Mega Edition: Unnamed MCC Lieutenant And HIs OIG Interview (8-10) (7/4/26)

Summary

---

The Epstein Chronicles

Mega Edition: Unnamed MCC Lieutenant And His OIG Interview (8-10)

Published: July 4, 2026 | Host: Bobby Capucci

---

Brief Overview

In this "Mega Edition" of The Epstein Chronicles, host Bobby Capucci continues to dissect the OIG (Office of the Inspector General) interview with an unnamed Manhattan Correctional Center (MCC) lieutenant. The episode delves into the procedures, logs, and lapses regarding inmate counts and supervision in the Special Housing Unit (SHU) leading up to and during Jeffrey Epstein’s death. The lieutenant, who worked in and around the SHU, is questioned in detail about count discrepancies, possible falsification of records, the notorious absence of effective rounds, and the protocols for cellmates and the supposed “hot list” for high-risk inmates like Epstein. The lengthy, granular exchange aims to illuminate systemic failures, confusion among staff, and the nuances behind the much-discussed MCC failures.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Count Discrepancies and Falsified Counts

• Unexplained Changes in Headcounts ([01:00]-[06:00], [12:03]-[19:38])
  • Investigators and the lieutenant review several headcount documents (“E1s” and count slips) from August 9th–10th, noting inconsistencies in the number of inmates recorded in the SHU (e.g., flipping between 76, 73, 72).
  • The lieutenant confirms that the change from 73 to 72 doesn’t align with documented inmate movements:

    "So they're taking off... If they're going from 76 down to 73, that's three people. And one person vanishes when it gets to 72. Are you able to tell where that person vanished from or is it impossible...?"

    • [03:51, Investigator]
  • The concept of a "ghost count" is discussed as a workaround sometimes used for inmates housed in medical or dry cells but still listed elsewhere.

    "Sometimes they have a ghost count… like the guy in medical, they say, hey, I didn't have time to key him in, but I'm verifying that he's down there..."

    • [06:24, Unnamed Lieutenant]

2. Systemic Issues in Count Procedure and Communication

• Count Slips Not Matching Physical Presence ([19:38]-[30:39], [30:39]-[39:38])
  • The process for keying inmates in different units (SHU, RA, R&D, etc.) remains murky, with the lieutenant noting the possibility of miscommunication or laziness in updating electronic records.
  • The process of notifying control or updating logs appears informal or inconsistent:

    "There’s no typical... you get it done, hey, I’m telling you to move him. Or I say I’m moving this guy, the lieutenant told me to move him."

    • [31:09, Unnamed Lieutenant]
  • Responsibility for inputting changes falls ambiguously between SHU staff and control.

    "The shoe should have contacted control and said, we just made this movement. He needs to be rekeyed."

    • [32:12, Investigator]

3. The “Ghost Count” and Dry Cell Confusion

• Failures to Key Out/Inmates ([14:41]-[19:38], [30:39]-[39:38])
  • Significant confusion arises over whether inmates were physically present or simply counted based on paperwork.
  • Dry cells (for observation) were a point of processing confusion, with logs and actual cell locations not matching.

    "It looks like they took a guy to shoe, put him in R&D, but instead of keying him in R&D, they keyed him in RA. Yeah, that's what it looks like."

    • [16:00, Unnamed Lieutenant]

4. Rounds, Supervision, and Responsibility

• Rounds vs. Actual Counts ([46:29]-[61:39])
  • Persistent uncertainty whether proper counts—or just "rounds" (checks in the unit without actual counting)—were performed.

    "They probably just went off the numbers... so you think they conducted a round, not a count?"

    • [40:53, Investigator/Unnamed Lieutenant]
  • Supervisor responsibility for verifying counts and rounds is highlighted as ambiguous and inconsistently enforced.

    "The purpose of a supervisor actually signing this round sheet? Making sure that the officer is following and doing their rounds."

    • [48:47, Investigator / Unnamed Lieutenant]

5. Cellmate Policy and The "Hot List"

• Epstein and Required Cellmates ([49:30]-[59:00])
  • Debate over who was aware Epstein had lost his cellmate and whether policies requiring a cellmate for inmates on "hot list"/suicide watch were followed.

