
Lamine N'Diaye, in his interview with the Office of the Inspector General, essentially tried to turn the Metropolitan Correctional Center into a scapegoat while positioning himself as a bystander to its failures. He leaned heavily on the narrative...
Loading summary
A
With Vrbill's last minute deals, you can save over $50 on your spring getaway. So whether it's a mountain escape, city break or a week at the beach, there's still time to get great discounts. Book your next day Now. Average savings $72 select homes only the
B
right window treatments change everything. Your sleep, your privacy, the way every room looks and feels. @blinds.com, we've spent 30 years making it surprisingly simple to get exactly what your home needs. We've covered over 25 million windows and have 50,000 five star reviews to prove we deliver. Whether you DIY it or a pro to handle everything from measure to install, we have you covered. Real design professionals, free samples, zero pressure right now. Get up to 40% off site wide plus get a free professional measure@blinds.com rules and restrictions apply.
C
What's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode we're going to pick up where we left off with the warden from MCC and his interview with the OIG inspectors. Question do you know if they are actually looking like the lieutenant's office people in the lieutenant's office or the ops Lieutenant activities Lieutenant Are they actually looking like at the list and saying or that's just based upon the busyness of their day? Answer yeah, I wouldn't speculate. I mean I don't know. I can't say what the lieutenant's looking at and stuff like that. I mean it's like the documents. Question no, I mean but should they have I guess is the question Answer as far as what emails that are coming through on who's leaving? Question no, no, this would be physical paper that they were provided internal would go around and provide everybody with this physical paper that they create and then they apparently destroy it at the end of the day. Answer Right. So I don't know if the you know, the internal gets the forms to go to. They're dropping it off at different units. So I don't know if, if one was passed off to the lieutenant the lieutenant would, I would guess this probably be the only document they tear up. Question we're being told by the lieutenants as well as by R D they all have it and they all and it would all. It would have said wab. Unfortunately I haven't found the document to show you. This is what I'm referring to but it's a document they apparently create which they call the court production list. Answer the court list. I've heard of the court list Question but it's like from my understanding, it's informal document that they are just providing so that, you know, these are the people that we need to produce today. Answer for internal. Yeah, the internal officer goes around and drops them off and at, you know, every unit, like, hey, I need this guy, I need that guy. It's a court list. Question in the morning. Answer. Exactly. So, yeah, that's not anything that's kept on record. Question. Right. So I guess the question, though, being that they had these court lists, is another one of these checks and balances, or is it that really just for the special housing unit? Answer. I think they. You mean as far as the court list? I don't understand the question. Yeah, it's just getting back to the point of, like, Reyes left. We were notified on the 8th, he left on the morning of the 9th. Epstein was found on the 10th, didn't have a cellmate for 24 hours. And we knew for almost 48 hours. What should have happened and who didn't do their job is really the question. And like I said before, when the notification. Whoever was on the unit knew that he was leaving, it should have been passed up to his supervisor. Question. All right. Answer. This guy's leaving. But then, okay, let's say the soup or whoever is working in there doesn't do it. And somebody should have stepped up and said, hey, this guy needs a cellmate and notified the lieutenant that he needs a cellmate. Question. And that goes back to anyone that was working in the shoe should have made that notification. Answer. Should have said it. It doesn't. Just because you're not no ic, doesn't mean all the responsibility falls on you. It's everybody's job up there to say, hey, okay, we need to, you know, this is what we need to do. Question. And that would be the case for when he left during the day shift. The next shift is the night shift. When he would, I believe during the night shift, he would have come back. And again, if they were doing rounds, they would have noticed that Reyes wasn't there in the first place. But also, certainly when they brought Epstein back to his cell, there would have been no cellmate in there. Answer. You should have known he was a cellmate. Question. And would it be the same thing for the morning shift that they would know that Epstein's in there alone? Answer. Because if the morning shift is doing their 30 minute checks, you would have realized he was in there by himself. Question. So should have every single shift reported it to the ops lieutenant that there was no one. He gets cut off by the warden, whoever caught it should have, you know, let's say one shift missed it, the next shift should have picked up and said, you know, called and said lieutenant, we got a guy that needs a cellmate. Question and again I know we're Monday morning quarterbacking because of the result here, but but what is your as the warden of the institution on these dates, how do you interpret this? Is this really a significant failure on their part the not have caught this and pass the information up? Answer it's not following the directive. I mean and then look at the result. So I mean the result is what, you know, caused it to be a serious matter. Question now as far as going back to this memoir, do you know why Mr. Redacted wrote this memo? Answer I forgot I might have called I might have called Lt. Redacted and said and I don't know if he was working said what happened up there? Question now when you say redacted because he was the ops lieutenant or are you talking about redacted who was the shoe lieutenant? Answer who was the operations because first I know when I got back somebody told me redacted wasn't at work because that was my first question who was the shoe lieutenant where they at? And when I think I did reach out to redacted and said what happened up there? And that's when I found out and found that out. Question and did you ever speak with either redacted or redacted about this? Answer no. Question okay. Answer because by the time I had gotten it, it was the day that I got the day of when I had to go up, I think the U.S. attorney's office