Mega Edition: How Does Lesley Groff's Narrative Hold Up Against Known Evidence? (6/12/26)

Summary

---

Mega Edition: How Does Lesley Groff's Narrative Hold Up Against Known Evidence?

Podcast: The Epstein Chronicles
Host: Bobby Capucci
Date: June 12, 2026
Episode Focus:
A deep dive into Lesley Groff—a central member of Jeffrey Epstein's "core four" inner circle—to assess whether her public defense holds up against considerable evidence and testimony, as well as ongoing legal scrutiny.

---

1. Episode Overview

Bobby Capucci scrutinizes Lesley Groff’s role as Jeffrey Epstein’s executive assistant, dubbed “Epstein’s second brain.” The episode exposes how she managed sensitive logistics—allegedly facilitating massages, arranging flights, and handling Epstein’s appointments—while unpicking her public narrative of innocence. Capucci references survivor lawsuits, court records, and a damning DOJ decision not to pursue charges, arguing this is emblematic of elite protection and a much larger conspiracy.

---

2. Key Discussion Points & Insights

A. Who is Lesley Groff and Why She Matters

• Position: Longtime executive assistant/“Epstein’s second brain”; managed his appointments, including illicit ones ([01:00]).
• Significance: Epstein’s operation was so dependent on her that even during her pregnancy, he paid her $250,000, covered a nanny, and bought her a Mercedes ([16:14], citing NYT reporting).
• Quote: “In a 2005 interview with the New York Times, Groff described herself as an extension of Epstein's brain.” (31:20)

B. DOJ & Legal System Response

• Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA): Groff included as “potential co-conspirator” and granted federal immunity in Epstein's 2007 Florida NPA—an extremely rare legal maneuver ([09:20]).

• Recent DOJ Position: In 2021, under Biden’s DOJ, they “decided not to pursue these charges,” a decision Capucci lambasts as political and protecting the powerful ([05:24]).

• Quote: “We have been informed that no criminal charges will be brought against Leslie Groff.” (Quote attributed to her attorneys, [04:22])

C. Survivors’ Accounts & Civil Claims

• Testimony from Kate: Survivor “Kate” testified at Ghislaine Maxwell’s trial that Groff booked flights and logistics for alleged abuse ([14:36]).

• Jane Doe Lawsuit: Accused Groff of facilitating trafficking, sending payments, and booking travel for abuse; lawsuit dropped after settlement structures forced claimants to forgo participating in further civil action ([20:30]).

• Other Lawsuits: Similar civil suits from Sarah Ransom and Jennifer Araoz were withdrawn after settlements.

• Survivor Perspective: Maria Farmer called Maxwell’s conviction “only the tip of the iceberg” ([12:42]); Virginia Roberts implored, “others must be held accountable. I have faith that they will be.” ([13:52])

D. Groff’s Public Defense

• Legal Strategy: Claims of being “falsely besmirched” and wrongfully named, asserting she “never engaged in any criminal or civil misconduct” ([22:18], [30:31]).

• Physical Proximity Defense: Groff’s lawyers argue she worked at a different office, not in the actual townhouse of abuse ([29:50]).

• Criticism: Capucci mocks these defenses, highlighting how survivors and independent media see through these legalistic maneuvers.

• Quote: “She doesn't think that she's going to be in trouble for this. ...Meanwhile, we know that she's been in Epstein's atmosphere for decades. Leslie Groff, you are one of the core four, and nobody believes you.” ([23:34])

E. Civil Settlement Mechanisms as Shields

• Epstein Survivors Compensation Program: Required claimants to permanently drop all other civil actions against the estate and employees (including Groff) in exchange for compensation. Capucci frames this as intentionally designed to shield Groff from public legal scrutiny ([21:22]).

F. Subpoena and USVI Legal Battles

• Virgin Islands Lawsuit: Groff subpoenaed in the USVI’s broad case against Epstein’s estate. The subpoena demands production of all documents tied to her work for Epstein—including all communications, schedules, payments, and lists of “masseuses” ([36:48]–[54:00]).
• Scope: Sweeping—covers a period from 1998 to the present and seeks deep insight into Epstein’s operations, possibly exposing Groff’s actual responsibilities.

G. Broader Context: Systemic Protection and Failure

• Narrative Control: Capucci accuses both political parties and federal agencies of systemic unwillingness to charge Epstein’s network to avoid exposure ([08:50]).
• Comparisons to Other RICO Cases: Points out inconsistency—why RICO charges for others, but not for Epstein and his team, whose operation “has a RICO operation written all over it” ([16:18]).

---

3. Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Problem with NPA:
  “Nobody should ever have an NPA like this, never mind somebody who’s been busted for the crimes that Jeffrey Epstein was charged with. We’re gonna protect the co-conspirators of a child molester. On what planet does that sound like a good idea?” — (10:15, Capucci)

• On DOJ Reluctance:
  “The whole idea here has always been to manage the narrative. So the feds let the other co-conspirators skate. And they only go after Maxwell...” — (03:10, Capucci)

• On Groff’s Claims of Innocence:
  “The audacity of Leslie Groff here to act like she was not a part of this, to act like she is a victim in all of this and all of the evidence that has been compiled against her is a bunch of BS. These people truly think that all of their old tactics are going to work in the new world.” — (26:24, Capucci)

• On Elite Accountability:
  “Ask yourself why. ...They thought that all of this would blow over by now. They figured that this would all go away, that nobody would still care. The problem is, when you’re not truthful with us, we still care." — (05:02, Capucci)

• On the Survivors:
  “If anybody has ever deserved a fat payout, a huge payday, it is these survivors.” — (33:31, Capucci)