    "I think all lieutenants should have known."

    • [56:37, Unnamed Lieutenant]
  • Despite messages/guidance, the breakdown in communication and accountability left gaps:

    "But sometimes it’d be an odd number and they can’t have one (a cellmate)..."

    • [57:30, Unnamed Lieutenant]

6. Systemic MCC Issues and Unusualness of the Event

• Falsification Deemed "Abnormal" ([46:29]-[49:30])
  • Lieutenant asserts that miscounts and slip falsification are “definitely abnormal,” not routine in his experience:

    "That's not normal. Definitely."

    • [47:05, Unnamed Lieutenant]

    "This seems to be an abnormal day... the counts and the slips and the rounds and the falsifying stuff like that."

    • [47:25, Unnamed Lieutenant]

7. General MCC Turmoil and Culture

• Busy, Overwhelmed Environment
  • Lieutenant describes MCC as chaotic with a continuous flow of inmates, both incoming and outgoing, hinting at broader systemic strain:

    "This place is a busy place... a revolving door."

    • [48:21, Unnamed Lieutenant]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the confounding headcount inconsistencies:

  • "It's just a baffling type of deal because it's baffling to us, and then we're just hoping that people can help us, especially people that were there."
    – OIG Investigator ([08:01])

• On the abnormality of the reporting lapses:

  • "That's not normal. Definitely."
    – Unnamed Lieutenant ([47:05])

• On cellmate protocols and the ‘hot list’:

  • "I think all lieutenants should have known."
    – Unnamed Lieutenant ([56:37])

• On responsibility for inmate location changes:

  • "There’s no typical... you get it done, hey, I’m telling you to move him. Or I say I’m moving this guy, the lieutenant told me to move him."
    – Unnamed Lieutenant ([31:09])

• On communication/responsibility confusion:

  • "If anybody can do it and no one is told to do it, I guess... that would quite frequently not be done because everyone would be like, well he could have done it, he should have done it."
    – OIG Investigator ([33:08])

---

Timestamps for Critical Segments

| Timestamp | Segment Description | |-----------|--------------------| | 01:00–12:03 | Deep dive into count discrepancies in the SHU (E1s, count slips, ghost counts) | | 12:03–19:38 | "Ghost count" mechanism, dry cells, and the question of physical presence vs. paperwork | | 19:38–30:39 | Logbook ambiguities, policies/protocol confusion, shift changes, and overtime explanations | | 30:39–39:38 | Who is responsible for updating inmate movement (SHU staff vs. control), chain of notification | | 39:38–46:29 | Debates about whether counts or just rounds were conducted; indications of systemic failure; falsification implications | | 46:29–61:39 | Nature of abnormality at MCC, cellmate policy, hot list, supervisor oversight, and where breakdowns in notice and action occurred |

---

Tone & Language

Throughout the episode, the tone remains direct, unsparing, and methodically investigative, with Capucci and interviewers combining technical challenge with open-ended questioning. The lieutenant is initially defensive and hesitant but grows more frank about systemic issues, ultimately framing the Epstein episode as unusually chaotic—even by MCC’s troubled standards. There’s a distinct undercurrent of frustration and incredulity at the procedural breakdown, with a focus on accountability and the implications for the broader conspiracy theories.

---

Conclusion

This episode builds an intricate, granular portrait of the bureaucratic fog and operational lapses that clouded Jeffrey Epstein’s final days at MCC. Investigators and the veteran lieutenant together reveal a system vulnerable to error, buck-passing, and inadequate communication—factors that likely contributed to the confusion (and controversy) around Epstein’s death. More than just a review of bureaucratic logs, the episode challenges listeners to consider how protocol failures, both accidental and possibly malicious, shaped one of the most infamous institutional breakdowns in recent American criminal justice history.

---

For complete documentation and follow-ups, listeners are directed to the episode description box.

