Summary5 min read

Podcast Summary: The Epstein Chronicles — Inside The OIG Interview: The Testimony Of An Unnamed MCC Lieutenant (Part 13)

Host: Bobby Capucci
Episode Date: May 4, 2026
Episode Focus: Analyzing the OIG (Office of the Inspector General) interview with an unnamed MCC (Metropolitan Correctional Center) lieutenant concerning the circumstances, protocols, and irregularities surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s incarceration and subsequent death.

Episode Overview

This episode dives deeply into the testimony of an unnamed MCC lieutenant, as recorded by OIG inspectors following Jeffrey Epstein's mysterious death. The discussion explores prison protocols, gaps in record-keeping, camera malfunctions, the handling of inmate calls in the Special Housing Unit (SHU/"the shoe"), and persistent failures in daily routines the night Epstein died.
Bobby Capucci guides listeners through key interrogation exchanges, shines light on confusion and lapses among MCC staff, and continues to scrutinize possible negligence or misconduct.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Questions About "Out Counts" & Inmate Tracking

(00:45–03:00)

Investigators probe count procedures, particularly regarding the "out count" logged for Epstein ("redacted").
The lieutenant explains that an "out count" signifies an inmate either left the facility or is temporarily out for reasons (like attorney conference). Epstein was eventually removed fully from the count.
Quote:

"At this point, redacted is completely off of the count."
(02:30)
The administrator questions if staff should have notified higher-ups about changes to the count. The lieutenant agrees it would be appreciated but stops short of saying it's required:

"I mean, yeah, that's definitely helpful and it would have been appreciated. But to say that, you know, he's in the wrong for not doing it... I can't say that."
(03:12)
The lieutenant was not notified about this change.

2. Camera Malfunctions in the SHU

(03:20–06:15)

The OIG asks if the lieutenant knew which cameras weren't working on August 9th or 10th.
- He claims he wasn’t informed and knew of issues only after the fact, during the video review phase.
  
  "I heard something about it when they was, like, checking videos and stuff."
  (04:37)
- Describes the visuals as "some of them was showing granny" (grainy).
Calls out facilities to be responsible for cameras; suggests the facilities manager role was “probably vacant” at that time.
Communication gaps: The person responsible for ensuring camera functionality was possibly "vacant"; other staff (“redacted user,” a Com Tech) are named as potential leads.

"Whoever their manager is—facilities manager."
(05:15)

3. Staff Communication and Special Instructions Regarding Epstein

(06:30–09:10)

Lieutenant says he doesn’t recall giving or receiving special instructions specific to Epstein with other BOP staff ("redacted"), including about housing or the necessity for a cellmate.

“Not that I recall.”
(08:45)

4. The Mystery of Epstein’s Last Phone Call

(09:20–13:55)

The OIG investigator asks if the lieutenant knows about Epstein being allowed a phone call on the evening of August 9th, including whether it was conducted in the shower area.

"I think I heard something about that. I don't know. Was it redacted though? I just heard something. I think he made a phone call."
(10:15)
Discusses the logistics of calls in the shower area:

"The cord can't reach and I'll say, we got them out taking a shower. Hey, I'm going to give you a phone right now..."
(11:10)
Explains the difference between recorded and legal (unmonitored) lines—two jacks (legal line is unmonitored, for attorney calls).
Confirms it’s not normal protocol for non-attorney calls to be unmonitored/unrecorded.

"Would there be any reason to provide someone with a legal line that's not recorded?"
"No."
(12:15)
If the captain authorizes a call, staff must monitor and log it; failure to do so is questionable practice, although the lieutenant hesitates to declare it a violation.

5. Searches and Security Lapses in the SHU

(14:00–20:00)

The investigator brings up cell searches in the SHU on August 9th: Only one documented search at 12:36pm by a “redacted” staff member; protocol is a minimum of 5 per shift.

