Jeffrey Epstein's Death And The Long Pursuit Of Justice For His Survivors

Jeffrey Epstein's Death And The Long Pursuit Of Justice For His Survivors

Five years after Jeffrey Epstein's death, survivors of his sexual abuse are still seeking justice through various avenues. Despite the establishment of a victims' compensation fund, which began accepting claims in 2021 and offers a confidential forum for monetary compensation, many survivors feel that true justice has yet to be achieved.

Several survivors, represented by law firms such as Merson Law, are demanding accountability from institutions that failed to act on numerous allegations and tips about Epstein's activities. This includes the FBI, which is currently facing lawsuits for negligence in handling Epstein's case. Critics argue that the FBI has shown a lack of urgency in addressing the survivors' claims, in stark contrast to its actions in other high-profile sexual abuse cases, such as those involving Larry Nassar​.

Moreover, Epstein's influence and manipulation of the justice system allowed him to evade significant punishment during his lifetime, further complicating the survivors' quest for justice. Epstein's 2008 plea deal, which resulted in a minimal sentence, and the subsequent lack of notification to his victims about the deal, highlight systemic failures that survivors are now trying to address through legislative reforms like the Courtney Wild Crime Victims' Rights Reform Act.

The struggle for justice continues as survivors push for greater recognition of their suffering, legal accountability for those who enabled Epstein's crimes, and systemic changes to prevent such failures in the future.

(commercial at 13:26)

to contact me:

bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



source:

5 years after Jeffrey Epstein's arrest, push for accountability continues - ABC News (go.com)

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jaksot(1000)

Alan Dershowitz And The Threats To Sue Michael Cohen Over Jeffrey Epstein Comments

Alan Dershowitz And The Threats To Sue Michael Cohen Over Jeffrey Epstein Comments

Alan Dershowitz’s comments about potentially suing Michael Cohen over statements linking him to Jeffrey Epstein reflected a defensive legal strategy aimed at protecting his reputation. Dershowitz has consistently denied any wrongdoing in connection to Epstein and framed Cohen’s remarks as defamatory. By raising the prospect of a lawsuit, he positioned himself as someone seeking to challenge those statements through formal legal channels rather than allowing them to circulate unchecked. His response was characteristic of a high-profile attorney using the law as a means of addressing reputational harm in a public dispute.From a broader perspective, the episode illustrates how litigation is often employed by prominent figures facing reputational challenges tied to controversial associations. Defamation law allows individuals to pursue damages if false and harmful claims are made against them, though such cases also raise complex questions about free speech and public discourse. Dershowitz’s stance toward Cohen underscored the tension between preserving one’s reputation and navigating the fallout of being connected—directly or indirectly—to Epstein. In this sense, the situation was less about uncovering new facts regarding Epstein and more about the legal and rhetorical strategies used by those whose names surface in his orbit.(commercia at 7:36)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Alan Dershowitz Says He's Suing Michael Cohen Over Epstein Claims (thedailybeast.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

19 Elo 10min

What Did Jeffrey Epstein's Tax Returns Tell Us About The Nature Of His Fortune?

What Did Jeffrey Epstein's Tax Returns Tell Us About The Nature Of His Fortune?

Jeffrey Epstein’s tax returns revealed a grotesque mismatch between the punishment he received and the fortune he controlled. His filings showed that even after his 2008 “sentence,” Epstein was earning tens of millions of dollars through opaque hedge fund deals and consulting arrangements that no one could quite verify. The numbers were staggering—proof that his money machine never slowed down, even as he was supposedly a registered sex offender. Those returns underscored the absurdity of treating him like a low-level offender while he continued living like an untouchable Wall Street kingpin. Instead of being dismantled, his financial empire thrived in plain sight, a reminder that the system was designed to shield wealth, not protect victims.The deeper scandal was that Epstein’s declared income made it impossible to believe authorities were unaware of the scale of his financial operations. His tax documents weren’t the secret ledgers of an underground criminal—they were government-filed papers showing immense earnings, year after year. Yet rather than trigger investigations into where that money came from and who his clients really were, officials looked the other way. The law’s failure here was not just in letting him keep the money but in refusing to ask the obvious questions about its origins.to contact me:Bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://wallstreetonparade.com/2019/07/tax-filing-suggests-child-sex-offender-jeffrey-epstein-made-his-wealth-flipping-hot-ipos-on-wall-street/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