Transcript

[Bluff]

What's going on everyone? It's bluff here and we're driving through the states in the Bluff Mobile and the best thing that we can do is play our favorite casino style games on Spin Quest. They have over a thousand games including live dealer, blackjack and craps. With tons of slots and unlimited options, you can get a 30 coin pack for just $10. For new users. Sign up today. Go to spinquest.com right now Spinquest is

[SpinQuest Announcer]

a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[OnDeck Announcer]

Cash Flow Crunch Ondeck's small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confidently. Apply [e-mail] funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondeck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

[Unnamed Lieutenant]

What's up everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode we're getting right back to the interview with the UNAM lieutenant from MCC with the OIG investigators. Question alright, now this is the one that I really want you to look at. Look at this E1. This is now August 10th at midnight. Check out what it says for za on e1. What number does that say? 72. Question alright, and check out the count slip. What does the count slip say? Question it says 73. So 73. But the top one that was clear, it says 72. Right? Answer yeah. Question and I'll give you one more just so it's not a magic trick. Look at this page first for the August 10th and I have the rest of them too if you want to see them. But 3am on August 10 and then the last page where it says the count slip, what does it say on the E1? On the next one it says 72 end on the E1. And then what does the count slip say? 72. So in looking at all of this, does that tell you as a lieutenant and someone who worked in the shoe, does that tell you something? Answer yeah, but the thing is this one had up though. Question that's exactly right. So we're trying to figure out where did this count change down to 72? And does it indicate to you that these counts were not actually conducted and that this is not that we have no reason to believe you were involved in this. So I want to make sure your were actually just looking for your help here. As someone who worked in the shoe and someone that is familiar with these kinds of documents. Can you help us put this puzzle together? So we have a reason to believe that they called in the midnight 73 and the control lieutenant who was working that night figured out that there is actually only 72 people in there. They've been calling in 73, but there's only 72 people in the shoe. Is there any way from looking and that's from this point forward they're now starting calling in 72. Is there any way from looking at these you're able to determine with your knowledge and experience where that changed. I would say that it changed from the 10 o' clock count. This was printed at 9:33. So it has 73. And then at 9:33 Attorney Conference and open. So Epstein would have probably been up by then. He would have went back to the shoe. So he would have been listed on Epstein would have been back at least by 8pm Right. Answer yeah. Question so that would have been. He should have been on this one. Answer so he threw it. Yeah. Question and can you see where on let's talk about. I guess that's the one before the 5pm The 4pm Answer yeah, it would have been the attorney conference. Yeah. Question and it would have showed him an the attorney conference on one of these. Correct on the E1. Answer yeah. At three o' clock at attorney conference. Well, from shoe question and then does it show that he's already in shoe in this one? Is there any way an attorney conference at the 10pm Count answer no, but see what I was telling you before about the numbers. See how I had 76. Question Yep. Answer and this is at the 4 o' clock count and then it went down to 73. Question Right. Answer so you don't know until after the count about the whole cellmate coming back. Question Right. But then the weird part about it is going from 73 to 72 with no movement. So we don't know. Okay, so they're taking off. You know, if they're going from what does it say 76 down to 73, that's three people and one person vanishes when it gets to 72. Are you able to tell where that person vanished from or is it impossible because possibly all these counts were not conducted and that I know you weren't here for any of these counts apparently. So it's again, I'm just asking for your guidance Is that correct? You weren't even working when any of these counts were conducted. Answer yeah, well, if I was, you said four, right? Answer well, you possibly worked up until four. Answer yeah, Question but he gets cut off by the lieutenant. So I wasn't here. I wasn't there for count. Question Right. So again, I want to reassure you this is not a gotcha moment. We're just trying to help he gets cut off by the lieutenant. No, no, but you know, it feels like it. Question yeah, yeah, and I get that