---

4. Timestamps for Key Segments

• [01:00] — Introduction to Groff’s role and significance
• [04:22] — DOJ decision not to charge Groff; legal statement from her attorneys
• [12:42] — Maria Farmer, survivor, weighs in after Maxwell’s conviction
• [13:52] — Virginia Roberts’ call for further prosecutions
• [14:36] — Details from Maxwell trial: survivor and pilot testimonies about Groff
• [21:22] — Civil suit settlements, survivor’s compensation program, and legal protective mechanisms
• [22:18] — Groff’s defensive PR push: claim of being “falsely besmirched”
• [23:34] — Capucci’s take: skepticism towards Groff’s defense
• [26:24] — Ridicule of Groff’s victim narrative
• [29:50] — Groff’s defense she worked at a different office
• [30:31] — Breakdown of legal argument; Capucci’s call for a public trial
• [33:31] — Discussion on reparations and justice for the survivors
• [36:48]–[54:00] — Overview and implications of USVI subpoena and ongoing legal discovery

---

5. Structure of the USVI Subpoena (Detailed in [36:48]–[54:00])

• Target: All documents, communications, and records—personal and professional—relating to Epstein, Maxwell, and “core four” members, operations, and all related entities.
• Focus: Establish factual basis for Groff’s involvement and map Epstein’s logistical and financial web.
• Capucci’s Take: “They are not going to be able to muddy the waters this time. ...You see all the scum…begin to scurry like the rats that they are.” ([35:14])

---

6. Overall Tone & Narrative

Capucci’s style is direct, sarcastic, and unapologetically skeptical of officials, legal maneuvering, and the insulated elite. He positions himself as an adversarial independent voice, siding with survivors and demanding public accountability for not only Epstein but also his enablers like Groff.

---

7. Conclusion – Where Things Stand

The episode contends that Lesley Groff’s narrative of innocence cannot withstand the surviving evidence and court records, nor persistent survivor testimony. Capucci sees the government and legal system’s reluctance to charge Groff as emblematic of deep, bipartisan corruption and a society failing to hold the powerful accountable. He ends with a call for further transparency, litigation, and survivor justice, vowing to “leave no stone unturned.”

---

For more on referenced court documents and subpoenas, see the episode show notes.

Transcript

[Post University Announcer]

Post people do not wait for the perfect time. They learn between shifts and family dinners. At Post University, Online education is built for busy schedules so you can keep moving forward without putting life on hold. And Post makes it personal. With support from real people who care about your goals, become a Post person. Learn [e-mail].

[Dish Network Announcer]

Dish has been connecting communities like yours for the last 45 years, providing the TV you love at a price you can trust. Watch live sports news and the latest movies, plus your favorite streaming apps, all in one place. Switch to Dish today and lock in the lowest price in satellite TV, starting at $89.99 a month with our two year price guarantee. Call 888-@dish or visit dish.com today.

