Summary5 min read

The Epstein Chronicles – Inside The OIG Interview: The Testimony Of An Unnamed R&D Officer From MCC (Part 5)

Date: May 9, 2026
Host: Bobby Capucci
Main Theme:
This episode delves into the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) interview with an unnamed R&D officer from the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC), focusing on the chain of communication and procedural actions surrounding inmate cell assignments—especially regarding Jeffrey Epstein’s requirement for a cellmate and the events leading up to Epstein’s death. The episode aims to clarify how, when, and why cellmate decisions are made in the MCC and whether proper protocols were followed.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Cellmate Notification and Assignment Protocols

The officer explains the system's reliance on proper notification to ensure Epstein was not left alone in his cell.
Communication gaps exist: without explicit notifications, staff might not know a particular inmate (like Epstein) requires a cellmate.
There is ambiguity about whose responsibility it is to notify others when an inmate (Reyes) leaves, and timing for reassigning a cellmate.

Notable Discussion (00:50 – 03:12):

Question: "So the shoe very well may never have been contacted or would have been contacted saying Reyes isn’t coming back. Consider him gone."
Answer: "Correct."
If there’s no notification, staff on new shifts or floaters may miss the requirement for a cellmate.

2. Timing and Process for Replacing a Cellmate

The OIG asks when Reyes’ removal should’ve triggered a new cellmate for Epstein.
The officer says if it was known ahead of time (pre-removal), efforts would start immediately. But, it depends entirely on staff awareness (07:27).
Notification lapses and lack of signage can leave officers unaware of requirement.

Quote (07:50, R&D Officer):
“Oh, well, if he knows it... then yes, at that time it would be required to replace or move them in the cell with somebody else.”

3. Debate Over “Premature” Action vs. Verification

There’s discussion about whether it’s justifiable to delay assigning a new cellmate on the chance Reyes could return.
The officer notes that inmates sent out as "WAB" (Will be Back/Not Be Coming Back) rarely return from court—about 1 in 100 for court trips—which diminishes the argument for delay.

Quote (15:20):
“Maybe like 10 out of 100 [for airlift situations]. … But going to court? Maybe 1 in 100 that might have come back. But most of the time they go.”
— R&D Officer

The OIG pushes on whether waiting for verification is valid:
(17:38, OIG):
“So that argument that we needed to wait until verification, that really doesn't hold weight then if they know he was going to court WAB.”
“Yeah.”
— R&D Officer

4. Breakdowns in Communication & Institutional Dysfunction

Officer laments that communication at MCC is poor; critical information about inmate requirements is not always effectively shared.
The structure of the shift system and rotation means many staff are out of the loop.

Quote (21:30, R&D Officer):
“But like I said, communication around here is not at its best. So what should have happened, what should have taken place might not necessarily happen because everybody doesn't know everything that's going on around here. Everybody does not communicate the way that they should.”

5. Responsibility and Chain of Command

When action needs to be taken, the notification should ascend: to the SHU lieutenant or Ops (Operations) lieutenant.
In practice, if staff are unfamiliar with the unit or not properly briefed, mistakes happen.

Memorable Moment (22:13):
“We’re all over the place. Sometimes we don’t know. We don’t know everything about every unit. So that’s the unfortunate part.”
— R&D Officer

Notable Quotes & Speaker Attributions

On Notification Lapses:
- “If there’s no notification and I work a unit ... and there’s nothing placed on the walls ... or maybe on the clipboard? I wouldn’t know that.” (06:35, R&D Officer)
On Frequency of Inmates Returning After WAB:
- “...about 10 out of 100" (with airlift), "but going to court? Maybe 1 in 100 ... But most of the time they go.” (15:20, R&D Officer)
On Validity of Waiting for Verification:
- “... it really doesn't hold weight then if they know he was going to court WAB.”
- “Yeah." (17:38, OIG & R&D Officer)
On Communication Issues:
- “Communication around here is not at its best ... what should have happened ... might not necessarily happen because everybody doesn't know everything that’s going on around here." (21:30, R&D Officer)
On Staff Familiarity with Units:
- “If I was working up there, that’s not my normal unit ... I would not know that.” (22:01, R&D Officer)

Important Timestamps

00:50 – 03:12: Discussion of notification protocol breakdowns when inmates leave and how staff might remain unaware of cellmate requirements.
07:27 – 08:06: When a new cellmate should be assigned upon Reyes’ pre-removal.
15:00 – 17:38: Analysis of "WAB" returns and the statistical improbability of inmates coming back after a court trip.
21:30 – 22:13: Insight into MCC's communication failings and staff knowledge gaps.

Episode Tone

Capucci maintains a probing, detail-oriented tone, pressing for clarity on complex procedural failings that may have affected one of the highest-profile inmate deaths in modern history. The R&D officer's answers are blunt, procedural, and sometimes resigned—pointing to systemic dysfunctions rather than individual malice or oversight.

In Summary

This episode provides a rare, granular look into MCC’s internal processes immediately before Epstein’s death. Through the OIG interview, major procedural ambiguities and a breakdown in institutional communication are highlighted. The officer’s testimony undermines arguments for delay in cellmate reassignment and exposes how confusion, lack of information, and insufficient notification can allow critical rules (especially those designed for high-profile inmates like Epstein) to go unenforced.

