Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein's Survivors And Their Long Battle For The Accountability (5/29/26)

Summary

The Epstein Chronicles

Episode: Mega Edition: Jeffrey Epstein's Survivors and Their Long Battle For Accountability (5/29/26)

Host: Bobby Capucci
Date: May 29, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This "Mega Edition" episode of The Epstein Chronicles, hosted by Bobby Capucci, provides an in-depth update on the ongoing legal battles surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s victims, the efforts to hold his estate and associates accountable, and the frustrating obstacles survivors face, particularly in the U.S. legal system. Capucci analyzes recent developments in survivor lawsuits against the Epstein estate, highlights obstruction from Epstein’s longtime associates, and delivers commentary on the broader failures of powerful institutions to provide justice. He also breaks down the most recent appellate court developments related to the non-prosecution agreement that shielded Epstein and his co-conspirators.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Ongoing Legal Tactics of the Epstein Estate (00:46–13:25)

• Stonewalling and Obstruction:
  The co-executors of Epstein's estate, Darren Indyke and Richard Kahn, are accused of intentionally withholding evidence, canceling depositions, and engaging in tactics to delay or avoid accountability.

  • "[Indyke] was facilitating a money laundering ring. How is he still part of the estate? How is he acting as an executor? This behavior flies in the face of fairness, professionalism and much needed justice." – Bobby (01:42)
  • Lawyers for the estate failed to produce a single page of discovery in three months despite requests.
  • Scheduled depositions were abruptly canceled, often under pretexts that enable further delays.

• Demands on Survivors:
  The estate requested deeply invasive and arguably irrelevant information from Jane Doe, including her complete medical history.

  • "Among the requests were documents referencing any and all medical procedures and consultations she has ever had throughout her lifetime... even if such medical care was unrelated to Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged abuse of her." – Bobby (06:11)
  • This is presented as a classic attempt to intimidate and re-victimize survivors.

• Attorney Commentary:
  Robert Glassman, counsel for Jane Doe, publicly accused Epstein lawyers of obstruction, while estate lawyers claimed delays were due to a lack of agreed confidentiality order—a claim Glassman disputes.

• Reluctance for Discovery:
  Capucci asserts that figures like Alan Dershowitz, Prince Andrew, and others desperately want to avoid discovery, as it could reveal damning evidence.

  • "None of these people want discovery because that is where the rubber meets the road... It is absolute hammer time." – Bobby (11:01)
  • Settlement is often sought to avoid exposing evidence.

2. Details of Jane Doe’s Lawsuit Against Epstein Estate and Maxwell (14:45–22:31)

• Overlapping Criminal Allegations:
  Jane Doe’s civil suit echoes the criminal indictments against Ghislaine Maxwell. She alleges years of grooming and abuse starting at age 13, orchestrated by both Maxwell and Epstein.

  • Doe was first contacted at a Michigan music camp and brought into Epstein’s circle after her father's passing.
  • Maxwell acted as a sisterly figure as part of the grooming process, while Epstein offered financial support (voice lessons, tuition, apartment lease).

• Patterns of Abuse:
  Capucci underscores the “blueprint” Epstein and Maxwell used: selecting vulnerable girls, often fatherless or from disadvantaged homes.

  • "How many times have Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein preyed upon somebody from a disadvantaged home?" – Bobby (16:53)
  • Abuse locations included Florida, New York, and New Mexico (Zorro Ranch), with Capucci criticizing New Mexico authorities’ inaction.

• Active and Settled Civil Actions:
  Most survivors are pursuing compensation through a $655 million Alternative Resolution Program. Only a few, including Jane Doe, are pressing forward in court.

3. The Failures of the Legal System and the Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement (27:51–45:27)

• Court Rejects New DOJ Report:
  The 11th Circuit Court refuses to consider a new Department of Justice report in survivor Courtney Wild’s lawsuit, citing a limited legal scope (specifically, application of the Crime Victims’ Rights Act before indictment).

  • "I think it’s a travesty that this bit of information wouldn’t immediately be rushed onto the docket..." – Bobby (28:20)
  • Capucci expresses frustration with the American legal system’s technicalities and how they often favor the powerful.

• Sweetheart Deal for Epstein:
  Capucci calls out the 2008 non-prosecution agreement crafted by Alex Acosta, emphasizing its unprecedented broad immunity:

  • "Nobody else ever in the history of America... has ever caught themselves such a sweetheart deal like the one Epstein caught. And what did he catch it for? He was abusing children, folks. Let that sit in." – Bobby (34:34)
  • He reiterates that this deal protected not just Epstein but numerous “core four and more” co-conspirators, including Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Leslie Groff, and Nadia Marcinkova.

• Potential for Future Justice:
  If the 11th Circuit rules for Courtney Wild, the immunity provision could be invalidated and embolden federal prosecutors to charge a wider circle of enablers.

  • "If this NPA goes by the wayside, there’s decades of information already compiled that can be automatically weaponized." – Bobby (44:28)

4. Broader Societal and Political Reflections

• Failures of High Society and Politicians:
  Capucci doesn't hold back in criticizing both elites and systemic failures that enabled Epstein, referencing lingering connections of Epstein’s cronies in politics and business.

  • He also advocates for broader governmental reform, including term limits and increased transparency.

• Sympathy and Support for Survivors:
  Capucci is unequivocal in his support for survivors, often directly addressing them and the need for both justice and compensation.

