Summary4 min read

The Epstein Chronicles

Episode: Inside The OIG Interview – The Warden's Statement Detailing The Death Of Jeffrey Epstein (Part 12)

Host: Bobby Capucci
Date: April 12, 2026

Episode Overview

In this episode, Bobby Capucci continues his deep dive into the Office of Inspector General (OIG) interview with the former warden of the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC), focusing on the period surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s death. This installment examines the critical administrative failures in the Special Housing Unit (SHU) on August 9-10, 2019, including mishandled inmate counts, improper log documentation, lack of required rounds and cell searches, and the broader implications for supervision and accountability within the MCC.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Inmate Count and Tracking Errors (03:00–06:30)

The discussion revolves around breakdowns in protocol for tracking inmates, particularly moving inmates between cells or units (e.g., Fernandez moving to "RA"/"RD" dry cell).
Key Insight: The SHU was responsible for notifying the control center about inmate moves. It emerged, however, that some moves were not reported, leading to inaccurate count records.

“He requested the lieutenant, but he never notified control that an inmate was being moved. Right.” – Warden (04:40)
Administrative Oversight: Such omissions resulted in discrepancies in the official counts, raising significant concern in the context of Epstein's disappearance and subsequent death.

2. Required Rounds and Lieutenant Responsibilities (07:15–18:00)

The OIG and host probe the protocols for lieutenant rounds in the SHU, exploring whether these rounds were done appropriately and what their purpose was (ensuring inmate welfare vs. merely checking in with officers).

“Counts are for accountability… and the 30-minute checks are basically safety checks.” – Warden (12:30)

"If you're not showing on the form that you did your rounds, then that's, that's a problem." – Warden (18:30)
Key Failures: There’s evidence the required 30-minute checks were skipped or not documented, and round sheets were inaccurately filled out or left unsigned for multiple shifts.
Implications: These failures undermine both inmate safety and institutional accountability—especially troubling in the case of a high-profile inmate like Epstein.

3. Documentation Discrepancies and Signed Logs (12:00–17:30)

The OIG points out that round sheets were signed off by lieutenants even when proper rounds weren’t completed.
- Example: A lieutenant signed a form with zero rounds documented—clear evidence of non-compliance.
"It’s a problem. That same thing, we go this whole thing, so the whole shift looks like that. Then they didn’t even sign until here on 8/8." – Bobby Capucci summarizing findings (14:45)
Supervisory Gaps: The staff on duty is responsible for accurate logs, while supervisors must ensure compliance. Both failed in these duties.

4. Shortcomings in Cell Searches (20:00–25:45)

The discussion examines the Truscope log system, which records searches and security rounds.
Requirement: Policy required a minimum of five cell searches per shift.
Findings: On the day in question (August 9, 2019), logs showed only one cell search was performed across all shifts—another serious procedural lapse.

“Is that a problem that only one cell search was conducted in the SHU…? Yeah, it’s a problem.” – OIG Investigator & Warden (23:08)
Alternate explanations (like system outages) are considered unlikely due to other logged entries.

“I mean now there might have been a reason where the person said okay, the computers were down or whatever, but it’s highly unlikely.” – Warden (25:00)

5. Overarching Accountability Issues (20:30–close)

Multiple system failures, from documentation lapses to policy non-compliance, created an environment where accountability was compromised.
The podcast underscores that these combined oversight failures did not just affect Epstein but potentially the well-being and security of all inmates in the SHU during that period.

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

On the significance of staff not doing rounds and counts:

"The significance of the count is that if inmates or if the staff members aren’t conducting counts… that’s about accountability."
– OIG Investigator (12:15)
On rationale for round checks:

"If they were conducting the rounds, would that be a way at least to try and help ensure that inmates such as Epstein were alive and well?... Is that part of the reason to make sure that… you’re checking to see if they’re alive and they’re breathing?"
– OIG Investigator (16:05)

"It’s true. But I mean, an inmate can, you know, you can do your 30-minute rounds, and if they want to harm themselves, they’re going to do it."
– Warden (16:22)
Summing up the episode’s findings:

“So problematic in your opinion? Yes. Yes, it is.”
– OIG & Warden (25:38)

