Mega Edition:  Haley Robson And Courtney Wild Sue Julie K. Brown (9/17/25)

Mega Edition: Haley Robson And Courtney Wild Sue Julie K. Brown (9/17/25)

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.com

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Avsnitt(1000)

The DOJ’s Jeffrey Epstein Conflict of Interest and the Special Counsel Remedy (Part 2) (9/6/25)

The DOJ’s Jeffrey Epstein Conflict of Interest and the Special Counsel Remedy (Part 2) (9/6/25)

The Jeffrey Epstein scandal stands as one of the most glaring failures of the American justice system, a case where victims were silenced, a secret non-prosecution agreement shielded powerful enablers, and federal custody ended in Epstein’s death under suspicious negligence. Despite civil settlements, oversight reports, and the conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell, the story remains fragmented, unresolved, and tainted by mistrust. The Department of Justice is compromised by its own history in the case, and every unanswered question deepens public suspicion. A federally appointed special counsel is the only mechanism capable of cutting through that distrust—armed with subpoena power, independence from political pressure, and the mandate to follow the evidence wherever it leads.That need is only magnified by the President’s shocking dismissal of the scandal as a “hoax.” Such rhetoric retraumatizes survivors, emboldens enablers, and corrodes faith in the rule of law. When the highest office mocks the reality of child exploitation, independence becomes not just preferable but mandatory. A special counsel would separate truth from politics, provide finality where there has only been denial, and ensure that victims receive recognition instead of erasure. Without such independence, every decision will remain suspect, every survivor’s voice overshadowed, and the system itself further discredited. The choice is stark: let denial bury justice, or appoint a special counsel to prove that no power, no denial, and no president stands above the truth.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

6 Sep 16min

The DOJ’s Jeffrey Epstein Conflict of Interest and the Special Counsel Remedy (Part 1) (9/6/25)

The DOJ’s Jeffrey Epstein Conflict of Interest and the Special Counsel Remedy (Part 1) (9/6/25)

The Jeffrey Epstein scandal stands as one of the most glaring failures of the American justice system, a case where victims were silenced, a secret non-prosecution agreement shielded powerful enablers, and federal custody ended in Epstein’s death under suspicious negligence. Despite civil settlements, oversight reports, and the conviction of Ghislaine Maxwell, the story remains fragmented, unresolved, and tainted by mistrust. The Department of Justice is compromised by its own history in the case, and every unanswered question deepens public suspicion. A federally appointed special counsel is the only mechanism capable of cutting through that distrust—armed with subpoena power, independence from political pressure, and the mandate to follow the evidence wherever it leads.That need is only magnified by the President’s shocking dismissal of the scandal as a “hoax.” Such rhetoric retraumatizes survivors, emboldens enablers, and corrodes faith in the rule of law. When the highest office mocks the reality of child exploitation, independence becomes not just preferable but mandatory. A special counsel would separate truth from politics, provide finality where there has only been denial, and ensure that victims receive recognition instead of erasure. Without such independence, every decision will remain suspect, every survivor’s voice overshadowed, and the system itself further discredited. The choice is stark: let denial bury justice, or appoint a special counsel to prove that no power, no denial, and no president stands above the truth.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

6 Sep 12min

Mega Edition:  Prince Andrew And The Settlement With Virginia Roberts (Part 1) (9/6/25)

Mega Edition: Prince Andrew And The Settlement With Virginia Roberts (Part 1) (9/6/25)

Prince Andrew’s settlement with Virginia Roberts Giuffre, announced in February 2022, marked a significant moment in the fallout from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking scandal. Giuffre, who accused Andrew of sexually abusing her when she was a teenager, had filed a civil lawsuit in the United States. Despite years of public denials, including a disastrous BBC interview in which Andrew claimed to have no memory of meeting Giuffre, the prince agreed to an out-of-court settlement reportedly worth several million dollars. This agreement avoided a public trial, sparking widespread criticism that Andrew used his wealth and privilege to sidestep accountability. The settlement, though not an admission of guilt, reinforced perceptions that Andrew prioritized damage control over confronting the allegations directly.Critics argue that Andrew’s decision to settle further tarnished his reputation and that of the British royal family. The settlement came with no public acknowledgment of wrongdoing, leaving lingering questions about the prince’s involvement with Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell’s network. The financial payout also fueled resentment, with many pointing out that Andrew, stripped of his royal duties and titles, appeared desperate to preserve what remained of his public standing. By avoiding a trial, Andrew missed an opportunity to clear his name through transparent legal proceedings, deepening public skepticism. The entire affair underscores the broader issue of how the powerful often evade genuine accountability, leaving victims and the public dissatisfied with a system that appears skewed in favor of the elite.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

6 Sep 1h 14min

Mega Edition:  The Indictment of Vicente "Mayito" Zambada-Niebla (Part 7-9) (9/6/25)

Mega Edition: The Indictment of Vicente "Mayito" Zambada-Niebla (Part 7-9) (9/6/25)

