Mega Edition: Ghislaine Maxwell Was Always Prince Andrew's Biggest Fan (9/14/25)

In the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, Judge Arun Subramanian delivered final jury instructions that laid out the legal framework the jurors must follow as they deliberate on the charges. He emphasized the presumption of innocence, reminding jurors that the burden of proof rests entirely on the government and that Combs is not required to prove anything or call any witnesses. The judge explained that the prosecution must prove each element of every charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and that speculation, bias, or media narratives have no place in the jury room. He cautioned jurors to evaluate the evidence objectively, including the credibility of witnesses, and warned against letting emotions, celebrity, or public opinion sway their verdict.Subramanian also gave detailed explanations of the legal definitions behind each charge Combs faces, including the alleged predicate acts tied to sex trafficking, conspiracy, and obstruction. He clarified that even if jurors find certain behavior distasteful or immoral, it is not criminal unless it meets the specific legal thresholds outlined. Jurors were instructed to consider each count separately, and not to infer guilt on one charge simply because they believe guilt on another. Additionally, he reiterated the importance of unanimous agreement for any verdict and instructed them not to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, nor consume any media coverage about it. The instructions closed with a reminder that the rule of law—not fame, wealth, or notoriety—governs the courtroom.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.424.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

2 Juli 35min

In the federal trial of Sean “Diddy” Combs, Judge Arun Subramanian delivered final jury instructions that laid out the legal framework the jurors must follow as they deliberate on the charges. He emphasized the presumption of innocence, reminding jurors that the burden of proof rests entirely on the government and that Combs is not required to prove anything or call any witnesses. The judge explained that the prosecution must prove each element of every charged crime beyond a reasonable doubt, and that speculation, bias, or media narratives have no place in the jury room. He cautioned jurors to evaluate the evidence objectively, including the credibility of witnesses, and warned against letting emotions, celebrity, or public opinion sway their verdict.Subramanian also gave detailed explanations of the legal definitions behind each charge Combs faces, including the alleged predicate acts tied to sex trafficking, conspiracy, and obstruction. He clarified that even if jurors find certain behavior distasteful or immoral, it is not criminal unless it meets the specific legal thresholds outlined. Jurors were instructed to consider each count separately, and not to infer guilt on one charge simply because they believe guilt on another. Additionally, he reiterated the importance of unanimous agreement for any verdict and instructed them not to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury room, nor consume any media coverage about it. The instructions closed with a reminder that the rule of law—not fame, wealth, or notoriety—governs the courtroom.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.424.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

2 Juli 39min

On Day 9 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal trial, former personal assistant George Kaplan delivered compelling testimony that shed light on the inner workings of Combs' operations. Kaplan recounted an incident aboard a private jet in 2015, where he witnessed Combs allegedly assaulting singer Cassie Ventura. According to Kaplan, he heard glass shattering and saw Combs standing over Ventura, who was on her back with her legs up, seemingly trying to create space. Ventura reportedly screamed, "Isn't anybody seeing this?" as the altercation unfolded. Kaplan also described another episode where he observed Ventura with bruises under her eye, after which Combs instructed him to purchase over-the-counter remedies to conceal the injuries .Beyond these incidents, Kaplan detailed his responsibilities, which extended beyond typical assistant duties. He testified about preparing hotel rooms for Combs' events, ensuring they were stocked with specific items and later cleaning them to protect Combs' public image. Kaplan also mentioned procuring drugs like MDMA for Combs and maintaining a "medicine bag" containing substances such as ketamine and Wellbutrin. Despite expressing admiration for Combs, Kaplan stated that he ultimately resigned in December 2015 due to discomfort with the physical behavior he witnessed .On Day 9 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, rapper Kid Cudi (Scott Mescudi) delivered a compelling testimony detailing a series of unsettling events he attributed to Combs' jealousy over Cudi's brief relationship with Casandra "Cassie" Ventura in 2011. Cudi recounted receiving a distressed call from Ventura, warning him that Combs had discovered their relationship and had obtained Cudi's home address. Subsequently, Cudi found his Los Angeles home broken into, with Christmas gifts unwrapped and his dog locked in a bathroom. He reported the incident to the police. Weeks later, in early 2012, Cudi's Porsche was destroyed by a Molotov cocktail in his driveway—a retaliatory act he suspected was orchestrated by Combs. Although Combs later denied involvement during a meeting at a Los Angeles hotel, Cudi testified that he believed the incidents were meant to intimidate him.Cudi's testimony aligns with previous allegations made by Ventura in her 2023 lawsuit, where she claimed Combs threatened violence against both her and Cudi upon learning of their relationship. During his testimony, Cudi described Combs' demeanor during their confrontation as reminiscent of a "Marvel supervillain," noting his calmness and the unsettling nature of the encounter. These accounts contribute to the prosecution's narrative of Combs' alleged pattern of coercive and violent behavior to maintain control over individuals in his personal and professional life. Combs has pleaded not guilty to all charges, including racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking, and faces the possibility of life imprisonment if convicted.Mylah Morales testified about a 2010 incident at the Beverly Hills Hotel during the Grammy Awards weekend. She recounted waking up to the sounds of a heated argument between Combs and Cassie Ventura. After Combs stormed out of the room, Morales found Ventura with visible injuries, including a swollen lip, a black eye, and knots on her head. Concerned for Ventura's safety, Morales took her to her own home and consulted a doctor friend, who advised that Ventura should visit the emergency room. However, Ventura declined to seek medical attention or involve the police. Morales expressed fear for her own safety, stating she was afraid of Combs and feared for her lifeFrederic Zemmour, manager at the L’Ermitage Hotel in Beverly Hills, also testified on Day 9. He stated that Combs' customer profile had several notes to staff, including one that warned he "always spills candle wax on everything and uses excessive amounts of oil." These details were presented to illustrate Combs' behavior and its impact on hotel staff and property.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:May 22, 2025 - Day 9 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNNBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