Timestamps for Key Segments

03:00–06:30 — Breakdowns in inmate tracking & notification between SHU and control center
07:15–12:00 — Lieutenants’ required rounds, distinction between counts and rounds
12:00–17:30 — Documentation issues, falsified logs, failures by supervisory personnel
20:00–23:15 — Analysis of Truscope logbooks, serious lapse in required cell searches
23:15–25:45 — Confrontation on number of searches, possibility (but doubt) of system outage, final accountability assessment

Conclusion

This episode meticulously exposes systemic negligence and administrative failures inside the MCC prior to Epstein’s death. The OIG’s interview with the warden, as discussed by Bobby Capucci, paints a disturbing picture—required checks weren’t done, documentation was falsified or incomplete, and there was a breakdown at nearly every supervisory level. The implication is clear: a combination of gross negligence and institutional dysfunction created the perfect storm for one of the most controversial inmate deaths in U.S. history.

Next episode:

Capucci will continue dissecting the OIG warden interview, focusing on further details and implications for the Bureau of Prisons and ongoing investigations.

All episode resources and supporting documents are linked in the description.

Loading summary

Transcript2 lines

[00:00]
A
My name's Mackenzie and I started a GoFundMe for the adoptive mother of a non verbal autistic child. The mother had lost her job because she wasn't able to find adequate care for this autistic child. So she really needed some help with living expenses, paying some back bills. So I launched a GoFundMe to help support them during this crisis and we raised about 10, $10,000 within just a couple of months. I think that the surprising thing was by telling a clear story and just like really being very clear about what we needed, we had some really generous donations from people who were really moved by the situation that this family was struggling with.
[00:47]
B
GoFundMe is the world's number one fundraising platform trusted by over 200 million people. Start your GoFundMe today at gofundme.com that's gofundme.com go gofundme.com this podcast is supported by GoFundMe. What's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're diving right back in to the interview that the warden from MCC gave to the OIG inspectors. Question now we're going to move on because the warden agrees that there is not really reason to really dig further because he agrees this clearly shows that the counts were not conducted in the shoe from a certain time on. Question do you want to ask about the Fernandez key? The investigator responds, what about it? The warden who's responsible? Question so Fernandez oh, can you just. Sorry, would you mind signing, initialing and just dating. If Fernandez was actually removed from the shoe and placed onto our, you know, RA dry cell and R D dry cell rna R D are interchangeable, correct? Because RA for ra, I believe, is what it shows in the count slip. But it stands for R D, right? Answer I believe. Yeah. Question so if he's actually moved there around the 3pm on August 9th of 2019, who would have been responsible for keying him in and out of the shoe and placing him into the RA so that the count would be accurately reflected? Answer Shu would have notified control center that we're moving one over to R D. Question and by that notification, do they also say can you please key him out and into or is this just automatically done by control? Answer well, the notification is made to control that inmate such and such is being placed on dry cell and R D and then you key the inmate to that area. Question sure. Answer so I'll give you a quick background. It looks like redacted witness this and he wrote up the shot and he called the lieutenant and he requested the lieutenant and it looks like he requested the lieutenant, but he never notified control that an inmate was being moved. Right. Question. Well, no, no, no, no, no, I wouldn't, I wouldn't. He gets cut off again, but by the warden this time. But then while the counts are going on, there's somebody in R D. So whoever is sitting in R D should have known that I need to do a count slip because I have an inmate down there. Hayes interjects Is this where somebody disappears that we're looking for, Warden? Right. Question again. I told you this was more of an administrative thing. Just to say what does the warden, you know, and the boss of this place, what's his take on these matters? Because as you have gathered, a lot of things went wrong this day. So we need to figure out why these things went wrong. Let me just make sure before we move on that I got everything. All right, so first before we get into the rounds, when a lieutenant conducts a round in the shoe, are they required to conduct a round of the inmates going up and down the different tiers or does the round consist of just checking in with the officers to make sure everything's okay? Answer. Well, the check the officers to make sure that they're all right. And you check the documentation. So you check, you know, you edit. You would have to review the post orders also to state what their duties are. I mean all of us had different, you know, I was a lieutenant, so it was different things you did. But I always check the 292s to make sure, you know, the officer is checked off, you know, if the person ate or not. Any medical, I