Mega Edition: Danielle Bensky And The Lawsuit Filed Against Indyke And Kahn (Part 3-4) (10/26/25)

Mega Edition: Danielle Bensky And The Lawsuit Filed Against Indyke And Kahn (Part 3-4) (10/26/25)

Background of the Lawsuit
  1. Defendants:
    • Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn: Both are lawyers who were appointed as co-executors of Jeffrey Epstein’s estate following his death in August 2019. They have been responsible for managing the estate’s affairs, including financial assets and legal claims against Epstein.
  2. Plaintiffs:
    • Danielle Benskey: An alleged victim of Jeffrey Epstein who, along with other plaintiffs, has brought forward claims against the estate.
    • Jane Doe 3: Another individual who has accused Epstein of abuse and is seeking justice through the legal system.
Allegations and Claims
  1. Mismanagement and Negligence:
    • Estate Administration: The plaintiffs allege that Indyke and Kahn have mishandled the administration of Epstein’s estate. This includes accusations of mismanagement of financial assets, failure to properly address claims from victims, and overall negligence in managing the estate’s affairs.
    • Financial Irregularities: There are claims that the executors may have engaged in or failed to address financial irregularities that negatively impacted the estate’s value and its ability to settle claims.
  2. Failure to Address Victims’ Claims:
    • Inadequate Settlements: The lawsuit argues that Indyke and Kahn did not adequately handle or settle claims made by Epstein’s victims. This includes allegations that they were unresponsive or failed to provide fair compensation to survivors like Benskey and Jane Doe 3.
    • Lack of Transparency: The plaintiffs accuse the executors of being opaque about the handling of the estate’s assets and the status of the victims’ claims.
Legal Proceedings
  1. Filing and Court Actions:
    • Lawsuit Details: The lawsuit has been filed in a civil court, where the plaintiffs seek financial damages and other remedies for the alleged mismanagement and failures in addressing their claims.
    • Court Hearings: There have been ongoing court hearings and legal maneuvers as the case progresses, including motions, evidence submissions, and testimonies.
  2. Recent Developments:
    • Settlement Talks: There have been discussions and negotiations regarding potential settlements, though the specifics of these talks are not always publicly disclosed.
    • Court Orders: The court has issued various orders related to the case, including directives on evidence disclosure and procedural matters.
Broader Context
  1. Epstein’s Estate:
    • Complexity: Jeffrey Epstein’s estate is highly complex, involving significant financial assets, multiple claims from survivors, and legal disputes. The estate’s management has been under scrutiny, given Epstein’s criminal activities and the large number of victims involved.
    • Public Scrutiny: The handling of Epstein’s estate, including the actions of Indyke and Kahn, has attracted considerable public and media attention, adding to the pressure on the executors to address the allegations and claims appropriately.
  2. Victims’ Advocacy:
    • Support for Survivors: The lawsuit is part of broader efforts by victims and their advocates to seek justice and accountability for the abuse they endured. It reflects ongoing challenges in achieving fair compensation and redress for survivors of Epstein’s abuse.


(commercial at 8:16)

to contact me:

bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



source:

Microsoft Word - 2024.02.16 Kahn Indyke Complaint (FINAL) (wallstreetonparade.com)


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Jaksot(1000)

Mega Edition: The DOJ Makes It's Case To The 2nd Circuit Court In Opposition To Maxwell's Appeal (Part 1-2) (8/15/25)

Mega Edition: The DOJ Makes It's Case To The 2nd Circuit Court In Opposition To Maxwell's Appeal (Part 1-2) (8/15/25)

In its brief, the U.S. government argues that Maxwell received a fair trial in the Southern District of New York, that the evidence against her was overwhelming, and that any alleged errors raised by her defense do not warrant reversal. The prosecution maintains that witness testimony, corroborating records, and other evidence firmly established Maxwell’s role in facilitating and participating in Jeffrey Epstein’s sexual abuse of minors. They emphasize that the district court properly handled jury selection, evidentiary rulings, and sentencing, and that Maxwell’s claims of prejudice or legal error are unfounded.The government’s filing further contends that Maxwell’s constitutional rights were respected throughout the proceedings, and that the trial judge acted within the bounds of discretion in all key rulings. It dismisses arguments that the jury was improperly influenced or that Maxwell was denied a fair opportunity to defend herself, stating that these claims misrepresent the trial record. The brief concludes by urging the Second Circuit to affirm Maxwell’s conviction in its entirety, citing the strength of the government’s case and the fairness of the process that led to the verdict.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.ca2.57831.79.0_1.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