2 Juli 54min

On Day 8 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial, the courtroom heard critical testimonies from a forensic psychologist and a former executive assistant, shedding light on the alleged abusive dynamics within Combs' personal and professional life. Forensic psychologist Dr. Dawn Hughes testified about the psychological patterns commonly observed in abusive relationships, such as trauma bonding and victim behavior, without directly referencing Combs or specific accusers. Despite the defense's attempts to portray her as biased, Hughes maintained her neutrality and emphasized the complexities victims face in abusive situations. Her insights aimed to provide context to the behaviors and decisions of individuals involved in such relationships.As Day 8 of Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking and racketeering trial continued, former executive assistant George Kaplan provided detailed testimony about his tenure with Combs from 2013 to 2015. Kaplan described working extensive hours, often between 80 to 100 per week, and performing tasks that extended beyond typical assistant duties. He was responsible for booking hotel rooms under the alias "Frank Black," a nod to the late rapper Notorious B.I.G., and preparing them with specific items such as candles, baby oil, Astroglide, and liquor. Kaplan also testified that he procured drugs like MDMA and ketamine for Combs, sometimes using a corporate card, and maintained a kit containing various pills, including Advil and ketamine. He emphasized that these preparations were aimed at protecting Combs' public image, as hotels might sell compromising photos or videos of celebrities.Kaplan further recounted instances where he cleaned up hotel rooms after Combs' alleged "freak-off" sex parties, disposing of items like empty alcohol bottles, baby oil, and drugs, and tidying pillows to make it appear as if nothing had occurred. He mentioned encountering a brown crystallized powder in a bathroom during one cleanup. Kaplan testified that Combs frequently threatened his job, sometimes over minor issues, such as purchasing the wrong type of water bottles. He also stated that he left his position after witnessing Combs physically abuse his then-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. Kaplan's testimony provides insight into the alleged operations within Combs' inner circle and supports the prosecution's narrative of a pattern of coercion and abuse.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:May 21, 2025 - Day 8 of testimony in the Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs trial | CNNBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

2 Juli 38min

Sexual assault survivors are often allowed to proceed anonymously during court trials for several reasons, primarily aimed at protecting their privacy, safety, and well-being:Reducing Trauma: Testifying about sexual assault can be an incredibly traumatic experience for survivors. Allowing them to proceed anonymously can help reduce the additional stress and trauma associated with public exposure and scrutiny.Protecting Privacy: Anonymity shields survivors from unwanted public attention and intrusion into their personal lives. It allows them to maintain a level of privacy and control over their own narrative.Encouraging Reporting: Fear of public exposure can deter survivors from reporting sexual assault or seeking justice. Anonymity can help encourage survivors to come forward and participate in legal proceedings without the fear of being publicly identified and stigmatized.Ensuring Safety: In some cases, survivors may fear retaliation or harassment from the accused or their supporters. Anonymity can provide an added layer of protection and help ensure the safety of the survivor and their loved ones.However, there are also potential problems that may arise from allowing an accuser to remain anonymous:Fairness to the Accused: Anonymity for the accuser can raise concerns about fairness in the legal process. It may limit the accused's ability to fully defend themselves if they cannot know the identity of their accuser or access potentially relevant information about them.Presumption of Innocence: Anonymity may undermine the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" by creating an imbalance in the perception of the case. The accused may face increased scrutiny and presumption of guilt, especially in the absence of transparency regarding the accuser's identity.Potential for False Accusations: Without the accuser's identity being disclosed, there may be concerns about false accusations going unchallenged. Anonymity could make it more difficult for the accused to present evidence or witnesses that could refute the allegations.Impact on Public Confidence: Anonymity can sometimes lead to skepticism or distrust in the legal process, as it may be perceived as favoring one party over the other. This could affect public confidence in the fairness and integrity of the judicial system.In this episode we get a look at the Judge's order denying the request to proceed anonymously for the duration of the proceedings.(commercial at 11:57)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.611545.49.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