would check to see if medical came up so it would not be a factor and depend on what shift you went on. You know, the day shift, the inmates are up, so you're going to, you know, you can go around evening shift, you can see what's going on the midnight shift, they're sleeping, but you're definitely checking a 30 minute log to see if the inmates are doing their 30 minute checks and you know, just documentation. Question. Now, as the warden, did you expect your lieutenants though to go downrange when they were doing the lieutenant visits in the shoe, the rounds. And this is specifically when they're like signing off on the different, like on. As you can see, this is what I'm going to be showing you. These are the round sheets you sent to Ms. Redacted or Mr. Redacted where it shows the different lieutenant signed off on and what they and they did their round. So what does that he gets cut off by the warden but what does what the lieutenants are checking for is accuracy of the officer's rounds. Question okay, this is he gets cut off by the warden again. So what they're checking is okay, where the 30 minute infrequent checks done. Now if there is an easy that they are not being done, you know, so you know, then it needs to be annotated and said okay, this is what the issue is. But if they're signing it, they're kind of acknowledging that, you know that the time that the round will be put down that they were done. Question now what would be this is the round. It looks like 4, 8. 8. Can you think of a reason why these wouldn't be done but they would be signed off on right here? Answer Let me see. So if a lieutenant made the rounds and saw this thing was empty like this, then it's a problem. Question because you have this eight eight and then there is zero rounds showing that they were conducted but this lieutenant signed it. That's a problem. That same thing we go this whole thing so the whole shift looks like that. Then they didn't even sign until here on 8 8. Answer Wait, did you print these off the logbook? Question this is what you sent to Mr. Redacted answer right. Question on Saturday August 10th at 6:21pm answer now the only other thing I can think of and when I had gathered something I might have said because the checks are done at like no, these are 30 minute checks. So they you know these are, this is I was thinking of the log. The log did it electronic. He gets cut off by the investigator. We have the electronic version. Answer yeah, this is he gets cut off again by the investigator. Which one? So this is just wrong. Yeah, it's wrong. Should have this lieutenant sign that. No, he should have signed it. They should have put something listed as some discrepancy why the checks weren't done. Question and on these whereas it looks like this lieutenant signing it looks like probably because these are done. Do you think that this is the reason why the individual hadn't signed these because these weren't correct? Probably. I can't speculate on that question because it says reviewed by morning watch Lieutenant where they do that? Well that lieutenant does start signing it here where they now were filled out. Answer right Question for the same date. Answer so this looks like hey I don't know who it was but this looks like indiscernible worked it let me see how those 30 minutes, that's the same one. I don't know who it was. Question okay, so that was indiscernible. So certainly go look but whomever it was during those shift and then we get into it looks like still here's 8, 9 where it signed off until 2pm Answer that's a problem. QUESTION after that, no sign off, same thing. And that's just when I think redacted left his shift or somewhere around that time. So Mr. Hayes jumps in once again. The point of this, if I may ask is we got a miscount, right? Question we're not we moved on from the counts. We're in the rounds. HAYES okay, now. Counts the significance of the count is at some point Reyes disappears. QUESTION no. The significance of the count is that if inmates or if the staff members aren't conducting counts and counts are to the accountability of the inmates to make sure everybody is there. Rounds are basically to make sure everybody's alive and breathing. Is is that correct, sir? ANSWER yeah, you're right. Counts are accountability and then the 30 minute checks are basically safety checks. QUESTION so the point of the questioning is it looks like that we just finished was counts and we have shown that the staff members were not conducting their counts. Mr. Hayes Right, because that is why you have 72 when it should be 73. Question now we're doing the rounds to find out if the staff members were doing the rounds. HAYES Got it. QUESTION and again, we have in this case a very high profile inmate that was deceased became deceased at some point. And yeah, if they were not conducting rounds at all, if they were conducting rounds, would that be and that is the question to you, like we'll ask you now, since I'm making that explanation, if they were conducting the rounds, would that be a way at least to try and help ensure that inmates such as Epstein were alive and well? I know it's not going to prevent it in every case, but is that part of the reason to make sure that if they are conducting a round, you're checking to see if they're alive and they're breathing? ANSWER it's true. But I mean, and because I mean an inmate can, you know, you can do your 30 