"Are they supposed to conduct more than one cell search? Yeah."
(16:15) "Per shift? ...Yeah." (16:52)
SHU protocol holds that all cells must be searched every 30 days; all lieutenants are responsible for checking this has been done.
The lieutenant suspects more searches happened than were logged:

“I'm quite sure more than one was conducted.”
(18:55)
When asked about excess linens and clothing, the lieutenant is not surprised ("that's not surprising"), even though such items should be removed during searches.

"So if they're doing cell searches, wouldn't they take that stuff out?"
"I suppose so, yeah."
(19:10–19:20)

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On recordkeeping and protocol adherence:

"They gotta be done. Every cell is supposed to be searched every 30 days... It's everybody's responsibility."
(17:40)
On facility management:

"Whoever their manager is—facilities manager... It was probably vacant."
(05:15)
On unmonitored phone calls:

"So why, if they provided Epstein a phone call in the shower area for a legal line, would that be wrong?"
"You mean an unmonitored line?... Yeah, unless they didn't know which one it is."
(12:40–13:00)

Important Timestamps

00:45 — Discussing "out count" record and notification failures regarding Epstein's presence
03:20 — Inquiry into which SHU cameras were inoperable and whose responsibility this was
06:30 — Communication (or lack thereof) between staff about Epstein’s needs or special instructions
09:20 — Details and protocol confusion around Epstein’s last phone call
14:00 — Cell search procedures, policy failure, and discrepancies in search logs
18:55 — Suspicion that actual cell searches exceeded those logged, highlighting documentation failures

Episode Tone & Closing

Throughout, Bobby Capucci maintains a direct and analytic tone, highlighting the inconsistencies in staff testimony and routine procedure. The episode presents the underlying message that critical lapses—whether due to negligence or deeper issues—persisted at every level of Epstein's detention.

Closing Note:
The episode wraps with Capucci indicating further exploration in the next installment and points listeners to additional documentation in the episode description.

For listeners and followers seeking a granular breakdown of prison routines and the persistent irregularities in the Epstein case, this episode offers a rare, candid window into security failures and the culture of bureaucracy at the MCC.

