Ghislaine Maxwell Demands Immunity From Congress Before Appearing Before Them (7/30/25)

Ghislaine Maxwell’s efforts to secure a retrial faced daunting legal obstacles from the start. One central hurdle was proving that a significant procedural or constitutional error occurred during her original trial—mere disagreement with the result isn’t enough on appeal. Her team advanced arguments such as a juror failing to disclose a history of sexual abuse (which Maxwell’s lawyers claimed influenced deliberations) and prosecutorial overreach in applying “conscious avoidance” instructions to the jury. But trial judges largely rejected those arguments, and appellate courts are historically very deferential to trial-level rulings on admissibility, jury selection, and instructional issues.On appeal to the Second Circuit, Ghislaine Maxwell challenged multiple elements of her conviction. Among her central arguments was that Jeffrey Epstein’s 2007 non-prosecution agreement (NPA) with the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida included a clause protecting co-conspirators, and that it should have shielded her from prosecution in New York. She contended that because the NPA referred broadly to “the United States” (rather than naming a specific district), it was intended to bind all federal prosecutors, not just those in Florida. She also raised claims about the statute of limitations, alleged juror nondisclosure, potential constructive amendment of her indictment, and that her sentence was not procedurally reasonable.The Second Circuit rejected all those arguments and affirmed the conviction. It held that the NPA did not bind the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York, reasoning that unless an agreement “affirmatively shows” an intent to bind beyond its district, it is limited to the district in which it was made. The court also determined that the indictment was timely, that no abuse of discretion occurred in handling jury or procedural questions, and that Maxwell’s sentence was lawful under the relevant standards.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

11 Loka 40min

In 2005, the Palm Beach Police Department initiated an investigation into financier Jeffrey Epstein after a 14-year-old girl reported being paid for a massage that led to sexual activity at his mansion. The investigation uncovered a pattern where Epstein allegedly used personal assistants to recruit underage girls for "massages," which often escalated to sexual encounters. Evidence included testimonies from victims and witnesses, as well as items found during a search of Epstein's residence, such as hidden cameras and photographs of young girls. Despite the substantial evidence, when the case was presented to a Palm Beach County grand jury in July 2006, it resulted in a single charge of felony solicitation of prostitution.Dissatisfied with the outcome, Police Chief Michael Reiter sought federal assistance, leading to an FBI investigation that identified multiple victims and corroborating details of abuse. However, in 2008, Epstein secured a controversial non-prosecution agreement, pleading guilty to lesser state charges and serving a 13-month jail sentence with work-release privileges. This plea deal has been widely criticized for its leniency and lack of transparency, especially given that prosecutors were aware of allegations involving victims as young as 14 years old​,to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsources:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

11 Loka 22min

In 2005, the Palm Beach Police Department initiated an investigation into financier Jeffrey Epstein after a 14-year-old girl reported being paid for a massage that led to sexual activity at his mansion. The investigation uncovered a pattern where Epstein allegedly used personal assistants to recruit underage girls for "massages," which often escalated to sexual encounters. Evidence included testimonies from victims and witnesses, as well as items found during a search of Epstein's residence, such as hidden cameras and photographs of young girls. Despite the substantial evidence, when the case was presented to a Palm Beach County grand jury in July 2006, it resulted in a single charge of felony solicitation of prostitution.Dissatisfied with the outcome, Police Chief Michael Reiter sought federal assistance, leading to an FBI investigation that identified multiple victims and corroborating details of abuse. However, in 2008, Epstein secured a controversial non-prosecution agreement, pleading guilty to lesser state charges and serving a 13-month jail sentence with work-release privileges. This plea deal has been widely criticized for its leniency and lack of transparency, especially given that prosecutors were aware of allegations involving victims as young as 14 years old​,to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsources:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

