The OIG Report Into Jeffrey Epstein's Non Prosecution Agreement (Part 17-18) (11/1/25)

On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Elo 15min

On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Elo 15min

Virginia Roberts Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit against Prince Andrew in 2021, accusing him of sexual assault when she was a minor under the control of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The complaint alleged that Prince Andrew knowingly participated in Epstein’s trafficking scheme, forcing her into sexual encounters in London, New York, and on Epstein’s private island in the early 2000s. Giuffre’s legal team argued that Andrew was fully aware of her underage status and the coercive circumstances, and that his conduct constituted both sexual abuse and intentional infliction of emotional distress.The lawsuit also emphasized the imbalance of power between a teenage trafficking victim and a member of the British royal family, highlighting how Epstein and Maxwell facilitated these encounters as part of their broader scheme. By filing in U.S. federal court under the Child Victims Act, Giuffre sought accountability for Prince Andrew’s alleged role in Epstein’s network, marking a historic moment in which a royal faced legal exposure over sex trafficking allegations. The case eventually drew worldwide attention before being settled out of court in 2022, with Andrew making no admission of liability but agreeing to a financial settlement reportedly in the millions.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Elo 24min

In his ruling dated April 27, 2017, Judge Sweet denied Maxwell’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the case could not be dismissed before trial because there were triable issues of material fact—meaning that reasonable jurors could differ on key factual elements required to resolve the defamation claims. Additionally, he held that the pre‑litigation privilege Maxwell invoked (a legal shield often applied to internal or preliminary communications before a lawsuit is filed) did not apply to bar the claim. Consequently, the motion could not succeed as a matter of law. Judge Sweet also directed the parties to submit a proposed redacted version of the opinion consistent with the protective order or to notify the court if no redactions were necessary, emphasizing the sensitive nature of the materials involvedThis decision ensured that Maxwell’s defamation case would proceed, allowing for full adjudication of disputable facts rather than prematurely ending the litigation. Moreover, although the summary judgment denial was itself sealed under protective orders—primarily due to concerns about privacy and confidentiality—the Second Circuit later determined that such judicial records should generally be accessible to the public, underscoring the importance of transparency in decisions impacting public interest; the appellate court directed review and unsealing of summary judgment materials following a careful balance of privacy interests.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Elo 21min

In his ruling dated April 27, 2017, Judge Sweet denied Maxwell’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the case could not be dismissed before trial because there were triable issues of material fact—meaning that reasonable jurors could differ on key factual elements required to resolve the defamation claims. Additionally, he held that the pre‑litigation privilege Maxwell invoked (a legal shield often applied to internal or preliminary communications before a lawsuit is filed) did not apply to bar the claim. Consequently, the motion could not succeed as a matter of law. Judge Sweet also directed the parties to submit a proposed redacted version of the opinion consistent with the protective order or to notify the court if no redactions were necessary, emphasizing the sensitive nature of the materials involvedThis decision ensured that Maxwell’s defamation case would proceed, allowing for full adjudication of disputable facts rather than prematurely ending the litigation. Moreover, although the summary judgment denial was itself sealed under protective orders—primarily due to concerns about privacy and confidentiality—the Second Circuit later determined that such judicial records should generally be accessible to the public, underscoring the importance of transparency in decisions impacting public interest; the appellate court directed review and unsealing of summary judgment materials following a careful balance of privacy interests.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Elo 29min

In his ruling dated April 27, 2017, Judge Sweet denied Maxwell’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the case could not be dismissed before trial because there were triable issues of material fact—meaning that reasonable jurors could differ on key factual elements required to resolve the defamation claims. Additionally, he held that the pre‑litigation privilege Maxwell invoked (a legal shield often applied to internal or preliminary communications before a lawsuit is filed) did not apply to bar the claim. Consequently, the motion could not succeed as a matter of law. Judge Sweet also directed the parties to submit a proposed redacted version of the opinion consistent with the protective order or to notify the court if no redactions were necessary, emphasizing the sensitive nature of the materials involvedThis decision ensured that Maxwell’s defamation case would proceed, allowing for full adjudication of disputable facts rather than prematurely ending the litigation. Moreover, although the summary judgment denial was itself sealed under protective orders—primarily due to concerns about privacy and confidentiality—the Second Circuit later determined that such judicial records should generally be accessible to the public, underscoring the importance of transparency in decisions impacting public interest; the appellate court directed review and unsealing of summary judgment materials following a careful balance of privacy interests.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Elo 25min