question okay to speak with them about this. Answer when I speak up to them and then the agent had the memorandum Question he already had it on him. Answer he had it on him because he was it was during the interrogation he presented it to the U.S. attorney that that was their question and was that the first time that you had seen it? Answer no, I don't recall when the first I saw it was but I know I had gotten it and I don't know if I had gotten it and then sent it up to my boss and then given it to the IG I forgot I forget his name and who was handling the case. Question for the IG Answer yeah, if you weren't giving it to indiscernible it would have been redacted. Answer because he sat in there with us so he I remember he had a copy of it because he had told him that that they knew that they were supposed to. He gets cut off by the investigator. So not including when you were speaking with the OIG and the FBI, did you discuss this at all with anyone from bop, such as redacted or redacted? Answer no, I just got the memorandum and that was it because I was like wanting to know like what happened then, you know, the directives were given what what happened? Question and when you asked what happened, was there a verbal response? Answer it was a verbal response. Question what did you what were you told? Question that they knew he was supposed to that redacted had passed it on to the other individuals about it. Question now do you think that what is your thought process of redacted? Who is the one who actually presented excuse me, right, Reyes to R D and Wab. What is your thought of him now saying, you know, prior to the end of my shift at 2pm I passed it on to the next guy saying that you guys got to do it. Do you think you should have done it pass the information on during his shift? Answer yeah, absolutely. It should have been letting the lieutenants know that they that this we got a guy that needs a celly. Answer I should clarify that. Question what? Answer I think on the elevator it was redacted. Redacted was escorting Reyes down to R D and Redacted was escorting Epstein over to attorney conference. They just happened across paths. Question yeah, they were together though, right? Answer yeah, but I think redacted is the one who brought him down to the Reyes down to R D Question then that would make sense because if redacted is Internal, Internal takes him to court. Answer and then if somebody is going to R D, I mean to an attorney visit, then it would be the shoe staff taking them. Question all right, so if redacted is the one who is actually providing him to R D, did he have a responsibility that if he was wab to make any notification? Answer I don't know if Internal, you know, redacted was internal and I don't know if you or if he knew, you know, the situation. Question and typically, would it be internal's job if they come and collect somebody as wab? Would it be their job to tell control or the OPS lieutenant to say this guy is off our books or anything or he gets cut off? Answer no, because we have a lot of inmates that move in and out. Question sure. Answer so he wouldn't be able to keep track of every particular inmate that's going and coming. Question okay, basically everyone had a share of the responsibilities. Answer Indiscernible Question all right, before we belabor this thing anymore, we want to just initial and date these both documents. We can get them out of your way and move on. Answer all of them. Question yeah, top of this and top of this. Question this guy, you know this one. All right, thank you, sir. Now, prior to this meeting, did you know that Reyes was actually transferred and at MCC didn't go to court? Answer Wait, prior to when? Question this meeting. Answer oh, no, I knew he. I heard that, you know, after his death that he was removed, that he was transferred when I came in on Saturday. Question Were you required or. I mean, were you aware that the Marshall Service had sent Those emails on August 8, 2019? Answer I was not aware. Question no. Well, did anyone ever prior to August 10th, did anyone ever make you aware that Reyes was transferred from the institution? Answer prior to October 10? Question August 10, 2019? Answer I found out when I came in that morning because I was like, where is his cellmate? Question okay, so you didn't know that he didn't have a cellmate on August 9? Answer no, I did not. Question now who is ultimately responsible to make sure that Epstein had a cellmate? Answer I mean, if it's the directive that's given out, I mean, whoever's working decide passes it up and then that ensures, you know, to make sure that he has a cellmate. Question so shoe staff. Answer Whoever was working up there. Question okay, when you say working up there, does that include like lieutenants doing lieutenant rounds and things like that? Answer well, yeah, from what transpired, it's obvious the lieutenants didn't know. I mean, they knew he was based on the emails that, you know, they knew he was leaving. But as far as when he finally was out of it, then you realize, okay, Reyes is gone, you take Epstein, you bring him back up in his cell and he doesn't have a cellmate. I mean, something should have went off on somebody to make some notification. Alright, 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.
Host: Bobby Capucci
Date: April 11, 2026
In this episode, Bobby Capucci continues to dissect the Office of Inspector General (OIG) interview with the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) Warden about the circumstances and procedural failures leading up to Jeffrey Epstein’s death. Focus centers on cellmate assignments, chain of command confusion, and internal communication lapses in the days before the incident. The host guides listeners through verbatim interview excerpts, parsing the warden’s explanations and highlighting where the system failed.
Timeline Recap:
Responsibility and Missed Protocols:
The interview highlights how information about Reyes’ removal should have been conveyed or noticed by multiple shifts:
The Warden admits the lack of action was a "significant failure" to follow directives, referencing the grave outcome:
Who Knew What, and When?
Communication with the U.S. Attorney and OIG:
Ambiguity in Internal Roles:
Ultimate Responsibility:
Memorable Conclusion:
Bobby Capucci guides listeners through the OIG transcript with a steady, detail-oriented tone, repeating the central refrain: systemic failures, unclear communication, and a tragic, high-profile outcome. He pulls no punches, maintaining skepticism about internal procedures and accountability.
Next episode preview: The series will continue its meticulous inspection of MCC protocols, OIG interviews, and the implications for future oversight improvements.