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

What's up, everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're gonna move on to the next member of the core of four that we're going to discuss, and that's Leslie Groff. And Leslie Groff was Jeffrey Epstein's second brain. According to Jeffrey Epstein himself. This was somebody that was in charge of setting up the massage, appointments, flights, and anything else that Jeffrey Epstein might need. In fact, she was so important to him that even though she was pregnant, she was indispensable to Jeffrey Epstein and his operation. So much so that he gave her $250,000. But according to the DOJ, no matter how much eyewitness testimony there was, no matter how many of these girls said that they were abused by Jeffrey Epstein and that Leslie Groff helped facilitate it, there's nothing to see here. There's no case to be made, and nobody else should be held accountable. And that all of the actionable intelligence that they ever had on Jeffrey Epstein was acted upon and that there's nothing left to see here. And that's the narrative that everybody should just shut up and keep it moving. Well, the truth is that there's still a lot to be uncovered here and a lot that people have no idea about. In this episode, we're going to continue talking about Epstein's core four, and this time we're going to turn our attention to Leslie Groff. And to do that, we have an article from Business Insider. Prosecutors won't charge Jeffrey Epstein, former assistant Leslie Groff, who accusers say booked massage appointments and flights, according to Groff's lawyers. And that's not a shock to anybody that's been following along. They wouldn't be able to control the narrative. If they would have charged all these people, somebody would have spilled the beans, but instead would have, did they do they just decided not to pursue charges against people that obviously should have been charged. And the whole idea here has always been to manage the narrative. So the feds let the other co conspirators skate. And they only go after Maxwell. That way, they give the public the red meat that the public's obviously after, while at the same time, they don't open themselves up to more exposure by bringing more people into the criminal charge. That way, they kill two birds with one stone. Right? They control the narrative. And they also throw some red meat to the people who expect people to go to prison for their role in Jeffrey Epstein's criminal enterprise. Here's the biggest problem for them. They thought that all of this would blow over by now. They figured that this would all go away, that nobody would still care. The problem is, when you're not truthful with us, we still care. And people aren't just gonna let something like this go. And remember, even if you don't believe all the crazy stuff about blackmail, if you don't believe all the stuff about Jeffrey Epstein and all the high level contacts he had, this man was still abusing little girls for decades. And there were people that were helping him do that. And none of those people should ever be let off because it's politically expedient to do so. No matter who's engaging in that kind of behavior, they. They need to be held accountable. And there shouldn't be any kind of conversation surrounding it. Like, how is this even an issue where people are arguing, shouldn't we all want to see people like this held accountable? But I guess politics are more important, huh? Federal prosecutors have no plans to bring charges against Leslie Grof, an associate of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, who was reportedly under criminal investigation for sex trafficking, according to her attorneys. Goff's lawyer, Michael Bauchner and John Whitcomb said Thursday in a statement provided to Insider that prosecutors in Manhattan would not file an indictment against their client after a more than a two year investigation by the Department of Justice into Jeffrey Epstein's conduct, which included lengthy interviews of witnesses and a thorough review of relevant communication. We have been informed that no criminal charges will be brought against Leslie Groff, Bauchner and Whitcomb said. And just so we're clear, this was in 2021. So it was Biden's Justice Department that decided not to pursue these charges or go after Leslie Groff. Just keep that in mind, because when I tell you that this is something that's been going on for decades and that both parties have been smack Dab in the middle of it. This is what I'm talking about. There has been ample opportunity for both sides to stop Jeffrey Epstein and to bring his people to account. And they refused to do it. Time and time again, year after year, presidency after presidency. The attorneys added that Grof never witnessed anything improper or illegal. The New York Times first reported in 2019 that federal prosecutors were considering sex trafficking charges against Groff, who worked as an executive assistant for Epstein for nearly 20 years. A spokesperson for Grof told Insider that she was cooperating in the investigation. Oh, I'm sure she is, and I'm sure she was. Now let me ask you a question. Do you think that if Leslie Groff was running her own cat house at her own brothel, and she was setting up all of these different appointments for people, do you think she would have been given leniency, or do you think they would have threw the book at her? We all know the truth. If Jeffrey Epstein wasn't connected and protected, all of these people would have been hemmed up. Because under normal circumstances, this is the kind of operation that the feds live to disrupt. They love to trot people out who are hurting children, right? Look, we're doing our job. Give us more money for funding, whatever it might be. But all of a sudden, when it comes to Epstein, everybody wants to clam up. Nobody wants to do their job, Nobody wants to step up to the plate and do the right thing. Ask yourself why Groff was one of Epstein's employees named in a non prosecution agreement the financier pedophile signed with federal prosecutors in Florida in 2007. The agreement, which has been widely criticized, allowed Epstein to serve a lenient sentence and and Palm Beach County Jail in Florida on prostitution solicitation charges rather than face a federal sex trafficking indictment. The document also said that federal prosecutors would not bring criminal charges against Grof and the other women who it described as potential co conspirators. Now why would the Justice Department ever allow this? Why would Mukase and Philippe ever direct Acosta to. To do this? And for all the people out there that act like nothing is amiss here, can you point me in the direction of another NPA that looks anything like this one? Let me help you out. The answer is no, you cannot, because one doesn't exist. Nobody should ever have an MPA like this, never mind somebody who's been busted for the crimes that Jeffrey Epstein was charged with. We're gonna protect the co conspirators of a child molester. On what planet does that sound Like a good idea. Like everybody should be outraged by this. Everybody should be demanding a new investigation into the NPA and the NPA being turned over. That NPA is an abomination and it should be done away with. Federal agents arrested Epstein in August of 2019 following an investigation from Miami Herald reporter Julie K. Brown that exposed the scope of the agreement. He died in his jail cell while awaiting trial. In 2020, the FBI arrested Glenn Maxwell on suspicion of sex trafficking girls to Epstein and sexually abusing them herself. And that's a point that needs to be slammed home because there seems to be a lot of people that don't understand why Glenn Maxwell is in prison. And like I always say, she's exactly where she belongs. And that's because she was abusing girls herself right along with Jeffrey Epstein's disgusting ass. So yeah, the bipedal serpent exactly where she belongs. Prior to the conviction, Maxwell argued that the same non prosecution agreement protected her from all federal prosecution. U.S. district Judge Allison Nathan, who oversaw her case, rejected that argument. And thank God she did. Can you imagine? And the crazy part is we'd be getting gaslit anyway. People would be like, ah, you know what, the NPA is a good thing. It's good for justice. We can't have people's reputations getting sullied. You have to