  • "For people who act like, oh, it's about the money. The money is a small little part of what these girls are owed, but by these scumbags and society as a whole, if you want the truth of it." – Bobby (12:52)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On obstruction by Epstein's estate:

  "...they have attempted to delay, they have attempted to muddy the waters, and they have attempted to drag their feet every single step of the way." (03:04)

• On the non-prosecution agreement:

  “It smells to high heaven. And nobody else ever in the history of America... has ever caught themselves such a sweetheart deal like the one Epstein caught. And what did he catch it for? He was abusing children, folks.” (34:34)

• On the pattern of abuse and society’s complicity:

  “How many times have we seen it? And it is the MO that they used to continuously over and over and over again, and it is absolutely obscene.” (16:53)

• Support for survivors:

  “Good for you. Way to stand up for yourself and go for the throat. Get it all. Whatever you can get out of these people, you have earned it.” (12:03)

• On court’s refusal to consider new DOJ report:

  “I think it’s a travesty that this bit of information wouldn’t immediately be rushed onto the docket and into the court’s records.” (28:20)

• Systemic critique:

  “The government is never held accountable for anything it does. And here we are, here we are once again, scratching our heads and asking ourselves what in the hell is going on with these people.” (31:34)

• On next legal steps:

  “If the 11th Circuit sides with Wild ... the missing emails and other information in the report are immediately ripe for consideration by the court.” (45:08)

---

Key Timestamps for Major Segments

• [00:46 – 13:25]: Estate obstruction and strategies to delay survivor justice
• [14:45 – 22:31]: Jane Doe’s allegations and detailed account of grooming/abuse
• [27:51 – 45:27]: Appellate developments in Courtney Wild’s case and broader critique of legal system
• Notable Quotes: Interspersed throughout; highlights especially at 01:42, 06:11, 11:01, 12:03, 34:34, 16:53, 28:20, 31:34

---

Tone & Language

Capucci’s approach is uncompromising and impassioned, marked by disbelief, anger, and dark humor at systemic failures and the egregiousness of Epstein’s conduct and connections. He consistently speaks directly to survivors and the public, demanding accountability and transparency from both courts and powerful institutions.

---

Conclusion

This episode paints a sobering, detailed picture of the continued legal and emotional struggles faced by Epstein’s survivors, the calculated evasions of his estate and inner circle, and the glacial pace and setbacks survivors face in seeking justice. Capucci calls for persistent public attention, legal perseverance, and the hope that coming decisions may finally crack the shield of impunity surrounding the Epstein operation.

Transcript

[A]

Who says renting can't feel like home? Make your rental feel like yours. It all starts with one scroll. Download TikTok to discover easy home decor ideas.

[B]

Warning. This product contains nicotine. Nicotine is an addictive chemical for adults 21 and over. If you use nicotine, you probably have your routines, different moments, different situations. But when it comes to pouches, one thing matters most, whether they actually hold up. Well, that's where Joey stands apart. With 36 flavors like watermelon, strawberry and mango. There's something for every preference and it's all designed with Flavor Bead's technology for long lasting flavor. Joey Quick Kick, Long Tail, all flavor. Visit meatjoey.com to find a store near you or to order online.

[C]

