Mega Edition: Judge Preska Explains Her Plan to Unseal Maxwell/Virginia Files (11/13/25)

Ghislaine Maxwell’s proffer session with the DOJ was less about truth and accountability and more about performance and deceit. The entire premise of a proffer is simple: you trade truth for a chance at leniency. But Maxwell didn’t come to the table with intelligence, evidence, or leads that could help dismantle Epstein’s far-reaching web. She came armed with a rehearsed script of lies and character assassinations. She weaponized her time in that room not to aid justice, but to smear survivors who had already borne the crushing weight of humiliation in courtrooms and the press. The newly released emails now strip away any doubt about what happened—they show that Maxwell didn’t stumble or misremember. She perjured herself over and over, carefully contradicting her own sworn statements. This was deliberate, malicious dishonesty. And yet, instead of being dragged back to court with perjury charges and buried under the consequences, she was inexplicably rewarded with cushier accommodations. Sitting across from her during this travesty was none other than Deputy Director Todd “Baby Billy” Blanche, a man who should have cut the session short the moment the lies started, but who instead sat back, nodded, and let justice be mocked.The fallout from this disaster stretches far beyond Maxwell herself. For survivors, it was another betrayal layered on top of years of indifference and ridicule. They were once again slandered, this time under the very nose of the government agency tasked with protecting them. Their truth, earned through blood and tears, was tossed aside so Maxwell could preserve her own skin. For the public, the message couldn’t be clearer: the Department of Justice is not an impartial arbiter of the law, but a stage where the rich and connected get to rewrite the script in their favor. Accountability was promised, but what America got instead was a rigged performance where lies were treated as cooperation, and perjury was treated as a perk. A real justice department would have treated her dishonesty as a direct assault on the rule of law, stacking charges on her until her arrogance collapsed. But instead, Blanche and his colleagues chose complicity over courage, shielding Maxwell from consequences and exposing to everyone watching that in America, justice isn’t blind—it looks the other way when power is in the room.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

17 Syys 12min

In his opening statement, Patel described what he called the “original sin” of the Epstein investigation as being how Alex Acosta handled the case back in 2006. He criticized the limited search warrants used then and said they did not seize as much investigative material as they should have. Patel argued that significant portions of the case were restrained by the original non-prosecution agreement, which included provisions protecting some documents via court orders and limiting later prosecutorial or investigative access.Patel also addressed whether there is credible evidence that Epstein trafficked underage girls to other individuals (i.e. beyond himself). He said there is no credible information that such trafficking to third parties has been proven. He asserted that if he had seen such evidence, he would have pursued those charges. He emphasized that under his administration, the FBI is working to release all “credible information … legally able to do so,” while acknowledging legal limits.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Kash Patel claims no evidence Jeffrey Epstein trafficked girls to anyone but himself | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

17 Syys 13min

Prince Andrew came under scrutiny after documents revealed he told bankers to call Buckingham Palace when they questioned a £750,000 payment tied to him. The transaction raised compliance concerns, prompting officials to seek clarity on whether it was legitimate. Instead of offering a straightforward explanation, Andrew reportedly directed them to his Palace office, effectively leaning on his royal status to quell the inquiry.The payment’s origins and purpose stirred suspicions, especially given Andrew’s already controversial financial dealings and public scandals. The move highlighted how he allegedly relied on the prestige of the monarchy to shield himself from financial accountability, deepening concerns about his judgment and raising questions over whether he abused his royal position for personal protection.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

17 Syys 38min

Courtney Wild and Haley Robson, two women who say they were abused by Jeffrey Epstein, filed a defamation lawsuit against journalist Julie K. Brown in 2022. They argue Brown’s book Perversion of Justice contained false claims that harmed their reputations. Wild says the book wrongly described her as having had intercourse with Epstein and being raped, allegations she denies. Robson, meanwhile, claims Brown portrayed her as complicit in Epstein’s operations after she refused to be interviewed for the book.According to the lawsuit, Brown’s reporting left both women branded in ways that distorted their roles in the Epstein saga, causing reputational damage and emotional distress. The plaintiffs allege that Brown pressured them and misrepresented facts for dramatic effect, leaving them to suffer fallout in their personal and professional lives. The case underscores the tensions between journalistic storytelling and survivor testimony in high-profile abuse investigations.Courtney Wild and Haley Robson, both survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse, wrote powerful letters to top executives at JPMorgan—among them CEO Jamie Dimon—accusing the bank of enabling Epstein’s conduct by keeping him as a client for many years, despite knowing or having reason to know that there were serious abuse allegations. They ask JPMorgan to acknowledge that it benefited from the relationship (through transactions, accounts, etc.), to admit wrongdoing or mistakes, and to take steps to make amends—both to them and to other survivors. Wild and Robson frame their demand not just in moral terms but in legal and institutional accountability: that the bank should own up, not hide behind fine print or internal policies.They also stress that JPMorgan’s public statements and depositions (including Jamie Dimon’s) have downplayed or denied knowledge of Epstein’s abuse or minimized the bank’s role. In their letters, they challenge that narrative: they maintain that JPMorgan had ample warning of red flags and thus cannot claim complete ignorance. They call for transparency—release of internal documents, full cooperation, and concrete reforms—to ensure what happened with Epstein doesn’t happen again under the bank’s watch.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