be quite the bootlicker to have that outlook on life. Because if you think you're being told the truth, I have some really bad news for you. Bochner had previously indicated that Groff would avoid prosecution, telling Brown for her book Perversion of Justice, that federal prosecutors do not intend to bring criminal charges against Leslie Groff. Yeah, because they'd have to open a RICO investigation and it would ruin the whole thing. You can't have a RICO investigation on your own agent, can you? A representative for the U.S. attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, which is conducting the investigation into the conduct of Epstein and his associates, declined to comment to Insider on. On the decision of whether to charge Grof. Yeah, of course not. They don't want any accountability. And you have all these FBI agents that were working at this time who are now pundits, who run around talking all this when they could have done something when they were in the agency. But now you're going to blow the doors off this. You're going to tell everybody who Jeffrey Epstein was and what he was doing and how he was in the CIA or this, that the other thing. Please stop it. Stop the bullshit. You had your shot to stop this dude. Or at the very least to blow the whistle. And you chose not to. A jury convicted Maxwell at trial on Wednesday. Maria Farmer, whose sister Annie Farmer testified against Maxwell at the trial, told insider that while her family was elated by the verdict, the case was only the tip of the iceberg. As thrilled as I am by the arrest, it's only the tip of the iceberg. She said there should be many to follow. And Maria's not wrong. And let's remember that Maria blew the doors off this in 1996, telling the FBI about Jeffrey Epstein, what he was up to, and that the dude was an absolute creep. But of course, they ignored her, right? Can't go after your own agent. Can't go after a guy that's been flipped. And you certainly can't go after somebody that's being protected by intelligence. Kenya, that usually doesn't work out so well. Ask Kiki Camarena how that worked out for him. Virginia Roberts, who also accused Epstein, Maxwell, and other associates of sexual misconduct, also said on Wednesday that other people in their orbit must face justice. I hope that today is not the end, but rather another step in justice being served, she said. Maxwell did not act alone. Others must be held accountable. I have faith that they will be. And I can already tell you that if Virginia was still with us, she'd be raising holy hell right now. And that's because she knows, just like the other survivors, like Maria, like Annie, like everybody else, that Epstein wasn't acting alone, that he wasn't some lone wolf who did this all on his own with no help. He had a whole ass infrastructure built around him. And anybody that's trying to tell you that that's a hoax or a lie, they're the ones that are lying to you. They're the ones that are trying to manipulate you. The truth is Jeffrey Epstein didn't act alone. Groff's name came up several times in Maxwell's trial. One woman who testified under the pseudonym of Kate said Epstein sexually abused her for years, said that Groff was one of Epstein's office assistants who booked flights for her to travel to his residences in New York, Palm beach and the u. S. Virgin Islands. Larry Vasoski and David Rogers, two of Epstein's longtime private jet pilots, both said that Groff was a secretary who worked for Epstein in the 90s and 2000s and two schedule flights for Epstein. And this has a RICO operation written all over it. You don't have to be some kind of expert in RICO to understand that Epstein's whole entire operation was built to protect and and to cloak what he was doing. And how do you justify having RICO charges against Diddy but not having RICO charges against Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell? There is no justification for it, especially in hindsight considering the absolute failure that was the RICO case that was brought against Diddy by the federal government because that was a complete failure. So how can you look at what Diddy was doing and then look at Epstein and Maxwell and only charged Diddy with rico? Make that make sense. According to her attorney, Groff's job included making appointments for Epstein as directed by him, taking his messages, and setting up high level meetings with CEOs, business executives, scientists, politicians, celebrities, charitable organizations and universities. In a 2005 interview with the New York Times, Groff described herself as an extension of Epstein's brain. That statement aged well, huh? What section of his brain? The section that made him want to diddle little girls? It comes down to the bond, she told the Times. I know what he is thinking and I know when I need to be fast. It's a nice roll that we're on. Oh, I bet it is. Not a nice roll for the girls, though. Not a nice roll for the survivors. In the same article, Epstein described Groff as so valuable that when she became pregnant in 2004, he paid for a full time nanny and brought her a Mercedes Benz so that she could keep working for him. But I'm sure that Leslie Groff had no idea what was going on, not a single clue. There is no way that I could lose Leslie to motherhood, epstein told the Times. Civil lawsuits filed against Groff, all of which have since been dropped, depict her as one of Epstein's enablers. One lawsuit, filed in October by an anonymous Jane Doe, alleged that Groff facilitated Epstein's trafficking and sexual abuse of Jane, including by purchasing plane tickets, sending money, making appointments and sending various communications. The suit, also filed against the executors of Epstein's estate, says Epstein sexually abused Jane in New York, the France, the US Virgin Islands and Florida between 2017 and 2019, up until Epstein was arrested. Groff also paid Jane cash after sexual encounters, the lawsuit alleges. How is that not an associate? How is that not somebody that's engaging in a criminal conspiracy? She's pan out the money, right? Sure sounds like a criminal conspiracy to me. Jan and Groff jointly agreed to voluntarily dismiss the lawsuit with respect to Groff on Wednesday night, shortly after the verdict against Maxwell. The lawsuit is still pending with respect to the executors of Epstein's estate over the late financier pedophiles alleged misconduct. An attorney for Jane didn't immediately respond Thursday to Insider's request for a comment. Bochner and Whitcomb said they were not surprised the case was dropped. Our hearts truly break for any person victimized by Epstein, but the truth is Leslie had no knowledge of and no participation in any of the illegal conduct alleged in that lawsuit, the attorney said in a statement. Meanwhile, back in reality, at least two other accusers, Sarah Ransom and Jennifer arose previously brought civil lawsuits against Groff. Both women dropped their litigation once they accepted money from the Epstein Survivors Compensation Program, which was established by Epstein's estate after his death to pay compensation to his victims. But as Insider previously reported, the program required claimants to abandon civil claims against the estate and Epstein's former employees, including Groff and Maxwell. Grof denied wrongdoing in Ransom and Arreos lawsuits as well. A Rao's lawsuit had accused Groff of scheduling massages with with Epstein, who sexually abused Araus on those occasions. Participation in the victim's compensation program requires permanent discontinuance of all legal action against former employees of Jeffrey Epstein, including Ms. Groff, Arraos attorney Eric Lerner told the Daily News at the time. My client maintains the truth and veracity of all the allegations in her pleadings. So, so not only was the NPA in place to protect people like Leslie Groff, the whole compensation fund was set up so people couldn't go after people like Leslie Groff if they took compensation. And that was all by design. And now, all these years later, even though we still don't have any answers about any of this, the DOJ just decides out of the blue that there's nothing left to see here and that it's time for everybody just to move on because the case is closed and according to them, that's the end of it. And my response to that is we've only just begun. All of the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.