This article is from ABCNews.go.com the author of the article is James Hill Survivor's attorney accuses Epstein estate of attempts to stonewall Lawsuit an attorney for a woman who claims to be the first known child sex abuse survivor of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell is accusing the legal team representing Epstein's estate of withholding evidence and attempting to prevent the testimony of a key witness, according to a letter sent to the judge overseeing her lawsuit or on Wednesday. That should shock nobody. Like I just said in the opening statement, Darren Indyke and Kahn both should be nowhere near this case. And I have a funny feeling that if prosecution pursues this case the way that they should, in a very robust and aggressive manner, then they could have they'd have no other choice but to bring Indyke in as well for questioning. At the very least under oath. This man was involved in all sorts of financial transactions for Epstein and the rest of these morons. So he was facilitating a money laundering ring. How is he still part of the estate? How is he acting as an executor? This behavior flies in the face of fairness, professionalism and much needed justice, wrote Robert Glassman, the lawyer for the accuser who filed the suit under the pseudonym Jane Doe. According to the letter, attorneys for the estate have failed to turn over a single page of evidence in the three months since being served with pretrial requests. That's what they've done from the beginning in this case, when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein and the people that are in his circle or were in his circle, they have attempted to delay, they have attempted to muddy the waters, and they have attempted to drag their feet every single step of the way. And you see that same strategy continuing here, and they're attempting to get away with it again. Let's hope that they get a taste of reality like their good friend Ghislaine did. The estate missed a previously agreed upon deadline to begin producing documents and in the possession of the estate that contained Doe's name and information. Glassman wrote. And he claimed they abruptly called off a scheduled deposition of Darren Indyke, one of the estate's co executors and a longtime lawyer for Epstein and his affiliated companies. More than that friend confidant. Not somebody that just has a business relationship with him, just a working relationship. As much as I think Epstein is the scum of the earth, I believe that everybody is entitled to legal defense, right? But this went way beyond that. This is a man who was facilitating things for Jeffrey Epstein by participating in the financial crimes. The estate is engaging in obstructionist litigation tactics intended to stonewall and deprive Jane Doe of plainly relevant discovery. Glassman wrote in asking for a conference with the court. It is clear that absent court intervention, the Epstein estate will not comply with its basic discovery obligations. And again, that's par for the course with these people. They will try and do whatever they can to make sure that this goes all the way down to the 11th hour. They don't want a timely trial, they don't want to produce discovery because then their scummy ass clients will have to answer for their behavior. So let's drag our feet a little bit, let's wait longer, let's ask for a delay, all in hopes that they can somehow either A, find a loophole or B, find somebody to help them wiggle off the hook. Doe has already turned over more than 190 pages of documents to the estate earlier this month, according to the letter, but balked at the estate's request for what Glassman called largely irrelevant and quite frankly, outrageous information from Doe. Glassman claimed that among the requests were documents referencing any and all medical procedures and consultations she has ever had throughout her lifetime, including while she was a minor, even if such medical care was unrelated to Jeffrey Epstein's alleged abuse of her. This is what happens when you have a guy like Darren and Dyke and you have Kahn in there, okay? Indyke especially. This guy's no better than the rest of this criminal organization. In fact, he's right up there with the core four, right underneath them. In my opinion, in the command structure and in fact, in some other ways, this man would basically be the consigliere. If we want to continue with our mob talk, obviously that's what you would have to talk about this guy as, right? Something like that. Jeffrey Epstein's Question guy. Hey, can I do this? What should we do about that? Hey, can I get some advice on this legal issue? And it was up to Indyke to find out how to finesse all of that. It was up to Indyke to find out how to facilitate all of that and for him participating in Jeffrey Epstein's crimes. For that reason, Darren Endyke must be subpoenaed, must testify and must be questioned. Bennett Moskowitz, a lawyer for Indyke, and Richard Kahn, the estate's co executors, declined to comment on the allegations raised by Glassman's. By Glassman, when reached Wednesday by ABC News. And that's just telling right there alone. The executors of the estate had to go out and lawyer up themselves because they're such a dirt bags that they know the slap back from the rubber band is on its way to crack them. These people are gross, disgusting, almost not even human. But in a response filed in court Thursday, an estate attorney called Glassman's letter very premature and a misrepresentation of what had occurred over. Of course, it's always a misrepresentation. Oh, no, no, that's not what Mr. You know what, what we thought here, Mr. Khan thought here, what Mr. Indyke thought here. No, it's not okay. It is not a misrepresentation. These executors in this estate have made a habit of not turning over documentation when required, of making the judge force their hand and dragging their feet the whole way. The estate claims that Indyke's deposition was taken off the calendar to allow time for Maxwell's lawyer, who had just entered the case to confer with all parties about setting new schedules and contended that the production of documents in their possession was being held up only because Doe's lawyers had yet to agree to a confidentiality order, which must occur before we produce documents that referred to Doe, who filed this case anonymously by her real name. And I think that's something that's pretty important that's buried in that paragraph is the fact that the estate claims that Indyke's deposition was taken off the calendar to allow time for Maxwell's lawyer who had just entered the case. Entered the case? Why was, why is Maxwell's lawyer in the case? Maybe because of the suit that she was going to bring against the estate for them to pay for her? Or is Maxwell's lawyer just pilfering around hoping to get some information to help with her defense? Every single door must be kicked in, every rock turned over, and every tree must be given a good shake when it comes to this case. That is for Mrs. That is for Doe's benefit, wrote a state lawyer, Mary Grace Metcalfe. Glassman told ABC News Thursday that he hadn't agreed to delaying Indyk's deposition and that he sees no need for a confidential, a confidentiality agreement to protect the identity of his client because there is a prior court order which deals with that. And again, that's what they're trying to do. They'll try and make these assertions right when they know clearly they're not in the right and they'll force the judge to decide. That way they buy themselves more time, they can solidify their defenses and, and they can be involved in whatever sort of sordid activities they think are going to help them behind the scenes. We're interested in taking this case to trial and getting the evidence that we need in order to prepare the case for that time, glassman said. And it appears that they're more interested in sitting in their offices, writing letters and objecting to everything that we're trying to do. Glassman just fired them up right here with that statement. He just told the estate that he is ready to go to trial and bring this before a jury. That is the absolute worst thing for Jeffrey Epstein's associates, the worst thing for his estate, and it most certainly is not going to be a good situation for IndyCar Khan. Can you imagine getting that jury summons and sitting on that jury pool and learning all of this stuff that we know, just the circumstantial stuff that we're privy to. Imagine you compound that with what the feds already know, with the case that they're building and you're sitting on the jury, Forget it. These dudes are in big trouble. They better figure this out and they better appease these survivors. Lawyers for the estate have previously asked the court to dismiss some of Doe's claims as beyond the statute of limitations. The lawyers for the co executors have also encouraged Doe to participate in an alternative resolution program established by the the Epstein estate, which launched last month after protracted delays. Yeah, of course, like I said, they do not want discovery no matter what they say. This includes Alan Dershowitz. This includes Prince Andrew. This includes George Mitchell. This includes Bill Richardson. This includes Glenn Dubin. This includes Lex Wexner. None of these people want discovery because that is where the rubber meets the road. Do you think it's a coincidence that Ghislaine Maxwell settled out of court before discovery with Virginia? Of course it wasn't. They all understand the stakes and they understand that if they go to discovery, it is absolute hammer time. The details in Doe's lawsuit, which was filed in January against the Epstein estate in Maxwell, are substantially similar to the allegations pertaining to one of the three minor survivors included in the federal charges against Maxwell, who was accused in a six count indictment of assisting, facilitating and contributing to Epstein's alleged abuse of three minor girls between 1994 and 1997. This is significant as well. So if the claims are as similar as they appear to be, not only is Jane Doe spearheading along with Annie the criminal portion of Ghislaine Maxwell's downfall, she is now hammering their estate as well. So Jane Doe, if you're listening to this podcast by any off chance, good for you. Way to stand up to your for yourself and go for the throat. Get it all. Whatever you can get out of these people, you have earned it. Get it all. Jane Doe was their first known victim and subsequently abused by Epstein and Maxwell for years as a young girl suffering unimaginable physical and psychological trauma and distress, her complaint said. I can only imagine. I can only imagine. And for people who act like, oh, it's about the money. The money is a small little part of what these, these girls are owed, but by these scumbags and society as a whole, if you want the truth of it.

