Did anyone in this thread read the article?

According to the Montana Standard, after his name surfaced in the released files, Horner posted, and later deleted, a social media statement calling his decision to pursue Epstein’s support an extremely poor judgment. He said that while he knew Epstein had been convicted of soliciting prostitution, he was unaware of Epstein’s broader sex trafficking operation until years later.

Horner wrote that his visit involved only Epstein, staff, and several women introduced as college students. He said Epstein donated $10,000 toward a 2012 DinoChicken conference but otherwise declined to fund his research. “There was nothing weird, inappropriate, or out of the ordinary,” Horner said in the statement.

The Society of Vertebrate Paleontology released a notice to members last week, cautioning that inclusion in the Epstein files does not alone imply misconduct.

Those are sketchy circumstances, I think a ban from events is more than fair under the circumstances. Normally I would expect a ban like this to be lifted once feds completed their investigation (assuming no wrongdoing occurred), but obviously the feds aren't interested in investigating, so we may not get the chance to know whether or not there's more to this.

I think it's fair to expect the justice system to pursue "innocent before proven guilty", but private organizations ban and/or suspend members all the time due to credible accusations, even if they haven't been convicted in a court of law.