[Bobby Capucci]

Hello everyone, and welcome to the Jeffrey Epstein Show. I'm your host, Bobby Capucci, and this is a Morning Update. Before we jump into our article today about Leslie Groff, I just like to let you know that Dr. Stephen Delay, who is a friend to the program, a very, very, very intelligent man, and an incredible philosopher, has a new book out and the name of the book is Before Exercises in subjectivity. And Dr. Dalle and I have been speaking in emails and he graciously offered to send me a copy of the book. So I am pumped about receiving it when it comes, I'm going to dive into it, devour it. And afterwards I'm going to see if Dr. Delay has some time in his schedule to pop back onto the podcast and speak with us once again. Because for my money, Dr. Stephen Delay was one of the most fascinating hours we have ever spent here on the podcast. And what he added to the catalog is, was incredible. So if you're looking for some real brain work and you really want to work out that old brain of yours, I highly suggest you pick up the book before Exercises in subjectivity by Dr. Stephen Delay. And here's a little blurb from Google Books about what you can expect within the pages. Since Heidegger, it has become something of an unquestioned presupposition to analyze the structure and essence of selfhood from the perspective of being in the world. However, in this original work, Dr. Stephen Delay, using a wide breadth of philosophical sources, articulates a view of selfhood which emphasizes humanity's experience before God. The work presents an original view of the relationship between philosophy and theology, namely that there is no distinction between the two. And I don't know about you folks, but that kind of stuff right there gets your boy fired up. I love reading stuff like that, especially when I know that the source means business. And if anything, Dr. Delay is not only credible, but the man knows what he's talking about. So if you're interested in this sort of thing, you're interested in philosophy, I seriously suggest you grab this book now. I think the ebook is coming out soon as well. I know that the hard copy is a little pricey, but but either way, make sure if you're looking for something to read and you're looking for a real workout of the brain, because remember, it's a muscle. It needs to be worked out as well. I really suggest you take a look and you grab this book. So I'm going to try and get Dr. Delay back on after I read the book. I want to read it first before I ask questions about it, obviously. And yeah, so I'm going to talk with Dr. Delay, try and get it set up. After I read the book, I'll have him come on and then we'll be able to speak with him about it. And also if you decide to pick the book up and you have some questions, make sure you shoot me some emails and I will read those emails on Air with Dr. Delay if and when we can get him to come back on. So that's something that we can be looking forward to Going forward. And also, if you're looking to read something and you want to get that brain worked out and you're bored, you're still quarantined, whatever it may be, this is the perfect time to pick up the book before God Exercises in Subjectivity. All right, so on to our article for the day, the morning, I should say. Today we're going to talk about one of Jeffrey Epstein's core four who feels like she is being besmirched. Oh, well, why is everybody talking about me?

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

And your new news?

[Bobby Capucci]

I'm speaking about Leslie Groff. There's an article out in the New Canaan Advertiser, and the headline is, assistant to Jeffrey Epstein says she was Falsely Besmirched. Really? Falsely besmirched, huh? You've had all these years to come forward, provide information, tell people what you know about Jeffrey Epstein, considering you were so close, considering he called you his brain, and now you have the audacity to act like you're being besmirched. Give me a break. The author of this article is Robert Marchant. Recently filed court papers say that a New Canaan woman who worked for Jeffrey Epstein when he was allegedly sexually abusing minors has been unfairly tarnished by litigation against her and. And is innocent of wrongdoing. You notice she doesn't say that she's being defamed or there's been libel spoken about her in the news. None of that, right? No, she's going after the litigation because they know that that's her best bet, going to the courtroom. And, well, the courts have been so favorable with Jeffrey Epstein and his friends. Why not one mo. Again, that's how Leslie Groff is thinking. She doesn't think that she's going to be in trouble for this. Well, she was just an assistant. She had nothing to do with it. Meanwhile, we know that's not the case. Meanwhile, we know that Epstein bought her a Benzito. Meanwhile, we know that Epstein said he couldn't function without her. Meanwhile, we know that she's been in Epstein's atmosphere for decades. Leslie Groff, you are one of the core four, and nobody believes you. Leslie Grof was cited in a lawsuit last year by a survivor of Epstein, a longtime sexual predator. Jennifer Araz, a teenager when she was sexually assaulted at Epstein's Manhattan home, sued his estate in New York State Supreme Court last year. Well, yeah, for Leslie Groff to act like she had nothing to do with it, to act like she was never there, she was never around, she was never involved. She didn't know Anything. We're all crazy. Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. It's ludicrous. It's an embarrassment. And anybody who was buying this BS is naive at best. Leslie Groff and Jeffrey Epstein were as tight as tight could be. All you have to do is listen to the survivors and they will tell you the story. Because, folks, that's what it comes down to when you break this down to its very visceral core. What this comes down to is who do you believe at this point? Do you believe these survivors? Or do you believe these scumbags that were hanging out with Jeffrey Epstein who have had all the time in the world to come forward and speak out against what was occurring, but have yet chosen to do. Chosen not to do so. But we're supposed to believe that Leslie Grof is being besmirched? Please. Okay. Nobody's buying it. Grof was a secretary working for Epstein who was found dead in a federal lockup in August, presumably by suicide. Let's drop out, presumably, and go with allegedly, huh? And she was more than a secretary. What kind of secretary do you know that has a brand new Benz? What kind of secretary do you know that's making six figures? What kind of secretary do you know that's called Jeffrey Epstein's brain? That's not a secretary, folks. That's a confidant. That's somebody in his inner circle. That's somebody that has knowledge of what is going on and has knowledge of how this criminal enterprise is being run. That suit filed by Araz's attorneys contended that Ms. Groff directly facilitated as well as conspired with Epstein and the other co conspirators to make possible and otherwise facilitate the sexual offenses committed against minor plaintiff Ms. Aroz. It is seeking damages from the Epstein estate. Yeah, as it should.

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

The.

[Bobby Capucci]

The. The audacity of Leslie, of. Of Grof here. Leslie Grof here to act like she was not a part of this, to act like she is a victim in all of this and all of the evidence that has been compiled against her is a bunch of bs. These people truly think that all of their old tactics are going to work in the new world. Well, they're about to find out that they are wrong. They are about to find out that. That they are in for a very, very big surprise this time around. Because people like Leslie Grof and the Core Four, Your days of running are over. Your days of hiding are over. Your days of not being put on blast in the media, well, at least in the independent media are over. And you have nobody but yourself to blame. Groff had denied allegations previously through a New York lawyer, Michael Bauchner, and now a more robust defense has been put forward in a motion filed last week on her behalf. Groff played no part in facilitating Epstein's crimes, according to a motion to dismiss

[Epstein Chronicles Narrator]

the lawsuit in which she was named.