because you've got special agents talking to you. It's just all about trying to piece the puzzle together. So we need help with people like yourself to be able to say what the hell happened. You know what I mean? Answer yeah, well, there's also three here from indiscernible. I mean, I think. Question and we've had others. And you just. He gets cut off by the lieutenant. Oh, they hadn't keyed them out, but then they would have keyed them out. R d leaves at 10, they leave at 10. Now, they could have left somebody on and they came out because like you said, it's no movement. The only way you get it is you key out, like key a guy. Unless somebody went to the hospital or something. Answer yeah, and if there is nothing that happened but no inmates removed after, after 10pm if we know that, does that this indicate that we're just going off on numbers and just falsifying their counts? Or are you able to tell by looking at these all if these counts are legit or not? Are you able to kind of like give us any insight into that? Answer? I mean, the one with a plus one is the question because I don't see why they would. Then again, you've got R and D with a plus one too. I don't know. I don't know what's going on. They got R and D and discernible cell plus one. Question Am I looking at that person in R D? Are you able to tell who it is? Huh? Question not by looking at the name. Not by looking at the name. I mean, there's no outcount. Don't have the outcount. Question don't have the outcount, Is that what you're saying? Yeah. Question and what time is that for? Answer well, you don't have the count out. Question no. What time are you looking at? Answer this one's for 10. Question so the 10pm doesn't even have an outcount on it. Answer I mean, it don't add up because, yeah, something's not right because r D is not on here unless they moved. I mean, sometime they have a ghost count, but he gets cut off by the investigator. And what is the ghost count? Min the lieutenant. So, like the guy in medical, they say, hey, I didn't have time to key him in, but I'm verifying that he's down there or down here with me and put him on my account. Question so, r D, does that say 95 plus 1? Answer it could say 95, or it could say 9 South. Question oh, 9 South plus 1. The other investigator pipes in, what's 9 South? Answer the shoe. Question now this name to me looks like redacted. So is that somebody's name? Answer yeah, that's an officer. Question so if someone was placed in r d and someone was told to watch that person there, would the person at 10pm would they be able to see like a dry cell, someone was still sitting there at night? Answer well, yeah, because you could watch them down there. Yeah. Question and is that like a small indiscernible? Is it kind of like you'd be able to. That person would know if somebody was there or not? Answer yeah, because someone could have come in before the count too. A u. S. Marshal could have rung someone in and they said, hey, watch this guy. He's going to nine south. That's why the plus one is throwing me off. Question have you ever seen plus one on anything before? Answer no, I heard people calling in with a plus one, but then again I say, that's like a ghost, a ghost count. Question all right, does this, but seeing especially looking at 72, and does this at all tell you anything about any of those counts? Like we've had other people, you know, in higher positions saying to me, it tells me that the counts weren't done. Does that tell you that? Answer yeah, but at 10, I mean, yeah, I don't know, man. I mean, I couldn't tell you. I couldn't tell you. I don't know. I don't understand that. Question. Okay, so it's just a baffling type of deal because it's baffling to us, and then we're just hoping that people can help us, especially people that were there. Answer I don't know. See, that's why I don't understand that. I don't see how they got 73 at the 10 o' clock count and then they lose one after the 10 o' clock count. Question and that's the same thing we're Trying to figure that out. Answer Unless it wasn't keyed in the system. Question at what point are you able to tell at what point it should have been keyed in the system by that? Answer well, if a guy came into R D and they keyed him in shoe and they put him back in R D. Question so if like he went to shoe and then back. Answer he never went to shoe. They keyed him in the shoe. They, they put him on the count but he didn't make it. So the medical and stuff taking the guy out so they say, hey, leave him down there and count him in R D. I could see that happening. Question so if like he's in medical and they can't, he gets cut off by the lieutenant. Well so like medical comes down there and they check him out and he don't make it up to the shoe for the time. Seeing that they could say hey, well I'm not putting him in our account. Put them down there. Question so that would be like the ghost count you're talking about.

