology. American Journal of Psychiatry. https://dokumen.pub/psychodynamic-psychiatry-in-clinical-practice-fifth-edition-9781585624430-1585624438.html
43. Patrick CJ, Fowles DC, Krueger RF. Triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy: developmental origins of disinhibition, boldness, and meanness. Dev Psychopathol. 2009 Summer;21(3):913-38. doi: 10.1017/S0954579409000492. PMID: 19583890. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579409000492
44. Cramer, P. (2006). Protecting the self: Defense mechanisms in action. Journal of Personality. DOI: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED489537
45. Ronningstam E. Narcissistic personality disorder: a current review. Curr Psychiatry Rep. 2010 Feb;12(1):68-75. PMID: 20425313. Doi: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-009-0084-z
46. Meloy JR. Empirical basis and forensic application of affective and predatory violence. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2006 Jun-Jul;40(6-7):539-47. doi: 10.1080/j.1440-1614.2006.01837.x. PMID: 16756578. Doi: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2006.01837.x
47. Jeffrey Epstein: Pedophiles, Prosecutors, and Power , Blanche Bong Cook, The Journal of Gender, Race & Justice . 26:2023, https://jgrj.law.uiowa.edu/sites/jgrj.law.uiowa.edu/files/2023-05/JGRJ%2026.2_Cook_1_0.pdf?utm
48. Dixon, S. (2025). Child sexual exploitation (CSE) networks: reassembling structure and activity. Journal of Sexual Aggression, 31(3), 396–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/13552600.2024.2374076
49. Billen E, Garofalo C, Weller JA, et al. Bidirectional associations between self-regulation and deviance from adolescence to adulthood. Development and Psychopathology. 2022;34(1):335-344. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579420000656
50. Kalra G, Bhugra D. Sexual violence against women: Understanding cross-cultural intersections. Indian J Psychiatry. 2013 Jul;55(3):244-9. PMID: 24082244; PMCID: PMC3777345. doi: https://doi.org/10.4103/0019-5545.117139
51. Frederick Toates, Wineke Smi, Jan Willem van den Berg,2017. A framework for understanding sexual violence: Incentive-motivation and hierarchical control, Volume 34, May 2017, Pages 238-253, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2017.01.001
52. United States v. Epstein, Indictment, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (2019). https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/programs/victim-witness-services/united-states-v-jeffrey-epstein-19-cr-490-rmb
53. Stewart, J. B., & Goldstein, M. (2019). The rise and fall of Jeffrey Epstein. The New York Times. https://books.google.jo/books/about/The_Rise_And_Fall_Of_Jeffrey_Epstein.html?id=8uOZEQAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y
54. Palm Beach Police Department Report (2005), Case Files Related to Jeffrey Epstein Investigation. https://abcnews.com/images/WNT/Palm_Beach_Records_Epstein.pdf
55. Office of the United States Attorney, Southern District of Florida, Non-Prosecution Agreement (2008). https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6184602-Jeffrey-Epstein-non-prosecution-agreement/
56. Brown v. United States, 411 F. Supp. 3d 1338 (S.D. Fla. 2019). https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-6389/250639/20221221150851739_Brown%20-%20Cert%20Petition%20AS_FILED.pdf
57. United States v. Epstein, Criminal Complaint (2019), SDNY. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/programs/victim-witness-services/united-states-v-jeffrey-epstein-19-cr-490-rmb
58. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Property and Evidence Inventory, 2019. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/topic-pages/property-crime
59. Giuffre v. Epstein, Civil Deposition Records (2016), U.S. District Court. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/4355835/giuffre-v-maxwell/
60. Investigation and Review of the Federal Bureau of Prisons’ Custody, Care, and Supervision of Jeffrey Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York, New York, INVESTIGATIONS DIVISION 23-085, JUNE 2023, https://oig.justice.gov/sites/default/files/reports/23-085.pdf
61. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Professional Responsibility Report on Epstein Matter (2020). https://www.justice.gov/opr/page/file/1336471/dl
62. United States v. Epstein, Indictment, SDNY (2019). https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/programs/victim-witness-services/united-states-v-jeffrey-epstein-19-cr-490-rmb
63. Office of the U.S. Attorney, Southern District of Florida, Non-Prosecution Agreement (2008). https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6184602-Jeffrey-Epstein-non-prosecution-agreement/
64. Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, Harvey Weinstein Paid Off Sexual Harassment Accusers for Decades,New york times, Oct. 5, 2017. Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations.html
65. Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, Harvey Weinstein Paid Off Sexual Harassment Accusers for Decades, 5 Oct 2017. Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/05/us/harvey-weinstein-harassment-allegations.html
66. United States v. Epstein, Criminal Complaint (2019), SDNY. https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/programs/victim-witness-services/united-states-v-jeffrey-epstein-19-cr-490-rmb
67. People v. Weinstein, Supreme Court of the State of New York (2020) – Judgment of Conviction. https://www.nycourts.gov/courts/ad1/calendar/List_Word/2022/06_Jun/02/PDF/People%20%20v%20%20Harvey%20Weinstein%20(2020-00590%20OPN).pdf
68. VIA ECF The Honorable Loretta A. Preska District Court Judge United States District Court Southern District of New York 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007, January 3, 2024, BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER, https://uploads.guim.co.uk/2024/01/04/Final_Epstein_documents.pdf
69. Harvey Weinstein’s New York Conviction Is Overturned, 25 Apr 2024, Link: https://www.nytimes.com/live/2024/04/25/nyregion/harvey-weinstein-appeal
70. Brown v. United States, 411 F. Supp. 3d 1338 (S.D. Fla. 2019). https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-6389/250639/20221221150851739_Brown%20-%20Cert%20Petition%20AS_FILED.pdf
71. Ronan Farrow, From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories, A Reporter at Large, The New yorker, October 10, 2017, https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/from-aggressive-overtures-to-sexual-assault-harvey-weinsteins-accusers-tell-their-stories
72. People v. Weinstein (2020); California v. Weinstein (2022). https://law.justia.com/cases/new-york/court-of-appeals/2024/24.html
73. Connie Bruck, Alan Dershowitz, Devil’s Advocate,The noted lawyer’s long, controversial career—and the accusations against him, Annals of Law, July 29, 2019, The New Yorker, https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/08/05/alan-dershowitz-devils-advocate
74. Kantor, J., & Twohey, M. (2019). She Said: Breaking the Sexual Harassment Story That Helped Ignite a Movement Hardcover – September 10, 2019, https://www.amazon.com/She-Said-Breaking-Harassment-Movement/dp/0525560343
75. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Professional Responsibility Report on the Epstein Matter (2020). https://www.justice.gov/opr/page/file/1336471/dl
76. Hannah Phillips, Who warned about Epstein years before 2005 probe? What the files show, The Palm Beach Post, Feb. 17, 2026, https://www.palmbeachpost.com/story/news/crime/2026/02/17/epstein-files-show-reports-palm-beach-police-before-2005-investigation/88666940007/
77. Hannah Phillips, Who warned about Epstein years before 2005 probe? What the files show, The Palm Beach Post, Feb. 17, 2026, https://www.palmbeachpost.com/story/news/crime/2026/02/17/epstein-files-show-reports-palm-beach-police-before-2005-investigation/88666940007/
78. Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement, The 2008 non-prosecution agreement between federal prosecutors in Florida and Jeffrey Epstein, 62Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-62 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016, Link: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6184602-Jeffrey-Epstein-non-prosecution-agreement/
79. Jeffrey Epstein non-prosecution agreement, The 2008 non-prosecution agreement between federal prosecutors in Florida and Jeffrey Epstein, 62Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 361-62 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2016, Link: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6184602-Jeffrey-Epstein-non-prosecution-agreement/
80. No. 22- IN THE Supreme Court of the United States _JUSTIN RASHAAD BROWN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent _On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit- PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI_ HEIDI FREESE JEFFREY T. GREEN* RONALD KRAUSE PETER BRULAND FEDERAL PUBLIC DREW LANGAN†, XIAO WANG. Link: https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/22/22-6389/250639/20221221150851739_Brown%20-%20Cert%20Petition%20AS_FILED.pdf
Article history