minute rounds and if they want to harm themselves, they're going to do it? Question Right. And that goes into play with gets cut off by Hayes they just look like they do rounds by looking in the cell. Warden Right. HAYES so if they want to do harm you just wait until they passed your cell. Answer by the warden Right. And then you kind of figure out the timing of the route. But the fact remains, if you're not showing on the form that you did your rounds, then that's, that's a problem. Question so when you're looking at these rounds that are sent to Mr. Redacted, are you finding problems because they're not completed correctly? You know, what we just looked through. In fact, you know, these are August 10th indiscernible, they're not signed off. There's blocks that are not filled out. Answer yeah, looking at them now. Question Right. Well, does it show you that at least this paperwork doesn't appear to be filled out correctly? Answer yes. Question and that is for the eighth as well, right? Question so that was Mr. Hayes again jumps in and that is something. It was your job to pass that on to redacted the warden. No, he requested he gets cut off by the investigator. No, no, no. This is just to show that the rounds or the round sheets that the warden sent to the regional director were these rounds. So it's just a matter of hey, do you know if these rounds were. It has nothing to do with his if he did right or not. It's about what the staff members are doing, right? Hayes Right. Question and who is responsible to make sure that the round sheets are done correctly? Answer well, the staff working up there are responsible and then the supervisor is supposed to ensure that they're doing it. Question and what is this? This was also attached. What is this right here? What are we looking, Truscope logs? Answer yeah, this looks like Truscope. This looks like the log. And so like if they're doing what areas they search. Question and these are searches? Answer yeah, these look like searches. Question okay. Answer Let me see that search did the areas visiting Strip Room Recreation. Yeah, these are the search areas. Question does it show anywhere in there that there were cells that were searched or that they were all like common areas? Answer no, they searched it. It looks like what is this? Nine South Shoe completed. All these are. These look like everything that's been done in there. Fire and safety checks. This is it looks like the log. Question okay, so this goes with you answer huh? Question so all of this, this is something else that we asked for the BOP to print out for us. And this one specifically, the one we asked for when you send us the cell searches that were conducted on 8, 9 2019, we got back one by Mr. Redacted. It says it was conducted at 12:36pm on 89 2019. Is that a problem that only One cell search was conducted in the SHU according to, at least according to Truscope because I believe the post orders state it was supposed to be and don't quote me on it, you have to look at the post orders but they state, I, I think five a shift, a minimum of five. Question it's five, I believe for the night watch. The day watch I believe is more and the morning watch is just indiscernible. Hayes Self searches. Answer by the warden no, no, each shift is a minimum of five. Question I don't think that includes the morning watch though, because there is common areas. Hayes, you're supposed to do five cell shifts, five cell searches per shift. Answer yeah, Hay's all right. And in this case there was only indication that they did one. Answer One right. Question one the whole day. Answer one the whole day. Not per shift, the whole day. Hayes okay, now whose job is it he gets cut off by the warden? No. Hayes picks back up take say we aren't doing those, I was going to use the F word. Why aren't you doing all those shifts? Question well, this is, this is my question to the warden. Is that a problem that they're only logged into Truth Scope? Answer huh, it's a problem. Question does that indicate that the cells were not being searched to you or that they were just logging them in? Answer and again, whoever was working that day, you're going to have to ask them, I mean looking at the paper, I mean it shows you didn't, you didn't conduct your searches. Question okay. Answer I mean now there might have been a reason where the person said okay, the computers were down or whatever, but it's highly unlikely. So yeah, Hayes, you throw over mattresses, the whole thing. Warden no, you pull them out, you look at, you look, check stuff in the lockers, you check under their stuff, you know, and typically do it the like on certain days when the guys are going out to take a shower, you might go out and do that. Question so with your suggestion that the computers could be down and things like that, as you can see from the email attachment that you said there were certainly plenty of searches that were entered in there, but there is only one cell search. Answer right? Question and so I would assume, would that indicate that the computers are actually up and running? Answer yeah, this one, this is the same day. Yeah, this should be a 10, 8, 9 and 8 10. It shows the dates here. I just can't see them. Warden yeah. Change base. Yeah, this is search one. This is the log. Question okay, so problematic in your opinion. Answer. Yes. Yes, it is. 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.