Mega Edition: Danielle Bensky And The Lawsuit Filed Against Indyke And Kahn (Part 5-6) (10/26/25)

Mega Edition: Danielle Bensky And The Lawsuit Filed Against Indyke And Kahn (Part 5-6) (10/26/25)

Background of the Lawsuit
  1. Defendants:
    • Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn: Both are lawyers who were appointed as co-executors of Jeffrey Epstein’s estate following his death in August 2019. They have been responsible for managing the estate’s affairs, including financial assets and legal claims against Epstein.
  2. Plaintiffs:
    • Danielle Benskey: An alleged victim of Jeffrey Epstein who, along with other plaintiffs, has brought forward claims against the estate.
    • Jane Doe 3: Another individual who has accused Epstein of abuse and is seeking justice through the legal system.
Allegations and Claims
  1. Mismanagement and Negligence:
    • Estate Administration: The plaintiffs allege that Indyke and Kahn have mishandled the administration of Epstein’s estate. This includes accusations of mismanagement of financial assets, failure to properly address claims from victims, and overall negligence in managing the estate’s affairs.
    • Financial Irregularities: There are claims that the executors may have engaged in or failed to address financial irregularities that negatively impacted the estate’s value and its ability to settle claims.
  2. Failure to Address Victims’ Claims:
    • Inadequate Settlements: The lawsuit argues that Indyke and Kahn did not adequately handle or settle claims made by Epstein’s victims. This includes allegations that they were unresponsive or failed to provide fair compensation to survivors like Benskey and Jane Doe 3.
    • Lack of Transparency: The plaintiffs accuse the executors of being opaque about the handling of the estate’s assets and the status of the victims’ claims.
Legal Proceedings
  1. Filing and Court Actions:
    • Lawsuit Details: The lawsuit has been filed in a civil court, where the plaintiffs seek financial damages and other remedies for the alleged mismanagement and failures in addressing their claims.
    • Court Hearings: There have been ongoing court hearings and legal maneuvers as the case progresses, including motions, evidence submissions, and testimonies.
  2. Recent Developments:
    • Settlement Talks: There have been discussions and negotiations regarding potential settlements, though the specifics of these talks are not always publicly disclosed.
    • Court Orders: The court has issued various orders related to the case, including directives on evidence disclosure and procedural matters.
Broader Context
  1. Epstein’s Estate:
    • Complexity: Jeffrey Epstein’s estate is highly complex, involving significant financial assets, multiple claims from survivors, and legal disputes. The estate’s management has been under scrutiny, given Epstein’s criminal activities and the large number of victims involved.
    • Public Scrutiny: The handling of Epstein’s estate, including the actions of Indyke and Kahn, has attracted considerable public and media attention, adding to the pressure on the executors to address the allegations and claims appropriately.
  2. Victims’ Advocacy:
    • Support for Survivors: The lawsuit is part of broader efforts by victims and their advocates to seek justice and accountability for the abuse they endured. It reflects ongoing challenges in achieving fair compensation and redress for survivors of Epstein’s abuse.




to contact me:

bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



source:

Microsoft Word - 2024.02.16 Kahn Indyke Complaint (FINAL) (wallstreetonparade.com)


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

Avsnitt(1000)

The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes:  Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 4) (8/24/25)

The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes: Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 4) (8/24/25)

On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Aug 12min

The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes:  Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 3) (8/24/25)

The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes: Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 3) (8/24/25)

On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Aug 13min

The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes:  Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 2) (8/24/25)

The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes: Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 2) (8/24/25)

On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Aug 15min

The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes:  Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 1) (8/24/25)

The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes: Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 1) (8/24/25)

On August 22, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice released redacted transcripts and audio recordings of a two-day interview it conducted in July with Ghislaine Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence for her role in Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking ring. During the interview, Maxwell denied ever seeing any inappropriate behavior by former President Donald Trump, describing him as a “gentleman in all respects,” and insisted she “never witnessed the president in any inappropriate setting in any way.” She also rejected the existence of a so-called “client list,” countering years of speculation, and claimed to have no knowledge of blackmail or illicit recordings tied to Epstein.In addition to defending high-profile figures, Maxwell expressed doubt that Epstein’s death was a suicide, while also rejecting the notion of an elaborate conspiracy or murder plot. The release of the transcripts—handled under the Trump-era Justice Department—has stirred sharp political debate. Trump allies have framed her remarks as vindication, while critics and Epstein’s survivors question her credibility, pointing to her conviction and suggesting her words may be aimed at influencing potential clemency or political favor.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Interview Transcript - Maxwell 2025.07.24 (Redacted).pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Aug 15min

In Their Own Words:  Virginia Robert's And The Complaint That Sunk A Prince (8/24/25)

In Their Own Words: Virginia Robert's And The Complaint That Sunk A Prince (8/24/25)

