So hypothetically, people are dying from some easily-cured disease (this part is not the hypothetical), and a corrupt person wants to save their lives in order to "buy legitimacy". We must righteously prevent that person from doing good in the world, because it will complicate people's view of the person? Basically you're proposing to do an evil thing for a "greater good".
Hypothetically that corrupt person might want to engage in eugenics of some sort. Let’s simply keep dirty money out of legit spaces or we might find mafia as a benefactor in some cases. As some mentioned here, the money Epstein donated was a drop in the bucket and insignificant but to him the ifluence he got in exchange was priceless
If you're meaning 'a convicted criminal guilty of a heinous crime' when you say "corrupt person" then why do we even allow them the ability to continue financially such that they can buy an appearance of legitimacy. Release them from prison with access to basic necessities (a half way house) and confiscate the rest - then the demos can direct the money to research without tainting it?
Do you currently think that Epstein is legitimate because of his past donations? Harvard rejected his donations after his convictions. Who thinks he is legit?