19 Elo 36min

Jeffrey Epstein's Fugazi Charity Was Really A Front Operation

Jeffrey Epstein's Fugazi Charity Was Really A Front Operation

Jeffrey Epstein’s so-called charity was a parody of philanthropy—a glossy storefront for laundering money, buying influence, and disguising the true scope of his criminal enterprise. On paper, the foundation claimed to support science, education, and global causes. In reality, the filings showed paltry amounts actually going to legitimate charities while large sums flowed into projects that padded Epstein’s image or circled back into his own network. It was the classic predator’s playbook: slap a humanitarian label on the operation, and suddenly hedge fund cash, foreign transfers, and murky “donations” could move around under the guise of benevolence.The real sickness was how the law enabled it. Charitable foundations enjoy enormous tax advantages and face laughably weak oversight. Epstein exploited this loophole masterfully, using his “philanthropy” not only to launder funds but to open doors into elite academic and scientific institutions that gave him legitimacy. Universities and research centers took his money, looked the other way, and in return gave him access to some of the brightest young minds he could exploit. The so-called charity wasn’t charity at all—it was a financial and social laundering machine, perfectly legal on the surface yet utterly corrupt in function.(commercial at 11:58)To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/26/business/jeffrey-epstein-charity.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

18 Elo 25min

Jeffrey Epstein And The Original Charges Against Him

Jeffrey Epstein And The Original Charges Against Him

The original charges brought against Jeffrey Epstein in Florida in 2007 were laughably weak when weighed against the sheer scope of his crimes. Despite overwhelming evidence that he had trafficked and abused dozens of underage girls, he was allowed to plead guilty only to two state-level prostitution charges—one of them grotesquely labeling a minor as a "prostitute." This framing alone was an insult to his victims and a textbook example of the justice system bending over backwards to protect power. Rather than a serious prosecution, it was a carefully choreographed wrist slap designed to shield Epstein and the wealthy men around him from real scrutiny.The law itself compounded the travesty. Florida statutes at the time allowed prosecutors to downgrade Epstein’s conduct into charges that not only failed to reflect the gravity of child sexual abuse but actively mischaracterized it. By calling minors "prostitutes," the law criminalized victims while sanitizing the predator’s behavior. This legal loophole—exploited with the DOJ’s blessing through the infamous non-prosecution agreement—made a mockery of justice. It revealed a system that, when confronted with wealth and influence, preferred euphemism and minimization over accountability. What should have been a landmark prosecution of a serial child sex trafficker instead became one of the most grotesque miscarriages of justice in modern American legal history.To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.baltimoresun.com/opinion/op-ed/bs-ed-op-1209-pitts-prostitute-20181205-story.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

18 Elo 14min

In Their Own Words:  Jane Doe 1-6 And Their Allegations Against Jeffrey Epstein (Part 4) (8/16/25)

In Their Own Words: Jane Doe 1-6 And Their Allegations Against Jeffrey Epstein (Part 4) (8/16/25)

The third amended complaint filed in the Southern District of New York involves six plaintiffs—Jane Does 1 through 6—who have brought claims against Darren K. Indyke and Richard D. Kahn, acting as co-executors of the estate of Jeffrey Epstein, as well as the estate itself and other unnamed defendants. The case, docketed as No. 1:19-cv-07675-GBD, seeks a jury trial and continues the broader wave of litigation aimed at holding Epstein’s estate accountable for his long history of alleged sexual abuse and exploitationThe complaint underscores the plaintiffs’ pursuit of justice against Epstein’s estate following his death, placing responsibility on those managing his assets to provide restitution for the harm they allege they suffered. By naming “Roes 2–10,” the filing also leaves room for additional defendants who may later be identified as complicit in Epstein’s crimes or responsible for enabling his conduct. This legal action highlights the ongoing efforts by Epstein’s victims to find accountability in civil court, given that his death cut short criminal proceedings.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.521195.45.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

18 Elo 20min

Accountability for Thee, Not for Me:  Epstein, Stacey Plaskett, and the Media Blackout (Part2) (8/18/25)

Accountability for Thee, Not for Me: Epstein, Stacey Plaskett, and the Media Blackout (Part2) (8/18/25)