[D]

Because all of us, all of us,

[C]

me included, everybody who ignored this story when it was, when it was happening originally. Well, I mean, really. And to ignore it after you know, about what has occurred, I can't even imagine. But what Jane Doe suffered at the hands of these people for years, of course she deserves one. Whatever sort of compensation is coming her way. I hope it is seven figures for all of these girls, every last one of them. And I hope that the estate is left penniless when it's all said and done.

[E]

Yes you can. A five minute quick and easy calorie burning workout. Give it a try. Come join our sweat sesh on TikTok.

[A]

Want to get more work done with less effort? On TikTok, creators are sharing AI automation tips that save time and deliver better results. Tap to discover. Try TikTok now. Who says renting can't feel like home? Make your rental feel like yours. It all starts with one scroll. Download TikTok to discover easy home decor ideas.

[C]

Maxwell pleaded not guilty to the charges at a hearing earlier this week and was ordered held without bail pending trial in July. Pending trial in July 2021. That trial date is set for July 12, 2020. 1. A week after Maxwell's July 2 arrest in New Hampshire, her attorney filed an answer to Doe's lawsuit denying the claims, which while also noting the overlap between the lawsuit and the criminal case against Maxwell in New York. And now remember, the other case in Prescott's court was also delayed for a while. So there was things going on behind the scenes that we weren't privy to. But when Maxwell got the case delayed and it was pushed back because of the criminal case, that is when you really knew the writing was on the wall and that Maxwell and the co conspirators were about to get got. And the rumbling started a few weeks before the arrest, but they were there. There were some clear signs that something was occurring. Ms. Maxwell's denials of factual allegations in the endo's lawsuit shall be interpreted the same as pleading not guilty to the various counts in any criminal indictment, wrote Laura Menninger, a lawyer who has represented Maxwell in civil litigation for five years. And Laura Menninger has been trying to run that same kind of story with Ghislaine Maxwell since the beginning. Right. And she has been unsuccessful in her pleading with the court for the most part. So I am not shocked to see that Ghislaine Maxwell added a couple of high profile lawyers to help steer her clear of the charges. Hopefully in her mind, right. She wants the best lawyers possible and that's why they brought in Everdell and Cohen, because Meninger, well, she seems to be like to be a lawyer that mainly deals with civil litigation and not such high profile cases. But I do believe she is taking part as part of the team in the criminal defense as well as as you know, when you're facing a federal indictment such as Ghislaine Maxwell is and you have the means, you usually have a pretty big team of lawyers working on your case. So I would not be shocked to see Menninger with a pretty prominent position. But of course she won't be the one that is the trial attorney, right? She won't be the one that is going in there and arguing it out at the trial. According to Doe's civil complaint, she first met Maxwell and Epstein in 1994 and as a 13 year old student at a music camp in Michigan. A months long grooming process continued, she alleges, after she returned home to Florida where Epstein had a seaside estate on Palm Beach Island. Doe's father had recently passed away, the complaint said, creating an opportunity for Epstein and Maxwell to fill the void. How often have we heard this story, huh? How many times have Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein and the rest of their disgusting ass co conspirators preyed upon somebody from a disadvantaged home, somebody from a broken home due to, like here, a death in the family or parents who have their own problems with drugs or alcohol. How many times have we seen it? And it is the MO that they used to continuously over and over and over again, and it is absolutely obscene. Epstein gave himself the name of Doe's godfather, while Maxwell acted like an older sister to her. Her complaint said they took her to the movies, went shopping with her, and lounged around Epstein's estate with her. That's part of the grooming process. For those of you out there that might not understand how that occurs. They're looking to get her to feel comfortable, to feel safe around them, and then to normalize their behavior. And they were very good at that. When you have people that are naive and most people at that age are, and you have somebody like Ghislaine Maxwell that comes in and offers comfort to these young girls. They never thought in their wildest dreams that this well thought, I mean, this well spoken, prim and proper lady would be involved in any sort of abuse against them. And that was all part of the plot. Doe, now 39, alleges the abuse escalated over the next few years as Epstein and Maxwell asserted more and more control over her life and aspirations. Epstein paid for voice lessons, private high school tuition, and even co signed a lease on a New York City apartment for Doe and her mother, according to her complaint. And again, that's what he would do. He would use his money, he would use his power, and he would offer these, these girls just a little sliver of something. And when you have never had nothing and you've been poor your whole life, well, even a little bit of nothing is better than nothing at all, right? And a lot of these girls were lied to. Oh, you're gonna get a job doing this or we'll hook you up and you'll be a model for Virginia's secret or whatever it may be.