17 Syys 43min

Theresa Helm has alleged that Epstein’s estate has been uncooperative with survivors in terms of transparency, accountability, and compensation. She and other claimants have brought civil lawsuits against the estate, accusing it of rape, sexual battery, false imprisonment, and of perpetuating a system that allowed Epstein and his enablers to continue abusing and trafficker women and minors. Helm has called for the release of federal documents related to Epstein’s cases, arguing that they are essential for understanding the full scope of what happened, who was involved, and how much oversight (or negligence) there was.She has also alleged that many survivors were recruited under false pretenses (e.g. “job interviews,” modeling, legitimate opportunities), and that the estate has not done enough to address the harms done or to compensate victims fairly. Some of the lawsuits in which she is involved (including Teresa Helm et al v. Epstein’s estate) seek not only monetary damages but acknowledgment of wrongdoing, accountability for enablers, and public disclosure of records. Helm emphasizes that this is about more than money—it’s about exposing structural wrongdoing and ensuring survivors’ voices are heard.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DisplayFile.aspx (vicourts.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

17 Syys 27min

The dive into the court documents continues in this episode as we take a look at the warrant for the Moscow forensics lab.(commercial at 10:21)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:030723 Order to Seal Redact - Moscow Police Department Forensic Lab.pdf (idaho.gov)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

17 Syys 14min

The JonBenét Ramsey case is a high-profile, unsolved murder mystery that occurred in Boulder, Colorado, in 1996. JonBenét Ramsey was a 6-year-old beauty pageant contestant who was found murdered in her family's home on December 26, 1996. Her parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, reported her missing and claimed to have found a ransom note demanding $118,000.However, later that day, JonBenét's body was discovered in the basement of the Ramsey's home. She had been strangled and had a severe head injury. The circumstances surrounding the murder, including the ransom note and the fact that the family did not immediately contact the police, raised suspicions and made the case highly publicized.The investigation was marked by controversy and mishandling. Suspicion initially fell on the Ramsey family, including JonBenét's parents and her older brother, Burke. They were subjected to intense media scrutiny, but they maintained their innocence.The case was complicated by a lack of physical evidence and a ransom note that appeared to be written within the Ramsey home. Some investigators and experts suggested that an intruder might have been responsible, while others believed the family might be hiding something.The Boulder police were criticized for not securing the crime scene properly, and their handling of the case came under scrutiny.Despite years of investigation and several grand jury proceedings, no one was ever charged or convicted in connection with JonBenét Ramsey's murder.To this day, the case remains unsolved, and it continues to be a subject of public fascination and speculation, with various theories and suspects proposed over the years.In this episode, we hear from Jonbenet Ramsey's father who talks about the differences in how the Moscow Murders investigation was handled and how his daughters case was handled, and how Boulder PD had just stuffed their pride, he thinks that his daughters killer would have already been brought to justice.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:JonBenét Ramsey's dad says Idaho murders probe shines a light on failings by police in his daughter's case | The US Sun (the-sun.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

17 Syys 22min

From the archives: 12-3-22When a homicide investigation is conducted, it is commonly thought that the first 48 hours are the most critical portion of the investigation and that with each passing day, the likelihood of solving the case diminishes. Is this true though? In this episode, we take a look at the 48 hour rule and examine some of the statistical numbers surrounding murder investigations.(commercial at 8:47)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.newsnationnow.com/crime/idaho-college-killings/how-much-do-the-first-48-hours-matter-to-a-homicide-case/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

16 Syys 13min