Prince Andrew And His Moronic Group Of Advisers And "Friends"

In a March 2025 ruling, U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian dismissed nearly all claims against every defendant except Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett, thereby ordering the case to proceed to trial against her in her individual capacity. The court found that Plaskett’s conduct—including soliciting campaign contributions from Jeffrey Epstein at his New York residence, accepting loans and political support, and approving substantial tax breaks for his businesses—created sufficient ties to New York to establish personal jurisdiction under the state's long-arm statute. Consequently, Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) and negligence claims against her were allowed to move forward, while related claims against other Virgin Islands officials were dismissed on jurisdictional and legal grounds.The judge also rejected the plaintiffs’ request for jurisdictional discovery, concluding they had failed to make a prima facie showing to justify it. With all other defendants out of the picture, Plaskett stands as the sole defendant facing trial in this high-profile case. The court further invited motions from both sides regarding venue transfers and potential defenses such as immunity, providing a clear path for the next legal phase.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.610915.202.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

21 Aug 51min

In July 2024, Delegate Stacey Plaskett filed a lawsuit under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure seeking sanctions against the attorney representing six survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse. Plaskett argued that the amended lawsuit against her was frivolously filed, lacked any factual or legal foundation, and was intended to harass rather than pursue a legitimate legal claim. She sought sanctions to penalize and deter what she viewed as a baseless and politically motivated suit.However, the court denied her Rule 11 motion, concluding that the survivors’ filing was neither frivolous nor made for improper purposes. The ruling underscored that the suit was grounded in sufficient factual and legal claims, and that the plaintiffs’ allegations merited judicial consideration rather than sanctions. In essence, the denial affirmed that the litigation could proceed on substantive grounds.Also....In the released segment of her May 9, 2023 deposition, Stacey Plaskett was pressed on her awareness of Jeffrey Epstein’s role in the Virgin Islands and the extent of his influence with local officials and institutions. The questioning focused on whether she had knowledge of Epstein’s financial relationships, his political donations, or his contacts with Virgin Islands leadership during the period when he was operating in the territory. Plaskett largely distanced herself from Epstein, stating that she had no direct involvement with him and little knowledge of his activities beyond what was publicly known.Attorneys also asked Plaskett about government oversight, her interactions with agencies connected to Epstein’s business holdings, and whether she had ever received benefits, contributions, or favors traceable to Epstein or his companies. In the available transcript, she denied having such connections and emphasized that she was not involved in decisions related to Epstein’s finances or residency. While limited to roughly 25 pages, the deposition underscores how central Virgin Islands political figures were to JPMorgan’s defense and the USVI’s allegations—whether officials ignored red flags about Epstein or knowingly permitted him to operate.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

21 Aug 32min

Congresswoman Stacey Plaskett, the Delegate from the U.S. Virgin Islands, became the lone remaining defendant in a civil case filed by six survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse after the court dismissed the claims against other parties. The survivors alleged that Plaskett was complicit in Epstein’s sex trafficking operation, accusations that she forcefully denied. In April 2025, a second amended complaint reiterated the charges, to which Plaskett responded by filing a motion to dismiss, calling the claims baseless and defamatory. She has consistently framed the lawsuit as politically motivated and lacking in legal merit.Prior to this, in July 2024, Plaskett filed a motion under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure seeking sanctions against the survivors’ attorney. Rule 11 motions are designed to punish parties or lawyers for filing frivolous, unfounded, or harassing litigation. Plaskett argued that the case against her was precisely that.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.610915.127.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

21 Aug 37min

The SEC and broader federal apparatus had every opportunity to expose Jeffrey Epstein’s financial operations, and yet their so-called “investigations” amounted to little more than window dressing. Epstein moved vast sums of money, ran opaque shell companies, and funneled questionable transactions through major banks—yet the SEC never pressed for full accountability. Instead, they treated him with kid gloves, filing paperwork but never truly pursuing the trail. For a regulator tasked with policing Wall Street and catching bad actors, the agency seemed strangely reluctant to follow the money of one of the most notorious predators of the modern era.What this really shows is how the SEC and its federal partners functioned less like watchdogs and more like gatekeepers, ensuring Epstein’s secrets stayed buried. Every delay, every redaction, every refusal to dig deeper into his offshore structures or client ties made it clear the goal wasn’t justice but containment. The agency’s inaction allowed Epstein to keep using the financial system as his playground long after his crimes were public knowledge.To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://nypost.com/2022/01/26/jes-staley-reportedly-backed-jeffrey-epstein-at-jp-morgan/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