[D]

It was all part of the grooming process.

[C]

And that is why Ghislaine Maxwell is so, so intricate in what went on with Jeffrey Epstein's criminal enterprise. Do not let her get off as a victim. Do not let her get off as somebody who was just, oh, a wilting Lil, a wilting Lilly, because that is not who she was. Ghislaine Maxwell had a leadership role. Ghislaine Maxwell was calling the shots from behind the scenes, the shadow boss. She claims the abuse occurred at Epstein's homes in Florida, New York, and his ranch in New Mexico, and that she would often travel to those locations with Epstein and Maxwell on one of Epstein's private jets. Again, New Mexico is an absolute shit show. How is there not an investigation going on by the state of New Mexico? Are you people kidding me right now? You got better things to do. What exactly is going on in New Mexico that you can't find the time to go kick in the door at Zorro Ranch? How many girls have to come out and say they were abused there? How many sources have to come forward and say this occurred? And yet, on a local level, all we get from them is, oh, we're sharing information with the sdny. I don't know about you, but if I was a local in New Mexico, I would be demanding a state investigation into this. Epstein's system of abuse was facilitated in large part by his co conspirator and accomplice, Maxwell, who helped supply him with a steady stream of young and vulnerable girls, the complaint said, many of whom were fatherless like Jane Doe and came from struggling families. I love that they call her a co, conspirator and accomplice here, because that is the fitting terminology. Not socialite, okay? Not ex girlfriend. Nice try setting up the defense for them, but it's not going to cut it. Doe's case is one of just a few civil actions against the Epstein estate that are being actively litigated. Most of the pending lawsuits have been put on hold by alleged survivors while they submit their claims to the Alternative Resolution Program. And again, I'm all for that program. And as long.

[D]

Here's the thing.

[C]

It really doesn't matter what any of us think about it, as long as the. As long as the survivors are okay with what goes on when it comes to the justice here, people getting arrested and the compensation program, that should be all that matters to anybody, honestly. Because for so long, they were told that they were liars. They were told that none of this ever happened. And now Jeffrey Epstein's estate is about to pay out $655 million to these very same girls that they painted as liars. You know what that's called, my friends? That is called validation of claim. Epstein's estate is valued at more than $655 million, according to a May 5 filing in probate court in the U.S. virgin Islands, where Epstein owned a private island compound that served as his primary residence since 2010. The criminal indictment against Maxwell is likely to further complicate Doe's efforts to obtain evidence and testimony necessary to pursue her civil claims. It is expected that Maxwell will eventually seek to pause the case, at least as it pertains to her, while the criminal case against her is pending. And that's pretty normal for situations like this, right?

[D]

They'll.

[C]

They'll. They'll suspend one of the trial. The k. The trials, obviously, the civil. The civil side, and they'll continue with the criminal side. And then after they can finish up the. The civil portion of it. But again, it's not like Elaine Maxwell was just some, you know, passenger on this trip, okay? And Jane Doe explains very clearly how disgusting Ghislaine Maxwell was. Very clearly that Ghislaine Maxwell was part of the abuse. And all of the evidence that has been provided also paints the same picture. Ghislaine Maxwell is looking at never seeing the light of day again, folks. And to be honest with you, I don't think she should. This is somebody who was involved in a reign of terror basically for decades, and she has no remorse. In fact, it looked like she was ready to bug out up in New Hampshire, two hours away from the Canadian border. You mean to tell me she has no contacts in Canada? You mean to tell me there are no private airfields that she could have been swooped away to and then off on a flight back to France? That's really out of the realm of possibility when we're dealing with people of means such as Ghislaine Maxwell. Of course it's not. Of course it's not. So this criminal case, her only out here is to serve up some huge names. And when I say out, I don't mean she's gonna get off because she's not gonna get a plea deal like you're thinking, where she gives up names and she walks scot free. That's not going to occur in this case. In my opinion. This lady's in big trouble. She's facing basically life in prison. And there is no hope on the horizon. As the allegations continue to come hot and heavy from every corner, I wonder, is Prince Andrew sweating or has his disease gone away? Because at this point where we are right now, the end is near for all of these people.

[E]

Wanna keep up with everything trendy? From breaking news to shareable jokes, pop culture bites to viral food spots. It's all on TikTok. Download TikTok now to explore

[A]

craving something specific. From global flavors to viral snacks, TikTok has it all. If you can dream it, you can make it right at home. Find your next favorite dish on TikTok.

[E]

Why pay when you can slash? With TikTok, slash and free, you can cut prices down all the way to zero. Just download TikTok, search, slash free, pick items in TikTok shop, share the link and boom. Free items unlocked even with free shipping. So seriously, why pay, download TikTok and start slashing now.

