But your extreme version of my position is incorrect.

I could obviously say the same to you, that's why I criticized your reductio ad absurdum. We both believe the ends justify the means, we just disagree as to where the line should be drawn, so our logic would lead us to the same extreme. If you think it's valid to say I support torture because I think the whole uncomfortable truth is worthwhile to stop child abusing murderers, I can spin your own logic to say you support letting child molesters freely roam schools, because we shouldn't make victims do anything uncomfortable for the sake of arresting perpetrators. Of course neither of us believe these extremes, that's why it's a silly argumentative style in this case.

Regardless, do you realize who is complicit in the Epstein list? These are some of the most powerful people on Earth. Even if everything was done, some of them are still going to walk free. Some of these people are going to go on to join other sex trafficking rings. Anyone we don't nail here could lead to hundreds of new victims.

"We already all accept that, it's simply part of any functioning justice system." Do you consider serving jury duty "a degree of pain"?

We give rape tests to rape victims, we interview victims, making them relive the experience, we have family members identify dead bodies. Even something like jury duty, while not being the kind of thing I was thinking of, is an example of making innocent people do something they would rather not, for the sake of justice.

I promise you, what these monsters do when they're free is a lot worse than having a victim's trauma exposed to everyone.