From the archives: 4-2-23One of the main questions that still needs to be answered when talking about Bryan Kohberger and the murders in moscow, is what motivated him to allegedly kill four people? We have learned a little bit more as the story has evolved, such as him following his victims on social media according to sources, but when looking at the warrants that have been executed and the timeframe in which they cover, could Bryan Kohberger have been following his victims much longer than previously thought?Let's dive in and talk about it!(commercial at 10:22)To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Cops are probing if Bryan Kohberger had contact with university students the YEAR before slayings | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Elo 17min

A forensic team plays a crucial role in investigating and analyzing a crime scene to gather evidence and information that can aid in solving crimes and prosecuting offenders. Here is a summary of what a forensic team does at a crime scene:Scene Assessment: The team starts by assessing the crime scene's overall situation, including securing it to preserve evidence and ensuring the safety of all personnel involved.Documentation: Detailed documentation is crucial. They photograph, sketch, and make written notes of the entire scene, including the layout, positions of objects, and any potential evidence.Evidence Collection: Forensic experts collect physical evidence, such as fingerprints, blood samples, hair fibers, weapons, and other items that might be relevant to the case. They use proper techniques and tools to prevent contamination.Trace Evidence: Specialized personnel collect trace evidence like fibers, soil, and gunshot residue, which can provide valuable clues about the crime's circumstances.Biological Evidence: Forensic biologists collect and preserve biological samples like blood, saliva, or tissue for DNA analysis, which can link suspects or victims to the scene.Latent Print Examination: Experts search for and lift latent fingerprints from surfaces, using various techniques such as dusting, chemical development, or photography.Ballistics Examination: Firearms experts examine firearms and ammunition, analyze gunshot residue, and match bullets and casings to specific weapons if necessary.Toxicology Analysis: Toxicologists may collect samples to determine if drugs, alcohol, or other substances were involved in the crime.Digital Evidence: Digital forensic specialists can examine electronic devices such as computers or smartphones to recover data, including text messages, emails, or images relevant to the case.Autopsy: If a death occurred, forensic pathologists perform autopsies to determine the cause and manner of death, collecting valuable evidence for the investigation.Footwear and Tire Impression Analysis: Experts may analyze footwear and tire impressions left at the scene to identify potential suspects or vehicles.Expert Testimony: Forensic experts may testify in court as expert witnesses to explain their findings and how they relate to the case.Evidence Preservation: Properly storing and preserving collected evidence is essential to maintaining its integrity for future analysis and use in court.Chain of Custody: The team maintains a strict chain of custody for all evidence to ensure its admissibility in court and prevent contamination or tampering.Crime Scene Reconstruction: Based on the evidence collected and analyzed, forensic experts may attempt to reconstruct the sequence of events that transpired at the crime scene.Report Writing: Forensic professionals create comprehensive reports detailing their findings, methods, and conclusions, which are crucial for investigators and legal proceedings.The work of a forensic team is meticulous and critical in helping law enforcement solve crimes and bring perpetrators to justice. Their objective, scientific analysis of evidence can be instrumental in building a strong case for prosecution or exonerating the innocent.In this episode we hear from form Joe Giacalone about the crime scene and how the evidence was collected at that crime scene and the similarities he sees between the investigation in Moscow and the one into Amanda Knox in Italy.(commercial at 7:45)to contactbobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Idaho murders' chilling similarity to Amanda Knox crime scene revealed by ex-cop who highlights key piece of evidence | The US Sun (the-sun.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Elo 11min