[C]

If you'd like to contact me, you can do that@bobby capuchirotonmail.com that's B O B B Y C A P U C c [e-mail] you can also find me on Twitter at B O B B Y Underscore C A P U C C I. All of the links that pertain to this episode can be found in the description box. All right, everybody, we later on with

[D]

some so we've been talking a lot about the department of Just Us and their nonsensical internal review that was released to the survivors one week ago today, in fact. Well, the question obviously became what would the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals think about this new revelation? Well, it looks like the court is not going to consider this new report in the Epstein case, meaning this new information is not going to be added to what's in front of them already and what's on the docket now, why that's the case, I'm not too sure. Maybe this article will clear that up for us. But you would think that a court would want to see all of the information and all of the evidence, right? That would probably be a good idea. No. But again, I'm certainly not a lawyer and I don't really know how all of this stuff works.

[C]

Right.

[D]

All of the ins and the outs of this nonsense. Certainly not my field of expertise, shall we say? And I'm just trying to make heads or tails of it with you folks at the same time. Right? So I'm guessing the court has some sort of motivation behind it. But from the cheap seats over here and from the peanut gallery, I think it's a travesty that this bit of information wouldn't immediately be rushed onto the docket and into the. Into the court's records. Right? So let's jump into this article and let's see what they have to say, and let's see if we can clear this up and try to understand what in the hell's going on here. This article is from cbs12.com and the headline is Court Rejects Considering New Report in Epstein Case. The author of this article is Dara Kam. And remember when we were talking, we knew that the government, the prosecutor's Office and the federal government itself was against this new evidence being submitted. So it looks like their argument won the day. New information released in a US Department of just US report last week shouldn't be considered in a lawsuit by one of Jeffrey Epstein survivors that seeks to undo a non prosecution agreement that allowed the notorious sex offender to avoid federal charges, an appeals court ruled Wednesday. And again, I don't understand how that could even be possible.

[C]

Right.

[D]

If you're going to hear this case, shouldn't you have all of the evidence before you? So when we talked, I figured that the court would totally accept this stuff, this evidence, and I figured with this new evidence that there was a better than good chance that the non prosecution agreements gets overturned. Now with the court not accepting this stuff, I still think there's a good shot that it gets overturned. But this would. This, this nonsense in this report certainly bolsters the argument that the federal government was negligent at best in their pursuit of justice. In regards to Jeffrey Epstein. The full 11th. The full 11th U.S. circuit Court of Appeals is slated to hear arguments on December 3rd in a lawsuit filed a dozen years ago by Courtney Wild, a Florida woman who as a teen was among Epstein's numerous underage sexual abuse survivors. I mean, think about it for a second, right? Think about if you were Courtney, how you would feel or any of these girls that were abused by Epstein. And this new information comes out about missing emails, all sorts of other nonsense, time gaps, data gaps, you would think that, you know, hey, this is a good deal, right? The court's gonna wanna see this. This can only bolster my argument, but again, it just goes to show you that all of the different loopholes and the technicalities and the way they navigate the murky water that is the American judicial system, it's rigged, right? It is completely rigged. The government is never held accountable for anything it does. And, and here we are, here we are once again scratching our heads and asking ourselves what in the hell is going on with these people. Wild's lawyers this week told the court that the report by the department of just U.S. office of Professional Responsibility, two years in the making, sheds new light on the government's handling of Epstein, a wealthy financier pedophile who owned homes in Florida and elsewhere and who died in a New York jail last year. Yeah, it most certainly does bring some stuff to light. Right. So again, I just don't understand why it would not be accepted by the court or why they wouldn't consider it. There has to be some sort of legal reason Right. There has to be some sort of, I don't know, scope of what they're looking for. Maybe that would be my guess. Right? But again, I'm certainly not a lawyer, but I will continue to try and navigate these murky waters and figure it all out with you folks. Right? Because common sense says, and decency says that a court should accept whatever sort of evidence is being provided. At least you would think, right? Wild is fighting a non prosecution agreement struck by former South Florida U.S. attorney Alex Acosta and his bosses who over a decade ago worked with Epstein's lawyers to craft a deal allowing Epstein to sidestep federal charges. Under the agreement, Epstein pleaded guilty to two state prostitution charges in Florida, including procuring a minor for sex.

[C]

Again, really?

[D]