[Bobby Capucci]

And again, folks, this stuff doesn't all happen in a vacuum. You notice how all of this stuff is happening at the same time. You notice how the MLA was released, and now we have one of the core four coming out with this. This. This suit here, filing paperwork in the case of her being a facilitator. You think this is all just happening coincidentally? Of course not. There is much more going on behind the scenes now. I'm trying to figure out what exactly is going on behind the scenes. You know. You know, I have a couple of questions out there to reliable sources, but so far, we've got nothing concrete back. And that's what happens a lot of times in these sort of cases, when the FBI is on their game, when the FBI isn't playing games, and when the FBI isn't being corrupt. I know very, very rarely does that happen, but when they're actually pursuing crimes, they know what they're doing, right? The field agents are good at compiling evidence and getting things going. The problem is the bureaucrats. But Leslie Groff, she. She really thinks people are going to believe that she had no part in facilitating Epstein's crimes.

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

Huh.

[Bobby Capucci]

Wow. The audacity of it all. But when you look at the big picture here, folks, there is something else brewing behind the scenes. Without a shadow of a doubt in my mind. The court papers state, it is not our intention to besmirch plaintiff. Rather, given the passage of almost 20 years, the alleged events, it is likely that the plaintiff is simply mistaken. Regardless, her conclusion. Her conclusion? Her conclusionary allegations against Ms. Grof are egregiously false and do not remotely satisfy applicable pleading standards. So Grof is. Defense here is. Well, this was a long time ago, and you just don't remember. So we're not. We're not trying to besmirch you or anything like that, but you don't know what you're talking about. You don't remember what happened, and Leslie Grof was not involved. It's like they tried to do. They're trying to do a Jedi mind trick here. This is not the Grof you're looking for. I mean, really, what sort of lawyers are these people finding? And where are they coming up with these ideas? Because if they think that this is going to work. They're wrong. A guy like Bradley Edwards is going to chew this kind of shit up and spit it out. The latest court filing emphasized that Grof, now 53, did not work at the Upper Eastside residence where Epstein sexually abused teenagers such as araz, who was 14 years old at the time. In 2001, when the criminal activity began, according to court records, her office was located elsewhere. Yeah. You know where her office was located? In the other building Epstein owned? The one where his brother supposedly owned it, Right? Yeah. Where they kept all of the girls. Yeah. It's okay, because Grof worked at another building owned by Epstein. She wasn't just at the.

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

At.

[Bobby Capucci]

At the townhouse or anything like that, so she had nothing to do with it. These people truly believe that their nonsense is gonna win them the day again. They think that all of their nonsense is really just going to be accepted. Well, they're in for a big surprise, like I said earlier, because nobody's believing it anymore. Grof isn't going to be able to get out of this nonsense with these BS Alibis and these BS Exc. And nobody's going to let him off the hook. Not independent journalists and certainly not the survivor's lawyers. The new motion by Grof's legal team states Ms. Grof never engaged in any criminal or civil misconduct. She did not conspire with anyone to sexually abuse plaintiff or any other survivor of Epstein, an innocent party. Ms. Groff has been subjected to widespread, defamatory, and salacious allegations against her in the media. Well, why don't you go ahead and sue some people then? If that's the case and Ms. Groff is being so terribly besmirched in the media, Start throwing out some lawsuits, start suing the newspapers who are supposedly besmirching her, and let's get to the discovery phase. Are any of the core four ever going to have the courage to get to discovery phase, or are they just going to try and litigate to waste more time? We all know the answer. They don't want their day in court. They're doing everything to stop themselves from having their day in court. And frankly, folks, that's all I'm asking for here is a trial. A day in court. Let's let the light of the sun purify the madness. The court papers filed on Grof's behalf said her activities centered on scheduling and meetings on business matters. Okay, well, let's just say for a minute, okay, she didn't have anything to do with the trafficking portion of It. Which I do not believe, but let's say for a minute she didn't. She was only involved in the business matters. Huh? Well, how much money laundering did you facilitate? How many deals did you set up where the money was washed, Ms. Grof. Oh, don't think there's just one angle to this case, because there are many fronts and many battles still to be fought. So anything that you try and do here, Ms. Grof, well, you're caught in the spider web. And again, you have nobody to blame but yourself. The Araz lawsuit also cited Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's longtime companion. Well, as Grof, two other. Excuse me. As well as Grof and two other of Epstein's associates. Every penny of Epstein's estate should go to the survivors. Araza's lawyer, Dan Kaiser told the media when the suit was filed last year. 100%. I've been saying that from the beginning. Back the Brinks truck up. Each one of these girls should get pieced off with a fat chunk of change.

[Epstein Chronicles Narrator]

I'm talking windfall status.

[Bobby Capucci]

Because what they went through with Jeffrey Epstein and then what the media did to them. And to pile it on top, what the prosecution has done to them. If anybody has ever deserved a fat payout, a huge payday, and it is these survivors. Maxwell's whereabouts are not currently known. The motion to dismiss notes that there have been specific and well detailed accusations about other Epstein employees. Yet there were no specific allegations that she personally participated in Epstein's sexual misconduct. Well, that's. That's true. I haven't heard that Leslie Grof was actually doing the abusing, but that doesn't make her any better, really. Right. She was enabling this. Procuring these girls, helping Jeffrey Epstein facilitate this, manage the fallout, make sure Epstein knew where he was going. Again, she was Jeffrey Epstein's brain. That's what Epstein said. A court date is scheduled for August 14th. On the latest motion in the case. A call left with Araza's lawyer, Dan Kaiser was not returned. Groff's legal team had no comment. A number of lawsuits have been filed by alleged victims of Epstein. Groff was named as a potential co conspirator in another court document. A secret non prosecution agreement that Epstein managed to secure in 2008. Imagine that. If Grof had nothing to worry about, if she wasn't involved in any of the crimes, why was it so important that she was cut in on that immunity deal? Answer me that, Mr. Lawyer for Leslie Groff. The agreement related to Epstein's misconduct came to light last year, triggering new investigations into his activities and his eventual arrest. That pretty much sums it up, right? Why did Leslie Groff need to be part of that immunity deal if she had nothing to offer, if she didn't have the goods on Jeffrey Epstein and the organization? Folks, they are not going to be able to muddy the waters this time. They can file all the lawsuits they want, they can go crazy with their lawsuits and they can try and litigate this till the cows come home. But the survivors, lawyers, these, these folks have, have taken the, the, the, the, the center of the ring. They've taken the initiative and they are on the offense now. You see the difference when you go on offense than playing defense all the time. You have to take the initiative. You have to force the issue. And that's the point we're at now, folks. The issue is being forced. And you see all of the scum that remains in the shadow of Jeffrey Epstein's death begin to scurry like the rats that they are. If you'd like to contact me, you could do [e-mail] that's B O B B Y C A P U C c [e-mail] youm can also find me on Twitter at Bobby Capucci alright everybody, we'll be back later on and we'll do it all over again. I hope you all enjoy your Saturday.