16 Elo 24min

The Murder Scene At 1122 King Road And The Latent Footprint Found At The Scene

The Murder Scene At 1122 King Road And The Latent Footprint Found At The Scene

Forensically speaking, a latent footprint refers to an imprint left by a person's foot on a surface that is not immediately visible to the naked eye. These footprints are typically created when an individual transfers natural oils, dirt, or other substances from their feet onto a surface as they walk. These impressions are often faint and can only be revealed through specialized techniques like dusting, chemical treatments, or photography. Forensic experts use these methods to make latent footprints visible and then compare them to known footwear patterns to help identify or exclude potential suspects in criminal investigations.In the affidavit, investigators stated that they found a latent footprint at the scene of the crime that was consistent with the type of print you would find on a pair of Vans shoes. The problem with that? Just about everyone has Vans.In this episode, we take a look at the latent footprint as evidence and how it might be used by the prosecutors during the trial for Bryan Kohberger.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com(commercial at 7:22)source:Clue in Idaho Murder Case Leaves Question About Bryan Kohberger Evidence (newsweek.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

16 Elo 10min

Murder In Moscow:  Motion To Strike The Utter Disregard Aggravator

Murder In Moscow: Motion To Strike The Utter Disregard Aggravator

In Bryan Kohberger's trial (Case No. CR29-22-2805), the defense filed a motion to strike the "utter disregard" aggravator, a legal factor that could justify seeking the death penalty by arguing the crime was committed with complete indifference to human life. The defense contends that the prosecution's use of this aggravator is unwarranted based on the evidence. They argue that the threshold for proving "utter disregard" has not been met and that the evidence doesn't support the claim that Kohberger’s actions demonstrated such extreme disregard for human life.This motion is significant because it directly impacts the prosecution’s ability to pursue the death penalty. If the judge agrees with the defense and strikes the aggravator, it could weaken the state's case for capital punishment, potentially altering the trial's trajectory. The "utter disregard" aggravator is typically applied in cases of extreme violence or brutality, and the defense is aiming to prevent its application by emphasizing that the evidence presented does not reach this level of severity. The outcome of this motion could be pivotal for both sides as the trial progresses.(commercial at 9:40)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:OFFICE OF THE KOOTENAI COUNTYBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

16 Elo 12min

Murder In Moscow:  Judge Hippler And The Threat Of Sanctions Due To Leaks

Murder In Moscow: Judge Hippler And The Threat Of Sanctions Due To Leaks

In the ongoing trial of Bryan Kohberger, accused of the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students, a significant development has arisen concerning unauthorized information leaks. Judge Steven Hippler has ordered an investigation into potential violations of a gag order after confidential case details, including Kohberger's internet search history and cellphone data, were aired in a May 9 episode of NBC's "Dateline" . The judge has mandated that both prosecution and defense teams submit lists of individuals who had access to the leaked information, encompassing staff, law enforcement, and consultants. He also indicated a willingness to appoint a special prosecutor to identify the source of the leak .The implications of these leaks are profound. Legal experts suggest that if the leaked information is deemed to have compromised the fairness of the trial, it could lead to the exclusion of critical evidence, such as surveillance footage and cellphone records, which are pivotal to the prosecution's case . Such exclusions could hinder the prosecution's ability to establish Kohberger's presence at the crime scene. Furthermore, the leaks may complicate jury selection by affecting potential jurors' impartiality, potentially prolonging the trial and increasing costs. Judge Hippler emphasized the necessity of identifying and holding accountable those responsible for the leaks to uphold the integrity of the judicial process .to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Idaho judge may exclude leaked Bryan Kohberger murder evidence from trial: Expert | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

15 Elo 12min

Should Bryan Kohberger Have Been Granted A Change In Venue?

Should Bryan Kohberger Have Been Granted A Change In Venue?

The ongoing legal battle between the state of Idaho and Bryan Kohberger, who is accused of killing four University of Idaho students in 2022, has been particularly intense regarding the venue for his upcoming trial. Kohberger's defense team has repeatedly requested a change of venue, arguing that he cannot receive a fair trial in Latah County due to the extensive media coverage and the small, potentially biased jury pool. They have specifically requested the trial be moved to Ada County, nearly 300 miles away, which they believe would provide a more impartial jury.The prosecution, however, has opposed this request, insisting that Latah County is a suitable venue and that moving the trial would not significantly improve the chances of a fair trial. They argue that media coverage and public opinion have been widespread and would likely follow the trial wherever it is held in Idaho.The legal back-and-forth has also been complicated by a series of other pre-trial motions and hearings, many of which have frustrated both the families of the victims and the judge overseeing the case. These include debates over evidence, such as the use of investigative genetic genealogy by the prosecution and the defense’s requests for broader access to this evidence. Additionally, the defense’s alibi strategy has been another point of contention, as they have claimed that Kohberger was "out driving" at the time of the murders, but have struggled to provide specific details to support this claim.A hearing is scheduled for August 29, 2024, to further address the change of venue request, and the trial itself is set to begin in June 2025. The extended pre-trial proceedings have drawn criticism for their slow pace, adding to the tension surrounding this high-profile case(commercial at 8:23)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