And even with, say that was the only charge this guy was ever hit with and there was nothing else that ever came out with Epstein. Imagine you have this charge procuring a minor for sex and people like Leon Black and you know, Jess Staley and all of these other folks who are in so called polite society, they, they have the audacity to say, I don't know what Jeffrey Epstein was. The dude was slapped with at the very least a procuring a minor for sexual charge, okay? And went to jail for it. So don't tell us you don't know what he was, you bunch of lying bastards. The plea deal also provided immunity from federal prosecution for Epstein, four other named co conspirators and any potential co conspirators. It's so wild every time we read that, I just shake my head and wonder how in the hell anyone can could look at that deal and say it's right. Say that it passes the sniff test. It does not. It smells to high heaven. And nobody else ever in the history of America. Think about that for a minute. All of the scumbaggery we've had go on in our 250. No one else has ever caught themselves such a sweetheart deal like the one Epstein caught. And what did he catch it for? He was abusing children. Folks. Let that sit in, right? Let that sink in for a minute. Chew on that. Put that in your pipe and smoke it. And then turn your full attention with disgust to the Department of Justice. The full Atlanta based appellate decided to hear arguments in the case after reversing a three judge panel's April ruling. The panel concluded that although the facts of the case were beyond scandalous and a national disgrace, the agreement did not violate the federal victim's rights law. Yeah, well, we know how that worked out. For the three panel judge. The three judge panel, right. We know that Judge Hull wasn't having it, we know about the amicus briefs and we know that Judge Hull's response was so fiery that the court decided to hear it with a fully empaneled bench. And it is a travesty, honestly, that it's come to this far. This should have been able to be handled in a lower court. It shouldn't even have been kicked up to an appeals court. What sort of judge can look at this? You know, the thing about it too is they'll sit there and they'll talk about, oh, this is the law, this is the law, this is this, this is that. But at the same time, they'll let their politics dictate the way they, the way they make their judgments from the bench. How they read the Constitution, how they read the law. But in cases like this, when it's obvious these people are scumbags, it's obvious the federal government shit the bed. It's obvious the federal government worked on almost on behalf of Jeffrey Epstein against these girls. And you would think after all these years, with all of this publicity and the spotlight turned on it, that now would be the time to start restoring our faith in the department of Just us. But instead it seems like we get more bullshit games, huh? The 11th Circuit. The 11th Circuit on Wednesday refused Wild's request to add the 287 page report to the case record, saying the court's reconsideration of the case was limited to, to, to two issues. Whether the Victims Rights act applies before charges are filed against a defendant and if so, whether violations of the act can be enforced with an independent court action. Alright, so there's the reasoning behind it, it's the scope. It's the scope of what they're looking at. But I still don't think that's acceptable, to be honest with you. Increase your scope. You're a federal court, you're an appellate court, you're one of the highest courts in the land. Do what you gotta do to make sure you have this information right. I would think that if you were sitting on this, this panel of judges, you would want everything in front of you. I know I would. I mean, when we're talking about something as serious as the law and possibly sending people to prison for their, their whole lives, I would think that every single bit of information should be digested by those who are going to render such a decision. That is a great amount of power and a great amount of responsibility you would want to have everything lined up right, everything in context. But I guess according to the court, it's not within the scope. Although the court rejected the admission of the report, Wild's legal team remained upbeat. Well, that's a, that's a positive, right? If the legal team remained upbeat and they would know all of this, you know, the nuance of all of this way better than I am. Again, I'm certainly no lawyer, folks. I'm just, you know, just a knucklehead who's commentating on what's going on here. So if her, if her legal team remains upbeat, then at least that's a little bit of silver lining in the cloud here. We're actually pleased that today's ruling narrows the case down to two issues because we think those are two issues where the statute and the legislative history making it absolutely clear that the survivor should prevail in this case. University of Utah law professor Paul Cassell, who joined Fort Lauderdale attorney Brad Edwards in Wild's legal battle shortly after her lawsuit was filed 12 years ago, told the News Service of Florida in a phone interview Wednesday. So I think that they might have, they might be onto something there, right? If the court is going to just strictly look at that particular part of the case and that is the scope and the only thing that matters here for which they are gonna make a ruling, then I think the survivors have a strong case no matter what. And I think Courtney has a very strong case here. I don't see how this appellate court could look at this and say that this is all above board and that this should not be overturned. I think that Judge Hull again, who had the fiery response to her colleagues on the three person panel after they ruled in favor of the government. I think Judge Hull is going to be very critical of everything coming across her desk for, for sure. And I am almost positive that she has multiple colleagues that will feel the same way. This is a travesty. The very people who wrote this law wrote amicus briefs telling the court that they were not using the law, how it was written. How much more clear is it than that? The report found that Acosta used poor judgment in striking the non prosecution agreement with Epstein's lawyers, showed that the government failed to provide documents to Wild's attorneys and revealed the Justice Department's views on how Acosta treated Epstein survivors. An element that plays a critical role in Wild's lawsuit for sure. It, it, it's a pattern. It just shows a pattern of how these gals were treated and how Courtney was treated. Right. There's no reason that the lawyers should have to wait 10 years to know about a gap in emails. Why isn't the government being transparent? And I don't even want to hear about no glitch or no coincidence. Every time I hear the word glitch or coincidence in this case, it makes my skin crawl at this point. I mean, you know, how much are you, how much shit are you going to shovel us and expect us just to accept it and suck it down? Because enough is enough at this point. Acosta served for two years as Secretary of Labor in President Donald Trump's administration, but he resigned last year amid criticism of his handling of the Epstein agreement. And again, look, Acosta deserved to resign. He didn't even deserve a place at the table when it comes to being involved in a president's cabinet. But we know that Trump has not shown the greatest judgment when it comes to having Epstein's buddies around him. Dershowitz, Mnuchin, I mean, you know, so par for the course there, but in a perfect world, Acosta would have never had a seat at the table. With that said, anyone who's just looking to pin this on Acosta and anybody who thinks it's just Acosta who was making these decisions is doing a disservice to the overall investigation and is not digging deep enough. An addendum to the report revealed a data gap in Acosta's email inbox from May 2007 through April 2008, the exact time period. Mr. Mr. Acosta was most deeply involved in negotiating and approving the Epstein NPA non prosecution agreement. Wild's lawyers wrote in a motion filed this week. 100%. It is beyond a coincidence at this point. It is beyond strange, okay? If you're looking at a building and you see, you know, smoke coming out of a window, chances are there's going to be fire. And that's what we have here. There's a lot of things that don't add up, and there's a lot of things that they would want us to believe as coincidence that I have a very, very hard time buying. Government lawyer. Lawyers who opposed inclusion of the report in the lawsuit have raised a whole flurry of other objections against getting to the merits of the issues in the case. Cassell said. And of course, the government lawyers are going to be smarmy. They're going harder against the survivors than they did against Epstein. It's a travesty to watch, right? It really is disgusting and disheartening and almost discouraging to watch shit like this occur. And Then what can you do about it? All we can do about it is vote out all scumbags. All incumbents, really. Because when I say scumbag, that's what I mean. And send real people to D.C. there has to be some sort of term limits. There has to be a limit on money coming in, or actually zero money coming in from out of states for campaigns. There's a whole bunch of shit that we can do, but. But yet we don't ever push the issue. We just keep sending the same retreads back and back and back and back. And then when shit goes south, we wonder, whoa, whoa, what the hell?