21 Aug 20min

Jes Staley’s image as Jeffrey Epstein’s “white knight” at JPMorgan is not just embarrassing—it’s damning. The idea that one of Wall Street’s most powerful executives bent over backwards to shield Epstein, even as serious red flags about his predatory behavior piled up, shows exactly how deep the rot ran inside JPMorgan. Staley didn’t merely tolerate Epstein—he actively vouched for him, defended him, and worked to keep him in the bank’s orbit, even after Epstein’s 2008 conviction. That wasn’t the act of a naïve executive; it was the conscious choice of someone who put profit, connections, and loyalty to a wealthy predator above basic decency. For years, he was the fixer, the gatekeeper, the man who lent Epstein credibility inside one of the largest financial institutions in the world.JPMorgan, meanwhile, enabled all of it. The bank has tried to paint Staley as an outlier, the “bad apple” who went rogue, but that spin doesn’t hold up under scrutiny. Epstein banked there for years, using JPMorgan accounts to move suspicious sums of money, fund his network, and maintain access to the elite circles that protected him. Compliance concerns were brushed aside, oversight was practically nonexistent, and the relationship continued because men like Staley treated Epstein as untouchable. The “white knight” label isn’t some exaggeration—it’s a reminder that JPMorgan didn’t just look the other way; through Staley, it played an active role in legitimizing Epstein and helping him thrive when he should have been cut off and cast out.To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://nypost.com/2022/01/26/jes-staley-reportedly-backed-jeffrey-epstein-at-jp-morgan/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

21 Aug 24min

Jeffrey Epstein was a wealthy financier and convicted sex offender who was born on January 20, 1953, in Brooklyn, New York. He began his career in finance, eventually establishing his own investment management firm, J. Epstein & Co., which catered to high-profile clients, including some of the wealthiest individuals in the world.Epstein's life became mired in controversy when allegations of sexual abuse and exploitation of underage girls emerged in the early 2000s. In 2005, he faced an investigation by federal authorities and was subsequently charged with multiple counts of trafficking minors for sex. However, he managed to secure a plea deal in 2008, pleading guilty to a lesser charge of solicitation of prostitution and serving only 13 months in a county jail, while being allowed to leave for work during the day.Despite his criminal conviction, Epstein continued to maintain a high-profile social circle, including numerous politicians, businessmen, and celebrities. He cultivated friendships with influential figures such as former U.S. President Bill Clinton, current U.S. President Donald Trump, Prince Andrew, and other prominent individuals.In July 2019, Epstein was arrested again on federal sex trafficking charges, this time in New York.However, before he could stand trial, he was found dead in his jail cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in Manhattan in what was officially ruled as suicide by hanging. His death sparked widespread speculation and conspiracy theories due to the suspicious circumstances surrounding it.Epstein's case drew significant attention due to the scale of his alleged crimes and the high-profile nature of his connections.It also led to investigations into his trafficking operation, which allegedly involved a vast network of underage girls who were exploited for sex. The case highlighted broader issues related to sex trafficking and the abuse of power, as well as flaws within the criminal justice system that allowed Epstein to evade more severe consequences for his actions.Since his death, investigations have continued into his associates and enablers, and efforts have been made to bring justice to the victims of his abuse. The case has had a far-reaching impact, shedding light on the issue of sexual exploitation, particularly of minors, and fueling public discourse on the accountability of the powerful.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:download (justice.gov)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

20 Aug 23min

The long-term impact of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse on survivors has been profound, stretching far beyond the immediate trauma of exploitation. Many have spoken about enduring struggles with trust, intimacy, and mental health, with conditions such as PTSD, depression, and anxiety becoming lifelong challenges. The abuse often took place during formative years, leaving deep psychological scars that shaped how survivors viewed themselves and the world around them. For some, the legal battles and constant public discussion of Epstein have compounded the harm, forcing them to relive their experiences repeatedly in a system that often seemed indifferent to their pain.Beyond the psychological toll, survivors have faced lasting social and economic consequences. Some described how the abuse derailed their education or career paths, cutting off opportunities and leaving them with instability that persisted for years. Others experienced stigma or disbelief when they tried to come forward, adding isolation to their trauma. Even after Epstein’s death, the slow pace of accountability and the continued prominence of the powerful figures linked to him have been painful reminders of the imbalance between survivor suffering and institutional protection. In this sense, the legacy of Epstein’s abuse is not confined to the past—it continues to shape lives, serving as a stark reminder of how long-term harm can ripple outward when justice is delayed or denied.To contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://www.wbur.org/cognoscenti/2022/01/04/ghislaine-maxwell-jeffrey-epstein-survivors-julie-dahlstrom-rachel-wechslerBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

20 Aug 29min

In 2011, court filings from JPMorgan revealed that Jeffrey Epstein—already a registered sex offender—paid a $25,000 tuition bill at Skidmore College for one of Cecile de Jongh’s children, upon her direct request via email subject‑lined “Please approve.” This was no act of charity; this was influence-peddling in plain sight. At the same time, de Jongh was coordinating policy to benefit Epstein, soliciting his input on softening a sex‑offender law to allow him freer movement within the territory. By drawing up legislation that Epstein could personally exploit while cashing in on his largesse, de Jongh blurred the line between public service and private profiteering.Moreover, the tuition payment fits into a broader pattern of de Jongh being Epstein’s political and logistical conduit in the U.S. Virgin Islands. JPMorgan labeled her as his “primary conduit for spreading money and influence” within the territory, citing other ways she facilitated his trafficking network—from arranging visas to crafting cover‑class schemes.^1 The tuition bill is far less an isolated favor and far more an emblem of how Epstein weaponized connections with public officials to shield his abuse. De Jongh’s actions weren’t innocent oversights—they were integral to maintaining a corrupt system of protection and impunity.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Jeffrey Epstein had close ties to U.S. Virgin Islands First Family | FortuneBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

20 Aug 14min