Inside My Six-Year Battle Against Jeffrey Epstein: Before the World Listened (Part 3) (11/22/25)

Maria Farmer is an American visual artist who rose to public attention not for her artwork initially, but for being among the first whistleblowers to alert authorities about Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. In 1996, while working for Epstein and Maxwell in New York, she was allegedly sexually assaulted by both. She went on to submit what is recognized as the first criminal complaint to the New York City Police Department and the FBI—a warning that would unfortunately go unheeded for years.Over the years Farmer has reemerged as a powerful advocate for survivors of Epstein’s exploitation. She filed an affidavit in federal court in 2019 supporting Virginia Giuffre’s defamation lawsuit, and in 2025, she sued the federal government for failing to act on her decades-old report. She has also publicly recounted a disturbing 1995 encounter with Donald Trump in Epstein’s Manhattan office, which she urged investigators to include in their probe of Epstein’s social circle.In this episode, we’re going back to April of 2022 for a conversation that’s as raw and revealing now as it was then—my interview with Maria Farmer. At the time, Maria was one of the only survivors publicly speaking out against the full machinery that protected Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. She didn’t just name names—she challenged institutions, exposed failures, and pulled the curtain back on a cover-up that reached into finance, intelligence, and politics. This interview captures Maria at her most unfiltered, recounting her experiences, her warnings to the FBI that were ignored, and her insight into how deep the rot really goes.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

23 Nov 1h 41min

In her deposition in the defamation lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre against Ghislaine Maxwell, Johanna Sjoberg described being recruited to work for Jeffrey Epstein under the impression that it was a legitimate job opportunity. According to her testimony, she was initially hired to help with office work but was soon asked to give massages to Epstein—something she testified quickly evolved into inappropriate and unwanted conduct. Sjoberg stated that Ghislaine Maxwell played a central role in managing the household and was often present during these encounters, contributing to the atmosphere of control and pressure. Her deposition supported claims made by Giuffre and other women who alleged they were misled into situations where they were exploited.Sjoberg also testified about interactions with well-known individuals while in Epstein’s company, including an allegation involving Prince Andrew, which she said took place at Epstein’s residence. She described an incident in which Maxwell, Epstein, and others were present during a moment she considered inappropriate and unsettling. While the full extent of those interactions remains the subject of legal scrutiny and public interest, Sjoberg’s deposition contributed to the broader pattern of allegations suggesting a tightly controlled environment where young women were manipulated under false pretenses. Her account was one of several that added weight to the claims being investigated in both civil and criminal proceedings surrounding Epstein and Maxwell.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

23 Nov 29min

In her deposition in the defamation lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre against Ghislaine Maxwell, Johanna Sjoberg described being recruited to work for Jeffrey Epstein under the impression that it was a legitimate job opportunity. According to her testimony, she was initially hired to help with office work but was soon asked to give massages to Epstein—something she testified quickly evolved into inappropriate and unwanted conduct. Sjoberg stated that Ghislaine Maxwell played a central role in managing the household and was often present during these encounters, contributing to the atmosphere of control and pressure. Her deposition supported claims made by Giuffre and other women who alleged they were misled into situations where they were exploited.Sjoberg also testified about interactions with well-known individuals while in Epstein’s company, including an allegation involving Prince Andrew, which she said took place at Epstein’s residence. She described an incident in which Maxwell, Epstein, and others were present during a moment she considered inappropriate and unsettling. While the full extent of those interactions remains the subject of legal scrutiny and public interest, Sjoberg’s deposition contributed to the broader pattern of allegations suggesting a tightly controlled environment where young women were manipulated under false pretenses. Her account was one of several that added weight to the claims being investigated in both civil and criminal proceedings surrounding Epstein and Maxwell.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

23 Nov 25min

In her deposition in the defamation lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre against Ghislaine Maxwell, Johanna Sjoberg described being recruited to work for Jeffrey Epstein under the impression that it was a legitimate job opportunity. According to her testimony, she was initially hired to help with office work but was soon asked to give massages to Epstein—something she testified quickly evolved into inappropriate and unwanted conduct. Sjoberg stated that Ghislaine Maxwell played a central role in managing the household and was often present during these encounters, contributing to the atmosphere of control and pressure. Her deposition supported claims made by Giuffre and other women who alleged they were misled into situations where they were exploited.Sjoberg also testified about interactions with well-known individuals while in Epstein’s company, including an allegation involving Prince Andrew, which she said took place at Epstein’s residence. She described an incident in which Maxwell, Epstein, and others were present during a moment she considered inappropriate and unsettling. While the full extent of those interactions remains the subject of legal scrutiny and public interest, Sjoberg’s deposition contributed to the broader pattern of allegations suggesting a tightly controlled environment where young women were manipulated under false pretenses. Her account was one of several that added weight to the claims being investigated in both civil and criminal proceedings surrounding Epstein and Maxwell.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