[Lady Luck]

Hey everybody, lady luck here. And we're celebrating America's 250th birthday. Now all summer long I'm going to be celebrating by playing on spinquest.com which is an American owned social casino. It obviously features over a thousand slot games and live blackjack, live craps, live bubble craps. Head on over to spin quest.com get yourself a $30 coin pack for just 10 bucks.

[SpinQuest Announcer]

SpinQuest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[OnDeck Announcer (Alternate)]

Cash Flow Crunch Ondeck's small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and control over repayment, get funded quickly and confidently. Apply [e-mail] funds could be as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by On Deck or Celtic Bank. On Deck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amount subject to lender approval.

[Unnamed Lieutenant]

Answer no, that's the real count. That's just saying someone put him in there and then took him out. Question. All right, but if he's not physically there, he's not actually allowed to be on the count, is he? Answer. Exactly. No. That's why this is. I don't know. You see this says ra. That's R and D. Question and does it say anybody in R D on this? Answer well, there's not out count. And that's what I'm saying. There's no outcount with that one. Question. So this RA is one answer. RA and R D are separate. You need an outcount for this. You don't need an outcount for that. This is a unit question. But as far as this goes, we're looking at the midnight and 10pm Right? Answer. Yeah. Question. So at midnight, there is RA1 and then midnight. But at 10pm, you know, two hours earlier, the zero correct answer. So I'm thinking this dude went back to RA okay, that's how they lost someone. But there is a counselet for RA and R D. That's what we're talking about. That's the thing. He gets cut off by the investigator is in the consulate. He gets cut off now by the lieutenant at the top. Question, that's R D. Well, they could have messed up. They could have had RA count slip for that one. Question. What's the difference between RNA and R D? RNA is a real unit. So when the guys come back from court, they're in RA status. R D is when they keyed out question to leave. Answer to go to court. But if they come back, they came back in their unit. If they don't come back, they release them from R D. But RA is technically a unit. Question and it doesn't count as it doesn't show up in R D. Answer no. Question, where would that one slip that says R D in there? Where would that show up? Answer that would be right here. But they don't have nobody in R D. Question. So there. So is that even weirder? The fact that the 10pm count, there is a count slip for R D and there's nobody for R D on this Answer. That's why I think they put him and keyed him in the shoe. They keyed him in the shoe, the inmate, and put him down in R D and then changed it after the count. Or they could have changed it right after his count cleared and set it up for the next count. Say the inmate. The inmate is. This is 10. Answer. Yeah. This one is 10pm Question. Yeah. You have the midnight one. Question and that midnight one right there. Answer. That's the three. Question. This is midnight. Answer.

[SpinQuest Announcer]

Yeah.

[Unnamed Lieutenant]

So that's what happened. Question, does R and D have like a dry cell or a dry room? Answer, no. They got cells. You see? They got R.A. right here. Yeah, that's what happened. I think the guy came from SHU and went to ra. That's why they lost one Question. And can you think of why a person would go from shoe to RA at that late at night? Answer. A body scan probably pulled something and they kept him down there, put him through the X ray. And is there a way by looking at these, you can see. Is there. You said 4pm yeah, that's 4pm question, is the person in R D at 4pm are you able to tell by this? Answer. Let me see, you know the inmate that was down there or no? Question. I think redacted. Is that right? Answer. He was a WITSEC dude. Question. Do you know anything about him? Answer no, I don't. But yeah, that's what it looks like. It looks like they took a guy to shoe, put him in R D, but instead of keying him in R D, they keyed him in RA. Yeah, that's what it looks like. Question. So at 4pm Was anything to do with redacted on that or anything to do with somebody in. He gets cut off by the lieutenant. Well, the 4:00pm no, because no one is out from R D. You've got one from 11 South. You got no one from R D. Question. But it also said that the 10pm right, or I don't know which one I'm looking at right here. Answer. No, you have one out here. Yeah, but it looks like this inmate from 10 o', clock, they did the count of 10. Plus one. Yeah, plus one. It seemed like they got screwed up by something, either moving this guy to RD or whatever. I mean, the count slip shouldn't have accepted anyway. So in the nine south plus one, like, I don't know why that was written. That's what it looked like. The guy came from nine South. He went in the ra, stayed there throughout the night, whoever the inmate was. Question. And we have reason to believe that that is the case, that there is a guy that was in, you know, he did stay there at the night and he had somebody on him. And. And that's one of the reasons why we want to talk to somebody that was in R and D to be able to verify, hey, was that guy really there? And by looking at that, would you be able to tell us the individual we talked about? Answer. Redacted question. Who did the count slip? Answer. It's based on the count slip. Question. All right, does this tell you anything just before we move on? Answer. I mean, I don't know. Yeah, I don't know. I don't understand it. That's the only thing. I think they probably took him down there. Is there a witch from looking at these, what basic like count seem bad to you? Does this 10pm one seem like a bad count to you? The way it what you just looked at when there is Nothing on the E1 and on the count slip, if you were working that night and you got a count like that, is that good or a bad count? I would have set a bad count. And who can you tell by looking at this? Who was the one who took the count? A redacted and was there any lieutenants involved with these? I mean there could have been, I'm not sure. Question but by looking at this, I think probably the midnight one there was an actual ops lieutenant. Are you able to tell that by looking? I think the ops lieutenant is the one who caught it at midnight. Are you able to tell that? Answer oh, this one here. Question yeah. Are you able to tell by looking at these? Are you able to tell me when the lieutenant actually took the count? Answer it looks like she took the count. Redacted. Took the count at midnight. Question all right. And it shows redacted on it. I'm looking at this upside down so I can't even see it. Answer that's what it says. Question and this one, does it show any lieutenant was involved? Answer no. Question so it would just have been redacted. Answer yeah. All right folks, we're going to wrap up right here and in the next episode dealing with the topic, we're going to pick up where we left off. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box.

