Mega Edition: Prince Andrew And Origin Story Of The Disastrous BBC Interview (8/29/25)
The infamous Prince Andrew BBC Newsnight interview—widely seen as a catastrophic PR disaster—came about through months of behind-the-scenes maneuvering. Emily Maitlis and producer Sam McAlister had been pursuing Andrew’s team for an interview for years, sensing that his ties to Jeffrey Epstein would eventually demand answers. McAlister, known for her persistence, managed to gain the trust of Buckingham Palace courtiers and convinced them that a sit-down would provide Andrew with the chance to clear his name and demonstrate transparency. The Prince and his advisors, astonishingly confident in his ability to explain away damning allegations, ultimately agreed, believing this would be the definitive rebuttal to growing scrutiny over his relationship with Epstein and Virginia Giuffre.What followed, of course, was the exact opposite: a masterclass in self-destruction. Andrew infamously claimed he couldn’t sweat, insisted a Pizza Express outing proved his innocence, and showed more sympathy for Epstein than for survivors. The decision to grant the interview—conceived as a reputational rescue mission—was the result of staggering arrogance and tone-deafness within the royal circle. Palace aides, who expected a controlled narrative, failed to recognize that Andrew’s own words would expose him as evasive, entitled, and profoundly out of touch. Far from salvaging his image, the interview sealed his disgrace, forcing him to withdraw from royal duties and leaving the monarchy scrambling to contain the fallout.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10974711/New-excruciating-details-Andrews-car-crash-Newsnight-interview-revealed.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
29 Aug 34min
Mega Edition: The USVI's Memo In Support Of Excluding Expert Testimony From JP Morgan (Part 3-4) (8/29/25)
The U.S. Virgin Islands’ Memorandum in Support of Excluding Expert Testimony from JP Morgan was a direct strike at the bank’s legal strategy of hiding behind highly paid specialists to sanitize its conduct. The filing argued that JP Morgan’s proposed experts weren’t there to provide neutral, technical insight—they were being deployed to confuse the jury, shift blame, and whitewash the bank’s longstanding financial relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The USVI pointed out that these experts attempted to dress up common sense issues—like due diligence, suspicious transactions, and regulatory compliance—as matters of complex banking science, when in reality the facts spoke plainly: the bank continued to profit off Epstein long after his 2008 conviction and obvious red flags. In essence, the memorandum framed JP Morgan’s “experts” as mouthpieces meant to cloud responsibility, not clarify it.By moving to bar this testimony, the USVI was making a broader argument about accountability. If JP Morgan was allowed to weaponize expert witnesses to downplay its failures, the survivors’ pursuit of justice would be buried under jargon and pseudo-objectivity. The memorandum emphasized that letting these experts testify would not only mislead the jury but also distort the purpose of the trial, turning it into a battle of résumés rather than a reckoning with the bank’s choices. The USVI’s position was clear: the facts don’t need interpretation from consultants paid millions to protect a financial giant—they need to be weighed on their own merits. This was an attempt to strip away the camouflage JP Morgan hoped to use, forcing the court to confront the bank’s role in sustaining Epstein’s trafficking operation without distraction or distortion.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.591653.289.0_2.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
29 Aug 25min
Mega Edition: The USVI's Memo In Support Of Excluding Expert Testimony From JP Morgan (Part 1-2) (8/28/25)
The U.S. Virgin Islands’ Memorandum in Support of Excluding Expert Testimony from JP Morgan was a direct strike at the bank’s legal strategy of hiding behind highly paid specialists to sanitize its conduct. The filing argued that JP Morgan’s proposed experts weren’t there to provide neutral, technical insight—they were being deployed to confuse the jury, shift blame, and whitewash the bank’s longstanding financial relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. The USVI pointed out that these experts attempted to dress up common sense issues—like due diligence, suspicious transactions, and regulatory compliance—as matters of complex banking science, when in reality the facts spoke plainly: the bank continued to profit off Epstein long after his 2008 conviction and obvious red flags. In essence, the memorandum framed JP Morgan’s “experts” as mouthpieces meant to cloud responsibility, not clarify it.By moving to bar this testimony, the USVI was making a broader argument about accountability. If JP Morgan was allowed to weaponize expert witnesses to downplay its failures, the survivors’ pursuit of justice would be buried under jargon and pseudo-objectivity. The memorandum emphasized that letting these experts testify would not only mislead the jury but also distort the purpose of the trial, turning it into a battle of résumés rather than a reckoning with the bank’s choices. The USVI’s position was clear: the facts don’t need interpretation from consultants paid millions to protect a financial giant—they need to be weighed on their own merits. This was an attempt to strip away the camouflage JP Morgan hoped to use, forcing the court to confront the bank’s role in sustaining Epstein’s trafficking operation without distraction or distortion.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.591653.289.0_2.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
29 Aug 24min
The State Of Idaho Adds Two More Prosecutors To The Team
In another move that signals that the state of Idaho is going for the highest penalty available to them when it concerns prosecuting Bryan Kohberger, the prosecution has reached out to the Attorney Generals office in Idaho and asked for assistance. That assistance, will come in the form of two more seasoned prosecutors who will help bolster the prosecutions team as they inch closer to trial.In this episode we take a look at the two new prosecutors that were added and what it might mean moving forward in the trial.(commercial at 6:12)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger Case Gets New Prosecutors (newsweek.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
29 Aug 10min
Steve And Kristi Goncalves And Their Interview With ABC In December Of 2022
From the archives: 12-15-22The parents of Kaylee Goncalves have given an interview to ABC news as they continue to search for answers in the murder of their daughter. The family has had a bit of a strained relationship with the investigators and to try to alleviate that the Goncalves' have now employed a lawyer to work as a liaison between them and the police.(commercial at 8:27)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:https://abcnews.go.com/US/parents-slain-idaho-student-desperate-answers/story?id=95219080Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
29 Aug 11min
The Death Penalty For Bryan Kohberger And Finances Behind The Death Penalty That Never Came
From the archives: 7-8-23The state of Idaho is not a state that is quick to execute people who have been found guilty of capital crimes. Just ask Gerald Pizzuto who has been sitting on death row for decades. It has cost the state of Idaho over 1.5 million dollars to house this man and deal with his plethora of medical ailments and now the question is being raised concerning Kohberger: Just how much could it cost to house him on death row if he is found guilty?Let's take a look.(commercial at 7:23)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger death penalty would cost $1M more than life in prison: report | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
28 Aug 10min
More Context On The Second FBI Visit To The House Located At 1122 King Road
The investigation into the murders in Moscow and the trial of Bryan Kohberger continue to roll on and with the delay in the proceedings, the FBI is taking full advantage of their new found time as they continue to build the case against Kohberger. In this episode, we take another look at the recent trip back to the house in Moscow and how Bryan Kohberger's team might try to spin it. (commercial at 8:38)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:FBI is spotted outside home where four Idaho University students were massacred as they do 3D imaging of the crime scene for suspect Bryan Kohberger's eventual trial | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.
28 Aug 15min
The Ghislaine Maxwell Tapes: Transcripts From Ghislaine Maxwell DOJ Interview (Part 10) (8/28/25)
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.
28 Aug 14min