23 Nov 30min

In 2020, the FBI began reaching out directly to survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse, informing them that new findings had emerged and arranging private briefings to share the material. After years of feeling ignored or sidelined by the justice system, survivors described the outreach as a sudden and unexpected shift, suggesting that the bureau had gathered additional evidence since Epstein’s death and was preparing to disclose information that had been previously withheld. The FBI told them they would be receiving documents and updates firsthand, rather than hearing developments through public reports or court filings, raising hopes that long-absent transparency might finally be arriving.Survivors said they were told that the forthcoming materials would include information connected to Prince Andrew, whose relationship with Epstein and alleged involvement in trafficking claims had become one of the most explosive unresolved questions surrounding the case. Many believed these discussions would shed light on his role and on the broader network that operated behind Epstein. Buckingham Palace continued to insist that accusations against Andrew were completely untrue, but the FBI’s decision to personally brief survivors signaled that the investigation was far from closed. For many who had fought for years to be heard, the meetings represented not closure, but a crucial opening—an indication that powerful figures might no longer remain insulated from scrutiny.In the months that followed, survivors say the promise of transparency evaporated. The meetings that were supposed to lift the curtain on Epstein’s network produced nothing of substance, and the documents they were told to expect never arrived. The FBI went quiet again, offering no meaningful follow-up, no accountability, and no explanation for the sudden reversal.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

23 Nov 18min

Jeffrey Epstein’s friends in the financial sector acted as a crucial safety net that enabled him to operate for decades without meaningful consequences. Wealthy financiers, private-equity executives, hedge-fund managers, and high-ranking banking figures opened doors for him, legitimized him publicly, and helped craft the image of a brilliant money manager with mysterious access to elite capital. Institutions continued to work with him even after his 2008 conviction, granting him accounts, moving large sums of money, and treating him as a respected client rather than a convicted sex offender. These relationships provided not just financial support, but credibility — the appearance of institutional trust that insulated him from scrutiny and deterred journalists and regulators who might otherwise have investigated his background more aggressively.Beyond image protection, Epstein’s financial allies created a buffer of influence capable of suppressing exposure and consequences. Banks ignored internal warnings, compliance flags were bypassed, and suspicious-activity reports were buried or dismissed, all of which allowed Epstein to continue wiring money for travel, real estate, and payouts. When legal pressure mounted, these connections helped him negotiate favorable deals, secure lenient treatment, and maintain access to wealth that functioned as leverage over powerful associates. In effect, the financial elite served as a shield, transforming Epstein from a disgraced predator into a man still protected by the prestige and silence of the institutions that benefitted from his presence — proving that in the rarefied world of power and money, reputation can be manufactured and accountability can be deferred indefinitely.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

23 Nov 22min

Two women who say they were sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein have filed separate lawsuits against JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Deutsche Bank AG, alleging that the banks “turned a blind eye” to Epstein’s trafficking operations and actively facilitated his abuse of young women. The suits claim that the banks ignored red flags—such as large cash withdrawals, suspicious wire transfers, and accounts linked to women exploited by Epstein—and that they financially benefited from maintaining him as a client despite his criminal history.In the case against JPMorgan, the lawsuit points to senior executives and the bank’s wealth-management division, asserting they prioritized profit over basic due-diligence and knowingly kept Epstein on as a client after his 2008 Florida conviction. The suit against Deutsche Bank likewise claims the bank accepted Epstein in 2013 for business-generating opportunities despite internal warnings and an ongoing regulatory probe, alleging that he was able to channel millions through the bank for rent, tuition, legal-settlement payments, and travel involving recruitments of young women. Both suits seek unspecified damages and ask the court to certify class-action status, arguing the banks bear responsibility alongside Epstein’s direct actions.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

23 Nov 13min

Maxwell and her team mounted a broad PR offensive to humanize her and create a sympathetic narrative ahead of her $28.5 million bail proposal. Her court filings included letters from her undisclosed husband and more than a dozen friends and family members describing her as a “wonderful and loving person” and insisting she posed no flight risk. Her husband’s letter acknowledged her relationship with Jeffrey Epstein but claimed she “had nothing to do” with the crimes—setting the stage for her bail package by positioning her as a loyal spouse and stable individual awaiting trial.At the same time, the bail submission outlined a lavish support structure: Maxwell’s husband offered to co-sign the majority of the bond, friends and family committed additional millions, and she proposed to live under 24-hour house confinement, electronic monitoring, and secure home location while awaiting trial. The presentation was heavily choreographed to demonstrate stability and control over her assets rather than the “extreme flight risk” the prosecution emphasized. The timing of the marketing push immediately before the holiday season and its thorough documentation reflect an obvious strategy to shift public and judicial perception before the court reviewed her release motion.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

22 Nov 36min