11 Loka 31min

In 2005, the Palm Beach Police Department initiated an investigation into financier Jeffrey Epstein after a 14-year-old girl reported being paid for a massage that led to sexual activity at his mansion. The investigation uncovered a pattern where Epstein allegedly used personal assistants to recruit underage girls for "massages," which often escalated to sexual encounters. Evidence included testimonies from victims and witnesses, as well as items found during a search of Epstein's residence, such as hidden cameras and photographs of young girls. Despite the substantial evidence, when the case was presented to a Palm Beach County grand jury in July 2006, it resulted in a single charge of felony solicitation of prostitution.Dissatisfied with the outcome, Police Chief Michael Reiter sought federal assistance, leading to an FBI investigation that identified multiple victims and corroborating details of abuse. However, in 2008, Epstein secured a controversial non-prosecution agreement, pleading guilty to lesser state charges and serving a 13-month jail sentence with work-release privileges. This plea deal has been widely criticized for its leniency and lack of transparency, especially given that prosecutors were aware of allegations involving victims as young as 14 years old​,to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsources:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

11 Loka 27min

In 2005, the Palm Beach Police Department initiated an investigation into financier Jeffrey Epstein after a 14-year-old girl reported being paid for a massage that led to sexual activity at his mansion. The investigation uncovered a pattern where Epstein allegedly used personal assistants to recruit underage girls for "massages," which often escalated to sexual encounters. Evidence included testimonies from victims and witnesses, as well as items found during a search of Epstein's residence, such as hidden cameras and photographs of young girls. Despite the substantial evidence, when the case was presented to a Palm Beach County grand jury in July 2006, it resulted in a single charge of felony solicitation of prostitution.Dissatisfied with the outcome, Police Chief Michael Reiter sought federal assistance, leading to an FBI investigation that identified multiple victims and corroborating details of abuse. However, in 2008, Epstein secured a controversial non-prosecution agreement, pleading guilty to lesser state charges and serving a 13-month jail sentence with work-release privileges. This plea deal has been widely criticized for its leniency and lack of transparency, especially given that prosecutors were aware of allegations involving victims as young as 14 years old​,to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsources:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

11 Loka 27min

Federal prosecutors accused Jeffrey Epstein of witness tampering after discovering that he wired $350,000 to two potential witnesses or co-conspirators shortly after The Miami Herald published its 2018 exposé on his sweetheart plea deal. Prosecutors argued the timing of these payments showed a deliberate attempt to influence testimony or buy silence as new federal charges loomed. These revelations added weight to their claim that Epstein used his wealth and connections to manipulate the justice system and obstruct accountability for his sex crimes.Epstein’s defense team requested that he be released on house arrest with an ankle monitor while awaiting trial, proposing that he remain confined to his $77 million Manhattan mansion. Federal prosecutors opposed the motion, pointing to the witness tampering payments as proof he posed a danger to witnesses and the judicial process. They also argued that his access to private jets and immense wealth made him an extreme flight risk. The judge ultimately sided with prosecutors, keeping Epstein in custody until his death a month later.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

11 Loka 11min

For years, Prince Andrew, Duke of York received counsel that undervalued the seriousness of his association with Jeffrey Epstein and over-emphasized the potential PR fixes. After Epstein’s first conviction for soliciting prostitution of a minor, Andrew continued to appear in Epstein’s orbit, stay at his residences, and cultivate the friendship — all despite obvious red flags. Advisors seem to have encouraged him to believe that a frank, high-profile interview (notably with the BBC) could stem the reputational bleeding, rather than first expressing genuine empathy for victims or full clarity over the depth of the association. This advice centered on saying his side, explaining misunderstandings, and trying to "clear the air," but did not sufficiently prepare him for critical scrutiny, emotional testimony, and public disbelief.When Andrew finally did submit to a televised interview, what unfolded was widely seen as catastrophic. The tone and substance of his responses came off as evasive, tone-deaf and lacking in remorse; rather than being a turning point, the interview intensified outrage and distrust. Some close to him admitted that the advisers had largely told him what he wanted to hear — that the interview would help, rather than warning how much worse things might get if not handled with full acknowledgment and contrition.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

11 Loka 12min

According to news reports, lawyers working for Queen Elizabeth II sent letters to major British newspapers warning them against taking or publishing photographs of the royal family and their guests at the Balmoral Castle estate. The letters emphasized that Balmoral is a private residence and that when royals and their guests are staying there, they have a “reasonable expectation of privacy.” The warning was issued on the same day that Prince Andrew reportedly arrived at the estate.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

10 Loka 21min