15 Elo 11min

Diddy Scores A Huge Win As Judge Rakoff Dismisses The Sara Rivers Complaint (8/15/25)

Diddy Scores A Huge Win As Judge Rakoff Dismisses The Sara Rivers Complaint (8/15/25)

Judge Jed S. Rakoff delivered a substantial legal victory for Combs, dismissing 21 of the 22 counts in Sara Rivers’ $60 million lawsuit with prejudice, meaning those allegations cannot be refiled. The dismissed claims included accusations of racketeering, assault and battery, forced labor, sexual harassment, false imprisonment, and more—severe charges asserting a hostile and inhumane work environment during her time on Making the Band 2.The only count still pending is under the Gender‑Motivated Violence Protection Act—Count 15. Its future hinges on an appellate court ruling, as the judge paused a final decision on whether to dismiss it with or without prejudice.   Rivers’ attorney, Ariel Mitchell, expressed intentions to appeal, stating they “look forward to more litigation specifically against Mr. Combs."  Meanwhile, Combs’ camp praised the ruling, calling the claims “meritless, time‑barred, and legally deficient,” and thanked the court for its swift resolution of what they considered baseless accusations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:'Making the Band' singer Sara Rivers' lawsuit against Diddy dismissedBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

15 Elo 10min

Morning Update:  Will The Epstein Testimony From Those Subpoenaed Be Public? (8/15/25)

Morning Update: Will The Epstein Testimony From Those Subpoenaed Be Public? (8/15/25)

In July 2025, a subcommittee of the House Oversight Committee voted 8–2 to authorize subpoenas for the Department of Justice’s complete cache of files related to Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking investigation. The move came just before Congress’s summer recess, following growing public pressure and bipartisan calls for transparency on how Epstein was investigated, who he was connected to, and why certain prosecutorial decisions were made. Lawmakers framed the action as an accountability measure aimed at uncovering potential government mishandling or preferential treatment, while the timing suggested an intent to keep the issue in public focus during the legislative break.On August 5, 2025, Committee Chair James Comer formally issued the subpoenas, setting strict deadlines. The DOJ was ordered to produce documents by August 19. A series of deposition subpoenas were also sent to high-profile figures with dates spanning late summer into the fall: William Barr (Aug. 18), Alberto Gonzales (Aug. 26), Jeff Sessions (Aug. 28), Robert Mueller (Sept. 2), Loretta Lynch (Sept. 9), Eric Holder (Sept. 30), Merrick Garland (Oct. 2), Hillary Clinton (Oct. 9), and Bill Clinton (Oct. 14). This schedule positioned the investigation to unfold in stages, with a steady cadence of witness appearances leading into October.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein testimony: Will D.C. testimony be public or private?Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

15 Elo 16min

Murder In Moscow:   Bryan Kohberger And His Demented  Internet Searches (8/15/25)

Murder In Moscow: Bryan Kohberger And His Demented Internet Searches (8/15/25)

Digital forensics testimony: Heather Barnhart, a digital forensics expert from Cellebrite, was slated to testify about Kohberger’s phone and hard drive. She revealed that he had meticulously downloaded full PDF files and information on more than 20 serial killers—including Ted Bundy and Danny Rolling—both before and after the murders, suggesting this wasn’t casual browsing but "meticulous research.” Barnhart noted Kohberger even downloaded updates from the Moscow Police Department multiple times following the killings, shedding light on his detailed online activity surrounding the crimes.Forensic analysts also intended to testify that Kohberger’s internet activity included repeated searches for the University of Idaho murders, nonconsensual pornography with terms like “forced” and “sleeping,” and research into psychopathy and sociopathy. They linked these searches to cell-tower data placing his phone near the victims’ home on 23 separate occasions in the four months leading up to the murders. Prosecutors planned to present this combination of digital evidence and location data as showing both premeditation and a pattern of voyeuristic, predatory behavior.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger's graphic internet searches revealed in never-before-seen evidence | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

15 Elo 13min

Suosittua kategoriassa Politiikka ja uutiset

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