Loading summary

Transcript1 lines

[00:00]
A
What's up, everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to dive right back in to the unnamed lieutenant and his interview with the OIG inspectors about the death of Jeffrey Epstein. Question. All right. And do you mind just putting it like you did the last time, just a little star next to it? Answer. I've just got one question. Real quick. Question. Yes, please do. Answer. This is the 4pm Count, right? Answer. Yep. This out count that you see right here. Answer for ZD Question for Za. Sorry. Answer for za. Question. Za. See, that one? Is that one. Who is that one for? Is that for redacted Answer. Out count. Question. Who normally gets marked off on the E1. That's outcount. It means he's still in the facility or the inmates had to leave the facility. You never usually see an outcount for that one, though. I don't know what assignment this is. Question. Say that again. I'm not sure what this assignment is. Question. You don't know what account. Okay. Answer. It could have been some type of. He gets cut off by the investigator. I was just trying to figure out if they were still counting him as, hey, there's a possibility of him coming back. They've left him as an outcount, and eventually after evening, they removed them from the outcount. Answer. No. So the outcount. Oh, I know what you're saying now. You're trying to say. You mean who is the one that they have at the attorney conference? Answer C. We know that. Question. Yeah, that's the same thing. Answer. That's the same thing. Question. Yeah, all the numbers is repeats for the outcounts. Question. So you hear what he's saying? Yeah. Okay. Question 10, 1, 2. That equals 13, 1, 1, 3 plus 1 plus 13, 2 equals 19. Got it. So at this point, redacted is completely off of the count. Answer. Yeah, four. Yeah, he was off at this time. Question. Okay. Answer. But the thing is, he could come back. Question. Got it. Answer. That's why I'm saying. I know you're saying that, hey, he should have. I can't say that. Question. So you're not, like, upset at the fact like that he didn't notify you and then you could have notified the captain. You don't think that would have been what he should have done? Answer. I mean, yeah, that's definitely helpful and it would have been appreciated. But to say that, you know, he's in the wrong for not doing it and stuff like that, I can't say that. Question okay. And he didn't notify you? Answer no, not that I recall. Question okay, all right, so we're going to move on from that. You can give that back or you can hold on to it, whatever you want to do. Do you know about any cameras in the MCC shoe that were not working on August 9th or 10th? Answer no. That they weren't working? Yeah. No. Question have you. Did you ever. Were you made aware of that after August 9, any cameras were not working? I heard something about it when they was like checking videos and stuff. What did you hear about it? Answer that some of them was showing granny. Question and who would have been responsible for making sure the cameras were working? Answer Facilities. Question who from facilities should we speak with? Answer I'm not sure. Question who worked in facilities? Answer Whoever they manager is. Facilities manager. Question do you know who that person was back in August? Answer it was probably vacant. Question Vacant. Was there a redacted? Answer yeah, redacted user. Question did he send. Was he a supervisor? Answer he's not a supervisor. He's a com tech though. He's a com tech. Question Would he be somebody that would be good to speak with on that? Yeah, probably. Alright. Were you aware though that prior to that time that they weren't working the cameras? No. Question no. Okay, who is BOP employee? Redacted I know him. Do you know what his position was in August of 2019? He would have been a manager. What does that role entail? What are his duties and responsibilities? He's a supervisor of a unit team. What unit team at the time, do you know? I'm not sure. Did you have any communication with regard to Epstein with redacted? Like what? Question Just with them being housed within the shoe? Answer I probably talked to him about something, but I don't recall nothing specific. Question okay. Answer no communication like that. I don't know. Question did you ever provide him with any kind of special instruction with regard to Epstein? Answer not that I recall. Question no. What about did you ever communicate with redacted regarding rounds being conducted in the shoe or Epstein needing a cellmate? Answer not that I recall. Question Are you aware that redacted allowed Epstein to make a telephone call on the evening of August 9, 2019? Answer I think I heard something about that. I don't know. Was it redacted though? I just heard something. I think he made a phone call. Question all right, so do you know anything about redacted involved with the phone call? Answer no. Question all right, what's your understanding of the phone call that took place understanding on August 9th with Epstein's telephone call? Answer. It was a regular phone call. Question. Did you hear that it was made in the shower area? Answer. No. Question. Have you ever heard of telephone calls being made in the shower area? Answer. In the shower area? Yeah. Question. And what's the purpose of that? Answer. The cord can't reach and I'll say, we got them out taking a shower. Hey, I'm going to give you a phone right now. While I'm. While you're right there, I don't have to pull you out. And it's like a time consuming method. Question. Do you know if the line that would have been using in that area would be a recorded line or a legal line? Answer. It's two. There's two. Question. Okay, so would there be any reason to provide someone with a legal line that's not recorded? Answer no. Would there be a reason? Answer a question. Yeah. Answer no. Question. So why, if they provided Epstein a phone call in the shower area for a legal line, would that be wrong? Answer. You mean an unmonitored line? Question. Yeah. Answer. If they gave him an unmonitored line? Answer. Question. Right. Answer. Yeah, unless they didn't know which one it