Next Episode Preview:
Capucci promises to continue dissecting witness testimonies and further revelations from the OIG documentation in the series’ next installment.

For further information: See the episode’s description box for referenced documents and supporting resources.

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 interview given by the R D officer from MCC to the OIG inspectors. Question. Okay, so at what point should control. Then at some point they'll call the shoe and say Reyes isn't coming back. Answer. If the count's not bad, they wouldn't know to call them and say. They wouldn't say that. No. Question. So the shoe very well may never have been contacted or would have been contacted saying Reyes isn't coming back. Consider him gone. Answer Correct Question. Okay, so they would have only known that based upon doing rounds and counts is what you're saying. Right? But if they don't know that he needs a cellmate, because I don't believe there was any notification that another individual had to be placed in a cell with them. So nobody would know that. Even if you're making rounds and counting your unit, you wouldn't know that. We need. If there's no notification. Question. While notifications were made and the people were saying that they passed it along to other ships saying, yeah, he's required to have a cellmate. However, they're saying that Reyes is gone, possibly not returning. Make sure to get him a bunky if he doesn't. So it's kind of like a. At what point does it determine when is Reyes not getting a bunky? When is Reyes not coming home? Coming back? We've also been told by a number of people though, they say R D would call us to say, yeah, Reyes isn't coming back. But to you, you're saying, no, that doesn't happen. We don't call Shu. We wouldn't have called them to say that Reyes, he gets cut off by the guard. It's a possibility. We could have called, but then sometimes we don't call. You know, if there is a miscount, there would be no reason for us to call. We would just key the inmate out. Sometimes they call us back and say, hey, inmate, so and so went out to court. Is he coming back? Some units will call and ask question. So they'll call rather than the other way around. Answer. Sometimes they call us. Question. Alright, answer. But the only way they'll know what the inmates might and then be because of the shift change. You might have an officer from the specific set of hours. And then now you have a new officer coming in at the specific set of hours. They won't know who went out to court unless they read their court list or they look at their log, they probably wouldn't know. And if they're doing account and their account is what it's supposed to be, they won't know. Question so you're a very unique person that we're talking to is both has both sets of knowledge with the facts that you've worked with custody as well as non custody. And you know how these things work when people are removed. If the people in the shoe knew, and let's say, let's just say for this example, say everybody in the shoe knows that Epstein is required to have a cellmate. Reyes leaves at 8:30, he has a pre removal. At what time do you believe they should have reassigned a new cellmate to Epstein? Answer well, if they knew that he was a pre removal, then they would be trying to work on that immediately, as soon as possible. But that's if they knew. Question so if they knew, let's say he gets cut off by the guard and if that was what was required. Question. Let's say the OIC absolutely knows he's wab not to return. Do you believe that he should have immediately then started working on a new cellmate? Answer he would notify the lieutenant. Hey, move. That's what he would do if that was what was required. Question. So, and if their argument are, let's say that the lieutenants and the OICs are arguing, that's premature, he could always return. So we pass it on to the next ship saying he gets cut off by the guard. Well, it's premature if you don't know that the inmate's not coming back. Question in this case though, if he's wabc, do you believe that he's still premature? No, if he is wab, but looking at this, I don't know. No, no, I'm just saying if he was wab at that point, do you think that it's still premature or do you think at the time it's appropriate? No, if it was okay, if it was known that this inmate was leaving and he wasn't coming back, and if it was known that this individual needed to have someone else in the cell with him, then yes, at that time it would be required to replace or move them in the cell with somebody else. So yeah. Question. So when you're saying known though, so I mean known that he's a wab, he gets cut off by the guard, known that he's wab, and also known that this individual requires a cellmate at all times, cannot be housed alone. Now there are some inmates that have to reckon A cell a alone. And there are signs on their doors and that there are some inmates that might be required to have a cellmate. But if there's no notification and I work a unit and this is not my normal unit and I'm working this unit and I'm just filling in here and then there, then I'm working and I don't know. And there's nothing placed on the walls that state that or on this inmate on the door or maybe on the clipboard? I wouldn't know that. Question. No, no, that's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is I think you've probably specifically talking about the Tova and Michael Thomas. I'm talking about in the morning at 8:30am Prior to that time, they get a court list WAB and the OIC says, yeah, he's WAB, he's likely not to return. He's got his bag, you know, I'm taking him down, I'm giving him off. I know. He says, I know Epstein's required to have a cellmate. Answer. Oh, well, if he knows it. Question. But is it a legitimate argument in your opinion to say placing Epstein with a new cellmate is premature because Reyes could return? Is that a valid argument? Answer. Well, based on what you just said, knowing she gets cut off by the investigator with WAB and with knowing Epstein requires right. Answer. Well, based on what you just said, knowing that he's wab, that would not be premature because he's leaving. Question. Right. Answer. Now, if for some reason it gets cancelled and they say, hey, we're not moving this inmate, we're going to move him at a later