Virginia Roberts Giuffre filed a civil lawsuit against Prince Andrew in 2021, accusing him of sexual assault when she was a minor under the control of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The complaint alleged that Prince Andrew knowingly participated in Epstein’s trafficking scheme, forcing her into sexual encounters in London, New York, and on Epstein’s private island in the early 2000s. Giuffre’s legal team argued that Andrew was fully aware of her underage status and the coercive circumstances, and that his conduct constituted both sexual abuse and intentional infliction of emotional distress.The lawsuit also emphasized the imbalance of power between a teenage trafficking victim and a member of the British royal family, highlighting how Epstein and Maxwell facilitated these encounters as part of their broader scheme. By filing in U.S. federal court under the Child Victims Act, Giuffre sought accountability for Prince Andrew’s alleged role in Epstein’s network, marking a historic moment in which a royal faced legal exposure over sex trafficking allegations. The case eventually drew worldwide attention before being settled out of court in 2022, with Andrew making no admission of liability but agreeing to a financial settlement reportedly in the millions.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Aug 24min

Judge Sweets Order Denying Maxwell's Request For Summary Judgement Against Virginia (Part 5-6) (8/24/25)

Judge Sweets Order Denying Maxwell's Request For Summary Judgement Against Virginia (Part 5-6) (8/24/25)

In his ruling dated April 27, 2017, Judge Sweet denied Maxwell’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the case could not be dismissed before trial because there were triable issues of material fact—meaning that reasonable jurors could differ on key factual elements required to resolve the defamation claims. Additionally, he held that the pre‑litigation privilege Maxwell invoked (a legal shield often applied to internal or preliminary communications before a lawsuit is filed) did not apply to bar the claim. Consequently, the motion could not succeed as a matter of law. Judge Sweet also directed the parties to submit a proposed redacted version of the opinion consistent with the protective order or to notify the court if no redactions were necessary, emphasizing the sensitive nature of the materials involvedThis decision ensured that Maxwell’s defamation case would proceed, allowing for full adjudication of disputable facts rather than prematurely ending the litigation. Moreover, although the summary judgment denial was itself sealed under protective orders—primarily due to concerns about privacy and confidentiality—the Second Circuit later determined that such judicial records should generally be accessible to the public, underscoring the importance of transparency in decisions impacting public interest; the appellate court directed review and unsealing of summary judgment materials following a careful balance of privacy interests.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Aug 21min

Judge Sweets Order Denying Maxwell's Request For Summary Judgement Against Virginia (Part 3-4) (8/23/25)

Judge Sweets Order Denying Maxwell's Request For Summary Judgement Against Virginia (Part 3-4) (8/23/25)

In his ruling dated April 27, 2017, Judge Sweet denied Maxwell’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the case could not be dismissed before trial because there were triable issues of material fact—meaning that reasonable jurors could differ on key factual elements required to resolve the defamation claims. Additionally, he held that the pre‑litigation privilege Maxwell invoked (a legal shield often applied to internal or preliminary communications before a lawsuit is filed) did not apply to bar the claim. Consequently, the motion could not succeed as a matter of law. Judge Sweet also directed the parties to submit a proposed redacted version of the opinion consistent with the protective order or to notify the court if no redactions were necessary, emphasizing the sensitive nature of the materials involvedThis decision ensured that Maxwell’s defamation case would proceed, allowing for full adjudication of disputable facts rather than prematurely ending the litigation. Moreover, although the summary judgment denial was itself sealed under protective orders—primarily due to concerns about privacy and confidentiality—the Second Circuit later determined that such judicial records should generally be accessible to the public, underscoring the importance of transparency in decisions impacting public interest; the appellate court directed review and unsealing of summary judgment materials following a careful balance of privacy interests.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Aug 29min

Judge Sweets Order Denying Maxwell's Request For Summary Judgement Against Virginia (Part 1-2) (8/23/25)

Judge Sweets Order Denying Maxwell's Request For Summary Judgement Against Virginia (Part 1-2) (8/23/25)

In his ruling dated April 27, 2017, Judge Sweet denied Maxwell’s motion for summary judgment, concluding that the case could not be dismissed before trial because there were triable issues of material fact—meaning that reasonable jurors could differ on key factual elements required to resolve the defamation claims. Additionally, he held that the pre‑litigation privilege Maxwell invoked (a legal shield often applied to internal or preliminary communications before a lawsuit is filed) did not apply to bar the claim. Consequently, the motion could not succeed as a matter of law. Judge Sweet also directed the parties to submit a proposed redacted version of the opinion consistent with the protective order or to notify the court if no redactions were necessary, emphasizing the sensitive nature of the materials involvedThis decision ensured that Maxwell’s defamation case would proceed, allowing for full adjudication of disputable facts rather than prematurely ending the litigation. Moreover, although the summary judgment denial was itself sealed under protective orders—primarily due to concerns about privacy and confidentiality—the Second Circuit later determined that such judicial records should generally be accessible to the public, underscoring the importance of transparency in decisions impacting public interest; the appellate court directed review and unsealing of summary judgment materials following a careful balance of privacy interests.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

24 Aug 25min

Populärt inom Politik & nyheter

aftonbladet-krim
fordomspodden
p3-krim
motiv
rss-krimstad
blenda-2
rss-viva-fotboll
flashback-forever
aftonbladet-daily
svenska-fall
rss-sanning-konsekvens
rss-krimreportrarna
rss-vad-fan-hande
dagens-eko
olyckan-inifran
rss-frandfors-horna
rss-svalan-krim
krimmagasinet
rss-klubbland-en-podd-mest-om-frolunda
rss-flodet