2 Juli 16min

Sexual assault survivors are often allowed to proceed anonymously during court trials for several reasons, primarily aimed at protecting their privacy, safety, and well-being:Reducing Trauma: Testifying about sexual assault can be an incredibly traumatic experience for survivors. Allowing them to proceed anonymously can help reduce the additional stress and trauma associated with public exposure and scrutiny.Protecting Privacy: Anonymity shields survivors from unwanted public attention and intrusion into their personal lives. It allows them to maintain a level of privacy and control over their own narrative.Encouraging Reporting: Fear of public exposure can deter survivors from reporting sexual assault or seeking justice. Anonymity can help encourage survivors to come forward and participate in legal proceedings without the fear of being publicly identified and stigmatized.Ensuring Safety: In some cases, survivors may fear retaliation or harassment from the accused or their supporters. Anonymity can provide an added layer of protection and help ensure the safety of the survivor and their loved ones.However, there are also potential problems that may arise from allowing an accuser to remain anonymous:Fairness to the Accused: Anonymity for the accuser can raise concerns about fairness in the legal process. It may limit the accused's ability to fully defend themselves if they cannot know the identity of their accuser or access potentially relevant information about them.Presumption of Innocence: Anonymity may undermine the principle of "innocent until proven guilty" by creating an imbalance in the perception of the case. The accused may face increased scrutiny and presumption of guilt, especially in the absence of transparency regarding the accuser's identity.Potential for False Accusations: Without the accuser's identity being disclosed, there may be concerns about false accusations going unchallenged. Anonymity could make it more difficult for the accused to present evidence or witnesses that could refute the allegations.Impact on Public Confidence: Anonymity can sometimes lead to skepticism or distrust in the legal process, as it may be perceived as favoring one party over the other. This could affect public confidence in the fairness and integrity of the judicial system.In this episode we get a look at the Judge's order denying the request to proceed anonymously for the duration of the proceedings.(commercial at 11:57)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.611545.49.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

2 Juli 10min

On the first day of jury selection in Sean "Diddy" Combs' federal sex trafficking trial, held on May 5, 2025, in Manhattan, the courtroom witnessed a meticulous process aimed at assembling an impartial jury. Judge Arun Subramanian led the proceedings, questioning a diverse pool of potential jurors about their backgrounds, media exposure, and any personal experiences that might influence their judgment. Notably, three women disclosed past experiences of sexual assault but affirmed their ability to remain objective. Despite these revelations, none were dismissed from the jury pool at that time. The defense team, seeking to ensure a fair trial amid intense media scrutiny, enlisted the expertise of jury consultant Linda Moreno, known for her work in high-profile cases. Moreno's role involves analyzing juror behavior and backgrounds to assist in selecting individuals who can objectively assess the evidence presented.The jury selection process also included inquiries about potential jurors' familiarity with a list of 190 celebrities, such as Michael B. Jordan and Kanye West, to identify any biases stemming from media consumption. Some jurors acknowledged viewing a widely circulated video allegedly showing Combs assaulting his ex-girlfriend, Cassie Ventura. One juror described the video as "damning," leading to her dismissal due to concerns about impartiality. Combs, who has pleaded not guilty to charges including racketeering conspiracy and sex trafficking, appeared in court dressed in business-casual attire, presenting a composed demeanor. The trial is expected to last approximately eight weeks, with opening statements scheduled for May 12.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Diddy's secret trial weapon revealed… as he prepares for the fight of his life | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

2 Juli 11min

The case Doe v. Combs, Case No.: 23-cv-10628 (JGLC) involves a civil lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York by a plaintiff identified as Jane Doe against Sean "Diddy" Combs, Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, and other entities. The lawsuit alleges sexual assault, coercion, and other forms of abuse dating back several years. The claims are part of a larger set of accusations against Combs involving misconduct at parties, often referred to as "freak-offs."Jane Doe asserts that she was sexually assaulted by Combs and his associates when she was a minor. She is now in her late 30s, and her complaint argues that she suffered significant harm during these events. The case also touches on other previous legal actions involving Combs, including allegations made by Cassie, another former associate. The defense has raised concerns about the fairness of the proceedings due to Jane Doe's anonymity, arguing that it hampers their ability to investigate and defend against the claims.This lawsuit is part of a wave of legal challenges against Combs, with over 120 alleged victims coming forward, many of whom claim they were minors at the time of the abuse. The case continues to develop as more evidence is gathered, including videos and witness statements that could play a crucial role in the proceedings. Combs and his legal team have denied all allegations and are preparing for trial​.(commercial at 7:43)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.611545.64.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

2 Juli 10min