[Epstein Chronicles Narrator]

What's up everyone and welcome back to the Epstein Chronicles. In this article, we're diving right back into those court documents from the USVI and we're going to take a look at the subpoena for Leslie Groff. Case ST20CV014. The government of the United States Virgin Islands v. Darren K. Indyke in his capacity as the executor for the estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein, administrator of the 1953 Trust and Richard D. Kahn, in his capacity as the executor for the estate of Jeffrey E. Epstein, plaintiff subpoena to third party Leslie Groff in accordance with Rule 45 of the Virgin Islands Rules of Civil Procedure and pursuant to the subpoena issued in the pending action Government of the United States Virgin Islands v. The State of Jeffrey E. Epstein before the Superior Court of the Virgin islands Division of St. Thomas and St. John, you, Leslie Groff, are hereby commanded to produce and deliver all documents responsive to the request set forth below to Carol Thomas Jacobs within 30 days following receipt of this subpoena. If you have questions, please contact Carol Thomas Jacobs. 1. When providing your responses, indicate the request to which each document or answer responds in the metadata field and request number. 2. Documents produced pursuant to these requests shall be produced as they are kept in the ordinary course of business. 3. For each document that you produce, produce the current version together with all earlier editions or predecessor documents during the relevant time period, even though the title of the earlier documents may differ from the current versions. Format for documents produced electronically, data shall be produced in single page tiffs at 300dpi resolution which are named for the BATES number of the page. There shall be no more than 100 images per folder. BATES numbers, confidentiality designations, and redactions shall be burned into the TIFF image file so as not to unreasonably obstruct any information on the page.

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

B.

[Epstein Chronicles Narrator]

Document Unitization each page of a document shall be electronically converted into an image as described above. If a document is more than one page, the unitization of the document and any attachment and or affixed notes shall be maintained as it existed in the original. When creating the image file and appropriately designated in the load files, the corresponding parent attachment relationships, to the extent possible, shall be provided in the load files furnished with each production. C. Include document level text files containing optical character recognition or extracted text name with the BATES number of the first page of the document. D. Include data load files containing all of the metadata fields, both system and application from the original native documents. E. Include the database field name in the first line of the metadata file in such a manner that it's clear how the metadata is organized in the file. F. All hidden text, e.g. track changes, hidden columns, comments, notes, etc. Shall be expanded, extracted, and rendered in the TIFF file. G. Documents created in Excel spreadsheets, CSV files, access databases, and audio and video media files shall be produced in native format. The extractable metadata and text shall be produced in the same manner as other documents that originated in electronic form as described herein. To the extent that metadata exists or is reasonably accessible, email attachments and embedded files or links shall be mapped to their parent. I Produce all attachments to responsive documents attached to the responsive documents deduplicate prior to production to the extent that exact duplicate documents based on MD5 or SHA1 values at the document level reside within a party's data set. Each party is only required to produce a single copy of a responsive document so long as there is a data field that identifies each custodian who had a copy. In addition, documents may be deduplicated in such a way as to eliminate earlier or incomplete chains of emails and produce only the most complete iteration of an email chain, so long as there is a data field that identifies each custodian who had a copy. 4. Format for hard copies of documents produced in response to this request a retype the question or request to which the document respond and firmly attach the documents to the retype request number all documents consecutively consistently with the numbers used for the documents produced electronically. 5. Unless otherwise indicated, the relevant time period for this request for production of documents is January 1, 1998 to the present. 6. If no documents responsive to a particular request exist, so state 7. As to any document which no longer exists but which you are aware existed at one time, identify such document with as much particularity as possible and in addition, identify the last known location of the document, the reason the document is no longer in existence, and the person responsible for the document's disposition.

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

8.

[Epstein Chronicles Narrator]