[Lady Luck]

Hey everybody, lady luck here. And we're celebrating America's 250th birthday. Now all summer long I'm going to be celebrating by playing on finquest.com which is an American owned social casino. It obviously features over 1000 slot games and live blackjack, live craps, live bubble craps. Head on over to spinquest.com get yourself a $30 coin pack for just 10 bucks.

[SpinQuest Announcer]

Spinquest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[OnDeck Announcer (Alternate)]

On Deck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team or bridging cash flow gaps on Deck's loans up to $400,000 help make it happen fast. Rated A by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five star Trustpilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in [e-mail] depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by Ondeck or Celtic Bank. Ondeck does not lend in North Dakota all loans an amount subject to lender approval.

[Unnamed Lieutenant]

What's up everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode we're going to dive right back in to the statement given to the OIG inspectors by the unnamed lieutenant. Question all right. And it shows redacted on it. I'm looking at it upside down so I can't even see Answer that's what it says. Yeah. Question and on this one does it show any lieutenant was involved? Answer no Question so it would have just been redacted? Answer yeah. Question all right, what about the 4pm does it show the lieutenant's name on the 4pm? No. Question do you have any idea what redacted's first name is? Answer no. Question but this does seem like a bad E1. Answer E1 seems good but he gets cut off even though that no one is listed on R D. Answer yeah, that's what's confusing. Question because you say there's a count slip for he gets cut off by the lieutenant. This is at 9:33. Question wasn't that just one that was printed because the numbers are printed on that. I see what you're saying. So after 9:33 possibly something changed. Answer so that could be two things. Either the Marshall was trying to get one in before the count and they thought they had enough time to process them upstairs and then when they call in the count it's wrong. Like hold on, it's not it Question and that's what I mean by wouldn't this be incorrect if they get a count slip that's not listed on the E1. Answer yeah, they got which one did they get? R D. Yeah, that would be a bad one. Question alright, so for this it seems like the 10pm on August 9th was a bad E1 and as far as the midnight it seems like it's the count slip that's a bad slip. Is that correct? Whatever. That's indiscernible. I'm sorry. So it seems like the E1 is good at midnight but the countslip is bad at midnight for za and we're primarily asking you this stuff just because we've got to write a report about what we're finding and we don't want the sound. We don't want to sound or want it to be wrong. You know what I mean? Yeah. Yeah. So the count slip is wrong on this one. Question so midnight count slip is wrong. E1 seems right. The E1 at 10pm seems wrong but the count slip seems right at least for R D We have Reason to believe that the count slip for Za is also wrong for 10:00pm because, well, it depends, I guess, like you said, what time the individual was moved to R D. We've been told that after, you know, people are all moved prior to this time. So if that person was in R D, it would have been prior to the 10pm count. Does that sound right to you? Answer that's what I'm saying. I mean, something could have happened. And you know, taking this guy downstairs. Question and that's why we need to talk to people. So by looking at this, are you able to, like, figure out who we can talk to to see if something happened at 10pm to change this count? Answer did you see the log already? Question the lieutenant's log? Answer yeah. Question do we have it? Yeah, I have it. Answer anything with the log. Question. So, yeah, so here's the log from the day you were on. That's the August. It's August 10th, but you know, it's the August 9th log in there. Are you able to tell by looking at that? And here's the day after. So this is. You've got the August 9th and the August 10th. Answer. Okay, so we put someone in a dry cell. Question Dry cell is in the shoe, isn't it? Answer yeah, if there's space. Okay, so it looks like they didn't key the guy up. He went to the dry cell. Depending on what time. Question Are you able to tell by these lieutenants? I think you've got the actual lieutenant log back there. I would assume that that's when it would be documented when people are moved. Correct. Are you able to tell by looking at that when someone, you know, this person was moved to a dry cell? Answer Question O and also if you've got that, are you able to tell by looking at that when you worked until. No. Answer no, I wouldn't have done the log that day from activities. Question yeah, I just didn't know if it was