Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein And His Good Pal Marvin Minsky (11/13/25)

Ghislaine Maxwell’s financial troubles have only deepened since her conviction, exposing a tangle of lawsuits, unpaid bills, and murky asset transfers. Her former defense firm, Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, filed suit against Maxwell, her brother Kevin, and her husband Scott Borgerson for nearly $878,000 in unpaid legal fees, alleging they strung along partial payments to keep representation going before abruptly halting. Questions have also swirled around more than $20 million in transfers tied to Epstein-linked accounts, raising suspicion about whether Maxwell attempted to shield resources as legal pressures mounted. These revelations painted a portrait of a woman who once moved in elite circles now trapped by debt and mounting obligations.Maxwell’s money woes also extend to her properties and lingering obligations tied to Epstein’s shadowy empire. Her former Manhattan townhouse and New Hampshire retreat have resurfaced on the market, sparking speculation that the proceeds might be used to satisfy creditors or bankroll appeals. At the same time, she has fought to limit access to documents and transcripts that could shed further light on the extent of her wealth and the mechanisms used to protect it. These disputes highlight not only Maxwell’s crumbling financial position but also the unraveling of the financial network that once insulated her from accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

28 Syys 10min

Lady Victoria Hervey has voiced deep skepticism about the Maxwell trial and its fallout, framing Maxwell not solely as a villain but also as a victim turned scapegoat. She’s claimed publicly that Maxwell used people—including Hervey herself—as “bait” to further Epstein’s operations, suggesting Hervey was “naïve” and manipulated in those circles. Simultaneously, Hervey has cast doubt on the narrative pushed by prosecutors and media, contending that Maxwell is being unfairly punished as “there is no one else to blame.”Hervey has also challenged the authenticity of some key evidence, most notably a photograph depicting Prince Andrew and Virginia Giuffre, which Maxwell’s allies—and Hervey—have insisted was doctored or manipulated. She uses these claims to further argue that Maxwell’s prosecution is tainted by bias, selective narrative control, and a lack of full transparency.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

28 Syys 31min

According to sources Ghislaine Maxwell was melancholy when first arriving at the Prison in Florida but now, after having time to settle in, she is also participating in activities such as interdormitory competitions such as checkers. She has also found a group of friends to pal around with. Let's take a look! to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11412785/Ghislaine-Maxwell-seen-walking-galpal-cushy-regimen-Florida-prison-revealed.html#commentsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 17min

In lawsuits filed beginning in 2022–2023, the central allegation is that Leon Black sexually assaulted a then-teenage girl inside Jeffrey Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse in 2002. The plaintiff, referred to as “Jane Doe,” claims she was trafficked by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell—and that Epstein directed her to provide Black with a “massage” that escalated into rape in a third-floor massage room. She further contends she was autistic and born with Mosaic Down Syndrome, vulnerabilities that the complaint says were exploited; she alleges Black used force, sex toys, and violence, inflicting physical injuries and psychological trauma.Black’s legal team forcefully denies the accusations, calling them baseless and “frivolous.” He has sought to dismiss the case on procedural grounds, challenging the statute of limitations, the revival of old claims under New York law, and jurisdictional issues. A federal judge declined to dismiss one version of the claim, ruling that the victim’s pleading under New York City’s Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law could proceed, while other lawsuits—such as one by Cheri Pierson making similar claims—have been withdrawn or dismissed.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 12min

Bill Barr’s deposition before Congress on Jeffrey Epstein was a masterclass in calculated deflection. While Barr insisted that Epstein’s death was “absolutely” suicide, he conceded that the prison surveillance system had “blind spots”—a detail that conveniently leaves just enough room for speculation without providing definitive answers. His reliance on flawed or incomplete camera footage, combined with his dismissal of alternative forensic perspectives, came off less like transparency and more like institutional damage control. Instead of holding the Bureau of Prisons accountable, Barr’s narrative positioned the failures as unfortunate but inconsequential, a stance that fails to satisfy the public demand for clarity.Just as troubling was Barr’s evasiveness when pressed about Donald Trump’s knowledge of Epstein. He admitted to having spoken with Trump about Epstein’s death but couldn’t recall when one of those conversations occurred—an astonishing lapse considering the gravity of the matter. His reasoning that “if there were more to it, it would have leaked” was not only flippant but dismissive of the very real history of suppression, obstruction, and selective disclosure that has defined the Epstein saga. By leaning on institutional trust in a case defined by betrayal of that very trust, Barr’s testimony did little more than reinforce suspicions that the Department of Justice has long been more concerned with containment than accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Barr-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 19min