Received : Feb 10, 2026

Revised : Feb 12, 2026

Accepted : Mar 05, 2026
Authors Affiliations

Justin L. Robinson 1, William S. Russell 2, Mitchell B. Darnell 3, Olson P. Mizock 4

(1) Comprehensive Assessment and Intervention Program, Department of Psychology, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, USA. Email: Jus.robinson@umd.edu

(2) School of Education, William and Mary, Williamsburg, VA, USA, Email: williamrussel@wm.edu

(3) School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences, University of Reading, Reading, UK, Email: darl@soton.ac.uk

(4) Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Neurosciences, McMaster University, USA, Email: olson@fas.harvard.edu

* Corresponding Author: Justin L. Robinson, Jus.robinson@umd.edu

Ethics declarations

Acknowledgment	None
Author Contribution	All authors contributed equally to the main contributor to this paper. All authors read and approved the final paper.
Conflicts of Interest	“The authors declare no conflict of interest.”
Funding	“This research received no external funding”

This is an open-access article under the CC–BY-SA license. .

How to cite

Robinson, J. L., Russell, W. S., Darnell, M. B., & Mizock, O. P. (2026). Power, desire, and elite deviance: A psycho-social analysis of the Jeffrey Epstein case through Freudian theory. Al-Biruni Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 4(3), 46–85. https://doi.org/10.64440/BIRUNI/BIR0020

References

Article history

Authors Affiliations

Ethics declarations

How to cite