like mentioned when people, you know, ops or activities started or stopped. Answer no, it doesn't say when. It just says inmate redacted on Dryshill. It doesn't say when he went through. There's no time associated with the movement on there. Should there have been? I mean, that's good to put it in there. Yeah. So you said you wouldn't have associated with a lieutenant's log. Who does the lieutenant's log? Ops would take care of it. Ops would. So on your shift it would have been redacted. Answer yeah, but redacted is already on dry sell on day watch it says question. And that's where we get confused. And that's why we have reason to believe because it seems like redacted was put on day watch. Answer at 3:15. Yeah. Question does it say 3:15 he was placed there? Answer yeah. Question so that indicates to us the 4pm and that 10pm count were also both bad. He wasn't in the shoe. Does that make sense to you? I think he was. He wasn't in the shoe, but he was still keyed in the shoe. Question he was still keyed in the shoe, but he wasn't there. Answer yeah. Question Right. So for the E1s, they would still show it. The only way that people in control would know if is if shoe actually did their account and said we only got 72 people in here, not 73. Right, because people working in the shoe, they know, hey, we only count bodies that are present. Answer oh, hold on. This is the ninth. Okay. So he went to transfer special housing dry cell, 4pm question at 4pm it says answer on the 9th. This is done on the night before. Okay. Okay. Question can you and again, I promise you, not a gotcha. You're being extremely helpful. Can you just note on there where you see things that these different things are if you can tell me at what time he was moved. Answer well, this just looks like the log is the same. Question we also have reason to believe that people manipulated the log after the fact. Question yeah, that's what I'm saying. Some things are indiscernible. Question do you know anything about that while I mention that? Answer no, I see shoe corrections redacted dry sell RA Saturday. Yeah. So I mean that's pretty much whatever. I think that the dial was still keyed in the shoe. Question but as far as Are you able to did you say that you saw something in there that said either 315 or then you said 4 after that? Were you seeing that? Answer no, it looks like they're saying that the guy was transferred back to shu. But this also says that I was I was relieved Redacted as day watch ops. Question it says you relieved Redacted as day watch ops. Answer yeah. Question instead of redacted, I mean redacted Answer yeah. Question Is that wrong Answer Huh? Question or was it that 25 potential you was redacted was late and you relieved her? Answer I don't know. I'm not sure. Question Would that be like a possibility? Like can they do that even if your activities lieutenant and she wants to Leave and you're there and redacted. Who is the ops lieutenant? Wasn't. Can they say that you relieved her even though you're you were activities lieutenant? Answer. Question or is she not supposed to write that or not supposed to be in there. So who wrote that? Answer Oh, I don't know. It could be. That's the thing, it could be. It's like from a day prior. So if you don't catch it, you just gotta keep going and doing it the same. So it's like because I'm ops, I know I'm ops, what I'm saying. So I must have came in on doing overtime that day. So normally I would relieve her. So she probably left it that way anyway. Thinking okay, it's the same. You're not changing that, you know. Question oh, you mean the day before you were ops? Is that what you're saying? Answer yeah, I think I was ops that whole quarter though. I think so, yeah. Question so you were that whole quarter you were ops. Answer Overtime. Question so overtime was a different duty? Answer yeah. Question so you were the opps lieutenant up until that day, your activities lieutenant that day though? Answer yeah, I think so. Question so being that you were ops, you were also potentially acting as like the ops lieutenant. Answer huh? Question like as in like since that were your normal duties, would have you also taken that on like hey, I know I'm activities, but I'll do the ops roll and this is again just to try to help you recollect what you were doing. Answer I think I was ops that quarter though. Question okay. Answer yeah, I was Ops. Question again, we don't have your records. There was no reason for us to be grabbing your records or anything like that. So everything we're asking you about is simply to help us fill in the blanks. So based on what you said, you think that it's. The log is from a previous date. It was just a spite edit that wasn't caught on to Answer yeah, the dry cell stuff, I don't know about all that, but that's what it looks like. It looked like the guy was in there and they didn't key him out even though he was R D. Question hey everybody.