In 2009, Vicente "Mayito" Zambada Niebla, son of Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada, was indicted by the U.S. government on charges of trafficking vast quantities of cocaine and heroin into the United States. As a high-ranking member of the Sinaloa Cartel, he was accused of coordinating drug shipments from Central and South America to Mexico, and subsequently into the U.S., utilizing various methods such as private aircraft, submarines, and speedboats. Following his arrest in Mexico City in March 2009, Zambada was extradited to the U.S. in February 2010 to face these charges.In April 2013, Zambada pleaded guilty to the charges and agreed to cooperate with U.S. authorities. His cooperation included providing testimony against key cartel figures, notably Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. As part of his plea agreement, Zambada acknowledged his role in coordinating the smuggling of multi-ton quantities of narcotics and agreed to forfeit assets totaling $1.37 billion. In May 2019, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison, with the court considering his substantial assistance to prosecutors. Due to his cooperation, Zambada was released in 2021 after serving part of his sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

6 Sep 41min

Mega Edition:  The Indictment of Vicente "Mayito" Zambada-Niebla (Part 5-6) (9/6/25)

Mega Edition: The Indictment of Vicente "Mayito" Zambada-Niebla (Part 5-6) (9/6/25)

In 2009, Vicente "Mayito" Zambada Niebla, son of Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada, was indicted by the U.S. government on charges of trafficking vast quantities of cocaine and heroin into the United States. As a high-ranking member of the Sinaloa Cartel, he was accused of coordinating drug shipments from Central and South America to Mexico, and subsequently into the U.S., utilizing various methods such as private aircraft, submarines, and speedboats. Following his arrest in Mexico City in March 2009, Zambada was extradited to the U.S. in February 2010 to face these charges.In April 2013, Zambada pleaded guilty to the charges and agreed to cooperate with U.S. authorities. His cooperation included providing testimony against key cartel figures, notably Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. As part of his plea agreement, Zambada acknowledged his role in coordinating the smuggling of multi-ton quantities of narcotics and agreed to forfeit assets totaling $1.37 billion. In May 2019, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison, with the court considering his substantial assistance to prosecutors. Due to his cooperation, Zambada was released in 2021 after serving part of his sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

6 Sep 32min

Mega Edition:  The Indictment of Vicente "Mayito" Zambada-Niebla (Part 3-4) (9/5/25)

Mega Edition: The Indictment of Vicente "Mayito" Zambada-Niebla (Part 3-4) (9/5/25)

In 2009, Vicente "Mayito" Zambada Niebla, son of Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada, was indicted by the U.S. government on charges of trafficking vast quantities of cocaine and heroin into the United States. As a high-ranking member of the Sinaloa Cartel, he was accused of coordinating drug shipments from Central and South America to Mexico, and subsequently into the U.S., utilizing various methods such as private aircraft, submarines, and speedboats. Following his arrest in Mexico City in March 2009, Zambada was extradited to the U.S. in February 2010 to face these charges.In April 2013, Zambada pleaded guilty to the charges and agreed to cooperate with U.S. authorities. His cooperation included providing testimony against key cartel figures, notably Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. As part of his plea agreement, Zambada acknowledged his role in coordinating the smuggling of multi-ton quantities of narcotics and agreed to forfeit assets totaling $1.37 billion. In May 2019, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison, with the court considering his substantial assistance to prosecutors. Due to his cooperation, Zambada was released in 2021 after serving part of his sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

6 Sep 23min

Mega Edition:  The Indictment of Vicente "Mayito" Zambada-Niebla (Part 1-2) (9/5/25)

Mega Edition: The Indictment of Vicente "Mayito" Zambada-Niebla (Part 1-2) (9/5/25)

In 2009, Vicente "Mayito" Zambada Niebla, son of Ismael "El Mayo" Zambada, was indicted by the U.S. government on charges of trafficking vast quantities of cocaine and heroin into the United States. As a high-ranking member of the Sinaloa Cartel, he was accused of coordinating drug shipments from Central and South America to Mexico, and subsequently into the U.S., utilizing various methods such as private aircraft, submarines, and speedboats. Following his arrest in Mexico City in March 2009, Zambada was extradited to the U.S. in February 2010 to face these charges.In April 2013, Zambada pleaded guilty to the charges and agreed to cooperate with U.S. authorities. His cooperation included providing testimony against key cartel figures, notably Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán. As part of his plea agreement, Zambada acknowledged his role in coordinating the smuggling of multi-ton quantities of narcotics and agreed to forfeit assets totaling $1.37 billion. In May 2019, he was sentenced to 15 years in prison, with the court considering his substantial assistance to prosecutors. Due to his cooperation, Zambada was released in 2021 after serving part of his sentence.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

6 Sep 29min

The Motion To Remove The Gag Order In Moscow Is Denied

The Motion To Remove The Gag Order In Moscow Is Denied

In this episode, the dive into the court documents continues and this time we're taking a look at Judge Marshall's ordering denying the motion to reconsider the gag order that she dropped over the case.(commercial at 7:42)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Idaho Judicial Cases of InterestBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

6 Sep 12min

Populärt inom Politik & nyheter

motiv
aftonbladet-krim
rss-krimstad
p3-krim
fordomspodden
blenda-2
svenska-fall
flashback-forever
rss-viva-fotboll
aftonbladet-daily
rss-sanning-konsekvens
rss-vad-fan-hande
dagens-eko
rss-frandfors-horna
olyckan-inifran
grans
rss-krimreportrarna
krimmagasinet
rss-flodet
spotlight