[C]

What happened?

[D]

Well, we sent the same morons back to D.C. what do you think's gonna happen? And that's what we see here. We need to send better quality people with morals to Washington, D.C. so we can get some quality lawmakers to write some quality laws. Wouldn't that be nice for a change, folks? But if the 11th Circuit sides with Wild on the alleged violations of the victim rights law, the missing emails and other information in the report are immediately ripe for consideration by the court. So, all right, that's promising as well. If they. If they side with Courtney and they feel like the government screwed up, which they should, then these reports and the missing emails and all the other garbage automatically becomes ripe. Meaning the court will be interested in it. Very much so. And we'll probably get to see it be included from that point on. But again, that means the 11th Circuit has to side with Courtney first, right? So one battle at a time, one step at a time. One thing I've learned in this case is every single time you think that you're ahead in the count, they come back with some sort of curveball, and it becomes a full count once again. After more than a decade of litigation, U.S. district Judge Kenneth Mara ruled in February 2019 that federal prosecutors broke the law when they struck the plea deal with a multi millionaire. But after Epstein died last year, the federal judge refused to undo the plea agreement or grant other remedies sought by Wild, who filed the lawsuits as Jane Doe and another victim. So it's pretty interesting, huh? After this stuff gets. In February, it's, you know, ruled that the. The government broke the law when they struck this deal with Epstein, meaning that the NPA was in serious jeopardy. And then Epstein just happens to get arrested and then kills himself. Huh? Pretty interesting how that happens. Just another coincidence, I would guess, though, right? Stops. Don't think it's. Don't think he. He got murdered. He could never have gotten murdered, obviously a suicide man, Bill Barr told us. And some no name medical examiner from New York too. Okay, yeah, I'm buying that. The act promised Ms. Wilde and other survivors the chance to confer with the prosecutor before any deal was done. That's what Judge Morrow ruled. So if we prevail, what we think should happen is the deal should be invalidated, including the immunity provision, which gives immunity not just to the now deceased Jeffrey Epstein, but his co conspirators, Cassell, a former federal judge, said Wednesday. And it's important, right, because it opens up a slew of well documented crimes. Then right now prosecutors are putting together other crimes that might not have been made public or, or on the books, whatever may have you. But if this NPA goes by the wayside, there's decades of information already compiled that can be automatically weaponized. So it's very crucial that this 11th Circuit Court decision comes down on the side of justice. And if it doesn't, I would hope and I would urge the survivor's lawyers to push this shit all the way to the Supreme Court. It's that important. After the earlier plea agreement on state charges, Epstein was arrested in July 2019 and charged with federal sex trafficking offenses involving minor girls from Florida and other places. He was found dead in a jail cell a month later in what was deemed a suicide. In addition to Epstein, the agreement provided immunity to four women. Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Leslie Grof, Nadia Marcinkova, and other unidentified people. So the core four, plus more is what I'm calling all of them now. Originally I dubbed the four. I just named the core four, but everyone else added in. Now that's the core four and more. Because you know where I'm coming from, all of these people need to get a big fat helping of rico. That needs to happen asap. And this prosecution agreement is certainly an impediment in that occurring. It has to go by the wayside. Wild is hoping the court will revoke the agreement so she can work with federal prosecutors to go after the conspirators who helped Jeffrey Epstein abuse her in Florida, said Cassell, a former federal prosecutor. So we're hoping to get a rescission of the immunity provision in the non prosecution agreement. Bam. That would be epic. And I think that it would be nice if the 11th Circuit Court would accept all of the evidence that has been compiled. Don't you think that would be prudent? Even if it means they have to push the, the, the hearing back a week or two or three weeks to get their ducks in a row. I don't understand why the court would reject it. Still, I get at the scope and I understand the legalese of it. That's not what I'm saying. The citizen in me, the taxpayer in me, the off agitated taxpayer in me does not understand, however. So we'll see how this plays out. December 3rd is a big day. Circle it on your calendar. I'll be calling in, obviously, to listen to the proceedings, if that's possible, like it has been in Presca and Judge Nathan's courtrooms. I'm guessing it's the same procedure here. So I will definitely be calling in and listening to what goes on when they make the they hear these oral arguments on December 3rd. So there you have it, folks. That answers our question about the Department of Justice report and if the 11th Circuit of Appeals was going to bring that onto their plate as well. And the answer that we have received to this point sounds like a no. If you'd like to contact me, you can do [e-mail] that's B O B B Y C A P U c c I protonmail.com you can also find me on Twitter Bobby Capucci. All of the links that go with this episode can be found in the description box and.