time, because those things do happen. His trip, he got cancelled. But knowing that he's going to be leaving, I don't think that would be premature. No. Question. So if he leaves at 8:38 in the morning and the OIC shift ends at 2:00pm, does that is there, Would he know that the trip got canceled? I guess the way I would be asking, he knows the guy left at 8:38 WAB and I guess by that time I would think by 2pm if a trip got canceled, they would know. Correct? Answer. Yeah, because the inmate would have went back upstairs. He would have went back to the unit. Question. Right. So how often do inmates that go WAB and their trips don't get canceled, how often do those inmates actually return? Oh, they go upstairs immediately. No, no. So I'm saying if Reyes is listed as WAB, he left at 8:30 in the morning, his trip didn't get canceled by 2pm because he never came back upstairs. How often do WAB inmates actually come back to the institution? It's happened with inmates going on an airlift. The marshals take inmates all the way out of their institution and then have to bring them all the way back. It's happened. Question and let's say if out of 100 wabs. Answer I'll say about. If I had to count, maybe about it's happened. It's happened. Question But I mean, does it happen, like very random and seldomly, or does it happen like one out of five times this happens, or are we talking about like one out of 100 or one out of a thousand? Answer I'll say maybe like 10 and of 100. Question so about 10% of the time it does happen? Answer it has happened. Yep. Question okay, so 10% of the time. All right. Answer it's happened. It might be something with the airlift. The paperwork is not right. She gets cut off. So then with keeping that in mind, that 10% of the time that has happened, then do you believe that is slightly a valid argument to say, yeah, well, we know that he needs a cellmate, but we don't think it's appropriate to do it in this shift. It should be done on the next shift when we're verifying that he's in fact not coming back? Answer yeah, I would say that's appropriate. Question okay. Answer because you don't know. You just don't know. Anything is subject to change. So I would say that's appropriate. Question okay, so it's different with you. You're saying airlift. Now we're talking about pre remove specifically for court. Answer While airlifts could be pre removed. Question but what I'm saying is it's WAB because the person is going to court. Nothing to do with transports getting messed up. If this inmate is Wab going to court, how often do the inmates going to court WAB actually return? Answer they mostly go. Question so it's like maybe 1 in 100. Answer maybe 1 in 100 that might have come back. But most of the time they go question so even 1 in 100 is like, yeah, no, they pretty much are always gone. Answer yeah. Question so then that argument of he gets cut off by the guard, it's got to be something drastic that they might not have come back. But most of the time they go Question so that argument that we needed to wait until verification, that really doesn't hold weight. Then if they know he was going to court. WAB Answer if they know he was going to court. Wab. Yeah. Question. Then the argument doesn't hold weight. Answer. It's a catch 22, because I've seen so many things that have happened that you might think somebody is gone and they bring him back. Question. Sure, but it sounds like he gets cut off by the guard. He might get on that side and something might come up in his paperwork where they're like, oh, we got a new case, we got a new charge, and we're not transferring him. We got to sort this out. I mean, it has happened where somebody has come back to the jail, but most of the time they do go. Question. And it sounds like it's extremely rare circumstances. Answer. Yeah. Question. All right, so at that point, do you think that they should have taken action immediately if they knew it was WAB and going to court knowing the fact that Epstein needed a cellmate? But we know Reyes left Epstein needed a cellmate. The OIC and the SHU officers knew that he needed a cellmate. Should they have taken action immediately? Answer. Maybe they should have notified their supervisor. Answer. Who would they have notified of this? Answer the shoe Lieutenant and let them know, hey, the guard gets cut off by the investigator. Indiscernible. No shoe Lieutenant. Should it be the ops Lieutenant? Indiscernible. Lieutenant. Answer. The ops or the acting lieutenant notify, hey, we got bunk inmate so up with so and so he can't be housed by himself. Question. Okay, answer. But like I said, communication around here is not at its best. So what should have happened, what should have taken place might not necessarily happen because everybody doesn't know everything that's going on around here. Everybody does not communicate the way that they should. So you might know it, but just because you know it, you might assume I know it and we're working together. Not necessarily true. Question. Sure. And yeah, we would only go off of what people tell us directly. Like, did you know this? Yes, I knew it. Okay. And you know, so. So he gets cut off by the guard. Because it's not like if I was working up there, that's not my normal unit. If I was working up there, I would not know that. Question. Right. Answer. You know, if I'm coming from another department and that's not my steady post, I would not know that. Question. Yeah, and that's why we're listing people like oic, Shoe, Lieutenant, Ops, Lieutenant, activities, Lieutenant. These people that he gets cut off. You know, it's so hard to say yes and no, but if you know someone new, then yes, but everybody that works in this institution. We're all over the place. Sometimes we don't know. We don't know everything about every unit. So that's the unfortunate part. Question. Do you recall anyone calling R D looking for the status of Reyes that day? Answer. I don't remember. No, I'm not going to. I don't remember that. No. Question. All right. Do you have anything else on the topic before the other investigator jumps in? I don't think so. We kind of beat it. All right, folks, we're going to wrap up right here. And in the next episode, dealing with the topic we're going to pick up, we're going to where we left off. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.