Bill Barr’s deposition before Congress on Jeffrey Epstein was a masterclass in calculated deflection. While Barr insisted that Epstein’s death was “absolutely” suicide, he conceded that the prison surveillance system had “blind spots”—a detail that conveniently leaves just enough room for speculation without providing definitive answers. His reliance on flawed or incomplete camera footage, combined with his dismissal of alternative forensic perspectives, came off less like transparency and more like institutional damage control. Instead of holding the Bureau of Prisons accountable, Barr’s narrative positioned the failures as unfortunate but inconsequential, a stance that fails to satisfy the public demand for clarity.Just as troubling was Barr’s evasiveness when pressed about Donald Trump’s knowledge of Epstein. He admitted to having spoken with Trump about Epstein’s death but couldn’t recall when one of those conversations occurred—an astonishing lapse considering the gravity of the matter. His reasoning that “if there were more to it, it would have leaked” was not only flippant but dismissive of the very real history of suppression, obstruction, and selective disclosure that has defined the Epstein saga. By leaning on institutional trust in a case defined by betrayal of that very trust, Barr’s testimony did little more than reinforce suspicions that the Department of Justice has long been more concerned with containment than accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Barr-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 14min

Bill Barr’s deposition before Congress on Jeffrey Epstein was a masterclass in calculated deflection. While Barr insisted that Epstein’s death was “absolutely” suicide, he conceded that the prison surveillance system had “blind spots”—a detail that conveniently leaves just enough room for speculation without providing definitive answers. His reliance on flawed or incomplete camera footage, combined with his dismissal of alternative forensic perspectives, came off less like transparency and more like institutional damage control. Instead of holding the Bureau of Prisons accountable, Barr’s narrative positioned the failures as unfortunate but inconsequential, a stance that fails to satisfy the public demand for clarity.Just as troubling was Barr’s evasiveness when pressed about Donald Trump’s knowledge of Epstein. He admitted to having spoken with Trump about Epstein’s death but couldn’t recall when one of those conversations occurred—an astonishing lapse considering the gravity of the matter. His reasoning that “if there were more to it, it would have leaked” was not only flippant but dismissive of the very real history of suppression, obstruction, and selective disclosure that has defined the Epstein saga. By leaning on institutional trust in a case defined by betrayal of that very trust, Barr’s testimony did little more than reinforce suspicions that the Department of Justice has long been more concerned with containment than accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Barr-Transcript.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 11min

Jes Staley, the former JPMorgan executive who later became CEO of Barclays, has alleged in court filings that he discussed Jeffrey Epstein directly with Jamie Dimon, including whether the bank should continue its relationship with Epstein after his 2008 conviction. According to Staley, Dimon was aware of Epstein’s accounts and engaged in conversations about them, contradicting the narrative that JPMorgan’s top leadership was in the dark. Dimon, however, has firmly denied this, testifying under oath that he never met Epstein, exchanged emails with him, or played any role in decisions about his accounts.Jes Staley, the former JPMorgan executive who later became CEO of Barclays, has alleged in court filings that he discussed Jeffrey Epstein directly with Jamie Dimon, including whether the bank should continue its relationship with Epstein after his 2008 conviction. According to Staley, Dimon was aware of Epstein’s accounts and engaged in conversations about them, contradicting the narrative that JPMorgan’s top leadership was in the dark. Dimon, however, has firmly denied this, testifying under oath that he never met Epstein, exchanged emails with him, or played any role in decisions about his accounts.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

27 Syys 27min