For information that you withhold on basis of privilege, provide a descriptive list of each document and stating the grounds for your refusal and providing the following the name or title of the document a description of the nature and subject matter of the document sufficient to enable a meaningful challenge to the assertion of privilege the date, author, sender and recipient of the document, including whether the person is an attorney and or was an employee of first bank at the time that the document was authored, sent, or received and nature of the privilege. 9. These requests shall be deemed continuing in character so as to require prompt supplemental responses if additional documents called for herein are obtained, discovered, or become known to you between the time of responding to the requests and the final disposition of this action. 10. Social Security numbers may be redacted from documents to the extent required by applicable law. 1. All shall be construed to include the collective as well as the singular, and shall mean each. Any and every document means any writing or any other tangible thing, whether printed, recorded in audio, video, electronically, or by any other means, reproduced by any process or written or produced by hand, including, but not limited to, letters, memoranda, notes, opinions, books, reports, studies, agreements, statements, communications, including intercompany and intra company communications correspondence, telegrams, emails, instant messages, chat logs, sms, mms or other text messages posted information, messages, chat logs on social networking sites, including but not limited to Facebook, Google, MySpace, and Twitter logs, bookkeeping entries, summaries or records of personal conversations, diaries, calendars, telephone messages and logs, forecasts, photographs, images, tape recordings, models, statistical statements, graphs, laboratory and engineering reports, notebooks, charts, plans, drawings, minutes, bylaws, resolutions, records of conferences, expressions or statements of policy lists of persons attending meetings or conferences lists of clients or customers or suppliers reports of summaries or interviews, opinions or reports of negotiations, brochures, pamphlets, advertisements, circulars, trade letters, press releases, drafts of any document and revisions of drafts of any document and any other similar paper or record. The terms also include a copy of a document where the copy is not exactly the same as the original. The terms also include emails and other documents made or stored in electronic form, whether kept on computers, computer tapes, disks or drives, including cloud storage of any type or any other media upon which information may be recorded. 3. Communication means the transmittal of information in the form of facts, ideas, inquiries, or otherwise. 4. Including is used merely to emphasize that a request for a certain type of document or information that should not be construed as limiting to the request in any way. 5. Referring to, relating to, reflecting, regarding, or with respect to mean without limitation the pertain to deal with concern, reflect, record, report, constitute, contain, mention, describe, discuss, analyze, evaluate, estimate, study, survey, project, assess, support, modify, contradict, criticize, summarize, comment, or otherwise involve in whole or in part. 6. Epstein entity shall include but not be limited Jeffrey E. Epstein Estate of Jeffrey e. Epstein the 1953 Trust Jege, LLC Cypress Inc. Financial Ballistics, LLC FSF LLC FT Real Estate, Inc. Great St. Jim LLC Hyperion Air, LLC IGO Co. LLC Jeepers Incorporated Laurel Incorporated Little St. Jim LLC, LSJE LLC LSJ Emergency, LLC Maple Inc. Michelle's Transportation Co. LLC Nautilus Incorporated Plan D, LLC Poplar Inc. Prytani LLC Southern Country International Trust company Southern Financial, LLC Thomas Worldaire, LLC VTT LLC Zorro Management, LLC Mort Inc. CDE Incorporated Freedom Air Petroleum, LLC Couq Foundation, Epstein Foundation, Inc. Epstein interests, Gratitude America Ltd. Epstein Foundation, Inc. Southern Trust Co. Financial Trust Co. IGY AYH St. Thomas Holdings, LLC Butterfly Trust, LLSJ Employees, LLC CDE Inc. And Financial Informatics. 7. You or your refers to Leslie Groff request for production January 1, 1998 to the present request 1. All documents or materials reflecting or referencing any communications with Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Erica Kellerhals, Richard D. Kahn, Darren K. Endyke, Uleena Slinskaya, Adriana Ross, Sarah Kellen, or Nadia Marcinkova. Request 2. All documents reflecting any and all payments to you, whether monetary or in kind, for any services or work performed by you for or on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Erica Keller Halls, Richard D. Kahn, Darren K. Endyke, Yulia Slinskaya, Adriana Ross, Sarah Kellen and or Nadia Marcinkova. Request 3. All documents and materials reflecting any employment agreements and or severance agreements between you and Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Richard D. Kahn, Darren K. Indyke, or any Epstein entity, including all defendants in this matter. Request 4 All documents and material reflecting or discussing any non disclosure agreements related to your employment with any individual or entity identified in Response to request 3 above. Request 5 All documents and materials reflecting any and all duties and or job responsibilities performed as an employee or agent of any individual or entity identified in Response to request 3 above. Request 6 All documents, materials, recordings or books reflecting, referencing or documenting any appointments or schedule you created, handled or maintained for or on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein or any Epstein entity. Request 7 All documents and materials related to any and all living arrangements made for any female at the request for or or by Jeffrey Epstein or any Epstein entity, including, but not limited to any housing leases or payments, transportation arrangements and or financial allowances for any individual. Request 8 provide all documents and materials related to any and all cellular phone numbers used by you for the relevant time frame, including each phone number assigned to you used by you and the cellular carrier through which the service was handled all documents reflecting any financial transactions you conducted for, on behalf of and or related to Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Richard D. Kahn, Darren K. Indyke, or any entity associated with Jeffrey Epstein or any Epstein entity, including all defendants in this matter. Request 10 all documents and materials relating to any immigration matters, including, but not limited to, visas and applications, therefore, for any girl or woman who visited or traveled with Jeffrey Epstein, and all communications in electronic or paper form with any immigration attorney related to any such girl or woman. Request 11. All documents or materials, including correspondence relating to any travel arrangements of any female and or Jeffrey Epstein, including documents or materials related to any plane, helicopter, car or boat used for travel to or from the Virgin Islands, including, but not limited to, the identity and age of all passengers any and all documents related to any gifts or items of value given to you by Jeffrey Epstein or any Epstein entity, including, but not limited to, automobiles, clothing allowances and or payments for household assistance or child care providers for you. Request 13. Any and all documents related to any locations of any offices, residences or other places at or in which you conducted business for Jeffrey Epstein and or any Epstein entity, including, but not limited to payments for any leases, mortgages, telephone and utility bills, office equipment and or furniture for such locations. Request 14. Any and all documents or materials containing the names, addresses or telephone numbers of individuals who are identified as masseuses. Request 15. Any and all documents or materials reflecting payments made to any female who provided a massage to Jeffrey Epstein.

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

16.

[Epstein Chronicles Narrator]

All documents, materials reflecting the names of any person to visit Little St. James and the dates of such visits.

[Epstein Chronicles Host]

Request 17.

[Epstein Chronicles Narrator]

All documents containing names, addresses and phone numbers of all persons who ever stayed overnight at any of the apartments owned, managed or controlled by Jeffrey Epstein. Located at 301 E. 66th St, New York, NY. This document was signed by Carol Thomas Jacobs, and It was dated September 3, 2020. All right, folks, that's going to do it for this one. All of the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.