is. Question. And if they did not know that they gave him a legal line that was an unmonitored line, should someone have monitored that call? Answer. You can't, though. You said it was unmonitored. Question no, I mean, like, sit there and listen to the call. Answer. Oh, you mean like. I mean, they do that all the time. I think they could, you know, they let the call. They're legal attorneys, and, yeah, they do that. Question. Okay, and if they didn't do that? Answer. I don't know if it's a violation, but it's not common. Question. Yeah. So let's say if the captain even authorized it. Yeah, give him his phone call. Just make sure you monitor and log it. Answer no Question. They didn't monitor it. They didn't log it. Would that be a problem? Answer. The captain telling me, yeah. Question. All right. Did you ever hear of the practice taking place in the past? Answer. Unmonitored calls? Question. Yeah, or like letting somebody in the shoe have a phone call on that unmonitored line, walking away, letting the person talk? Answer no. Now, from an officer standpoint. Question. Yeah. Answer no. Question. You never seen that before or heard of that? Answer. Officer is no. Question. Okay. What's the policy for inmates making calls from the shoe? Answer. I don't know, they could get, they got to come. There's an indiscernible in shoe that everyone has a line, a compassionate phone line. And they get with the captain or the chaplain, excuse me, and they can make a phone call like say they might. You only get one phone call every 30 days. So Chaplain comes in, hey, give this guy a call, they come up, they bring him up, they let him use the compassionate phone. Question and when you say what's a compassionate phone? Answer yeah, it's like something they have, you know, a death in the family or something like that. Questioned but is that a monitored call? Answer I don't think so. But I mean staff would stay with them. It's monitored. Yeah, it's monitored. Question so anybody in the staff, it's either a monitored line or staff is with them, is that correct? Answer if it's monitored in the shoe. Question yeah. Answer yeah. Question so when I say monitored, I mean it's either a recorded line or you're right there. And what are the reasons why you would give him an unrecorded line or. Or a non recorded line? Answer I mean probably like an emergency or something. Definitely. Yeah. So like the chaplain ain't the hey, you know. Okay. Question but if it was in the shower area, they would actually have the ability to do either a recorded line or a non recorded line. Answer yeah. Question they're right next to each other. Answer It's a jack yeah. Question yeah. Okay. What about what's the MCC policy on conducting searches and in the shoe? Cell searches. You have to search the cell. Do you know about them not conducting cell searches, staff not conducting. Question yeah. Answer like what? Question like for instance, here's cell search from Nine south or the Shoe on August 9th. It's one cell search. It was conducted at 12:36pm during the day by redacted. It's the only cell search that was conducted on August 9. Is that weird for you that you would see only one search conducted on a day? Meh. Are they supposed to conduct more than one cell search? Yeah. Question how many are they supposed to conduct? 5. Question and is it at least 5 on night watch and during the day watch? Answer per shift? Question what's that? Answer per shift. Question Per shift, everyone supposed to do five. Answer yeah. Question Is that including the morning watch? Answer no. Question so day watch, he gets cut off by the lieutenant. Do area searches or morning watch? Question so your understanding is that on day watch and on night watch it's supposed to be 5 per shift? Answer yeah. Question and are you aware if they weren't doing that? Answer hmm. Question or is it that you were saying before an abnormal day? Answer I mean, I don't know. I wasn't aware that they wasn't doing it. No. Question okay. And is there any responsibility for the ops or activities lieutenant overseeing to make sure that these cell searches are being conducted? Answer yeah. Question There is. Answer yeah. Question and what is that responsibility? Answer I mean pretty much we check every 30 days. They've got to be done. Every cell is supposed to be searched every 30 days. Question every cell in there is supposed to be searched every 30 days. Answer the whole unit. Question okay, and that's where the ops lieutenant and activities lieutenant come in. Answer any lieutenant Question any lieutenant Answer it's everybody's responsibility. Question so I guess what I'm asking is on August 9th, the there's no shoe lieutenant in there as the activities lieutenant or the ops lieutenant on any of the watches, should have they been like making sure that they were doing their job? I'm not sure. You're not sure? Yeah. Question because I mean that's in truscope. It's like you're not checking truscope at the time he gets cut off by the investigator. Yeah, yeah. The lieutenant picks it back up and on top of that I think the cells, the cameras probably show the cells being checked. I'm quite sure they just didn't log them. Question alright, so you think that they're actually searching them? They got to. Question and not locking it. You got to hey, get out. You're doing a feed and cuff up showers. You come out and yeah, so they not locked. Question but would it be surprising to you to hear that there was a lot of extra linens and clothing and all that kind of stuff in the shoe? Answer that's not surprising. Question so if they're doing cell searches, wouldn't they take that stuff out and keep them with the he gets cut off by the lieutenant? I suppose so, yeah. Question all right, but you believe that they were actually conducting the cell searches? Answer I'm quite sure more than one was conducted. Question okay, so you think it was just this is all that they logged, but they probably did more? Answer yeah. All right folks, we're gonna wrap up right here and in the next episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up where we left off. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.