The silence surrounding Stacey Plaskett’s lawsuit by Epstein survivors exposes the staggering hypocrisy of both lawmakers and the legacy media. Politicians who pound the table about justice and accountability fall mute when the accusations land inside their own chamber. Journalists who dissect every lurid detail of Epstein’s life suddenly find no headlines when survivors point to a sitting member of Congress. This selective outrage isn’t oversight—it’s complicity. Survivors are abandoned the moment their stories threaten insiders, and the system shows once again that accountability is conditional, not principled.That selective accountability corrodes credibility and turns justice into theater. By politicizing the scandal, lawmakers use survivors as pawns while letting the real villains—Epstein’s network of enablers—slip quietly back into the shadows. The result is a collapse of trust: citizens see investigations as performance, predators learn power protects power, and survivors are betrayed all over again. Epstein may be dead and Maxwell imprisoned, but the system that shielded them is alive and well—sustained by cowardice, silence, and the hypocrisy of institutions that pretend to defend justice while practicing selective blindness.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

18 Elo 15min

Accountability for Thee, Not for Me:  Epstein, Stacey Plaskett, and the Media Blackout (Part ) (8/18/25)

Accountability for Thee, Not for Me: Epstein, Stacey Plaskett, and the Media Blackout (Part ) (8/18/25)

The silence surrounding Stacey Plaskett’s lawsuit by Epstein survivors exposes the staggering hypocrisy of both lawmakers and the legacy media. Politicians who pound the table about justice and accountability fall mute when the accusations land inside their own chamber. Journalists who dissect every lurid detail of Epstein’s life suddenly find no headlines when survivors point to a sitting member of Congress. This selective outrage isn’t oversight—it’s complicity. Survivors are abandoned the moment their stories threaten insiders, and the system shows once again that accountability is conditional, not principled.That selective accountability corrodes credibility and turns justice into theater. By politicizing the scandal, lawmakers use survivors as pawns while letting the real villains—Epstein’s network of enablers—slip quietly back into the shadows. The result is a collapse of trust: citizens see investigations as performance, predators learn power protects power, and survivors are betrayed all over again. Epstein may be dead and Maxwell imprisoned, but the system that shielded them is alive and well—sustained by cowardice, silence, and the hypocrisy of institutions that pretend to defend justice while practicing selective blindness.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

18 Elo 11min

Bill Barr And His Role As Arbiter  Of Truth When  It Comes To Jeffrey Epstein's Death (8/18/25)

Bill Barr And His Role As Arbiter Of Truth When It Comes To Jeffrey Epstein's Death (8/18/25)

Bill Barr’s handling of Jeffrey Epstein’s death was nothing short of a disgrace. From the moment Epstein was found dead in his cell, Barr rushed to reassure the public that there was “no evidence” of foul play, even though the facts on the ground screamed otherwise: guards asleep, cameras malfunctioning, and a high-profile prisoner left alone despite being an obvious suicide risk. Rather than treating the matter with the transparency and rigor demanded by such a monumental failure of federal custody, Barr instead leaned into the narrative of “bungling incompetence,” effectively steering the public away from the far more troubling possibility of corruption, complicity, or deliberate neglect. His role was less about seeking justice and more about protecting institutions from scrutiny.The aftermath only deepened the scandal. Barr presided over an investigation that was tepid, narrow in scope, and ultimately designed to close doors rather than open them. Instead of demanding accountability from the Bureau of Prisons and investigating the broader network of Epstein’s enablers, Barr allowed the focus to remain on low-level staff scapegoats while the powerful ties Epstein cultivated were quietly brushed aside. His public statements carried the hollow tone of someone managing damage control, not uncovering the truth. In the end, Barr’s stewardship of the case did not restore trust—it obliterated it. The public saw clearly what he was doing: protecting the system at all costs, even if it meant letting the most suspicious death in modern American history remain shrouded in doubt.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

18 Elo 11min

Suosittua kategoriassa Politiikka ja uutiset

rss-ootsa-kuullut-tasta
aikalisa
ootsa-kuullut-tasta-2
politiikan-puskaradio
tervo-halme
rss-podme-livebox
otetaan-yhdet
rss-kiina-ilmiot
viisupodi
rss-vaalirankkurit-podcast
rss-raha-talous-ja-politiikka
et-sa-noin-voi-sanoo-esittaa
rss-polikulaari-humanisti-vastaa-ja-muut-ts-podcastit
aihe
linda-maria
rikosmyytit
the-ulkopolitist
radio-antro
rss-hyvaa-huomenta-bryssel
rss-merja-mahkan-rahat