[Lady Luck]

Lady luck here. And we're celebrating America's 250th birthday. Now all summer long I'm going to be celebrating by playing on finquest.com which is an American owned social casino. It obviously features over a thousand slot games and live blackjack, live craps, live bubble craps. Head on over to spinquest.com get yourself a $30 coin pack for just 10 bucks.

[SpinQuest Announcer]

Spinquest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[OnDeck Announcer (Alternate)]

Cash Flow Crunch On Deck Small business line of credit gives your business immediate access to funds up to $200,000 right when you need it. Cover seasonal dips, manage payroll, restock inventory or tackle unexpected expenses without missing a beat. With flexible draws, transparent pricing and control over repay funded quickly and confidently. Apply [e-mail] funds could be available as soon as tomorrow. Depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by On Deck or Celtic Bank. On Deck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amount subject to lender

[Unnamed Lieutenant]

approval so let's say if I'm in the shoe and I wanted to move somebody or you wanted to move somebody in the shoe you're going to do you key it in or do you call it in to somebody and tell them hey key it in. Who keys it in? Answer you can do it yourself if you want to. You can do it by yourself. Question and let's say you move it. Is someone supposed to be notified hey listen, this person is moved or you the shoe cos can move the inmates by themselves? Answer Someone from a different unit? Question yeah, like control or R D Answer no you tell you call control. Question is a policy that control must be notified? Answer I don't know if it's policy but I mean they take an account it's good to know hey this is what's going on. Gotta move this guy down to the drive cell. Question and let's say sorry go ahead. The other investigator jumps in I was going to say I guess are you asking like who is responsible for doing the keying? Answer it could be CNA Question what's cna? Answer Control number two question okay, but control would be responsible for him. It's not OPS or the shoe that would have been responsible for indiscernible it's control that's responsible for Answer I mean the shoe could make that change though. Question the shoe could answer yeah Question it's not an ops responsibility or activity Answer I mean if they say hey I need this guy in a dry cell, you know okay, you notify them, you know hey move them Question okay I guess though what we're saying is like under the regular practice I understand that other some people have the ability to do it but who should have done it Answer should have moved key the inmate from Shoot R D Question yeah Answer CNA Control Question Control should have Two. Yeah. Question and how should they have been notified that they needed to make that change? Who should have notified them that that change needed to be made? Answer I mean, Shu could have called ahead. This guy's keyed up here, he's keyed down there. Question so I guess what I'm saying is like once an inmate is moved and control needs to be notified, hey, this guy was in chew now and in rna, who needs to notify Control to make those changes in the system? Answer the shoe, hey, this guy is down there. Question so the shoe. Answer they'll call control. Yeah. Question okay, so whenever, let's say, for instance, we believe redacted was moved from the shoe to RNA on dry cell, the shoe should have contacted control and said, we just made this movement. He needs to be rekeyed. Answer yeah. Question all right, that's the way it works. Answer yeah. Question and again, these are just questions we don't know. Answer it could have been that or the lieutenant could do it either or, hey, I'm moving this guy, I'm moving him here. Question so should have a lieutenant been involved in that? Answer not necessarily. Question okay, and that's why we're just trying to figure out what is the standard operating procedure, like what is typically what's supposed to happen? Answer I mean there's no typical you get it done, hey, I'm telling you to move him. Or I say I'm moving this guy, the lieutenant told me to move him. And yeah. Question I guess, but if anybody can do it and no one is told to do it, I guess I would assume that would be quite frequently not be done because everyone would be like, well he could have done it, he should have done it. I'm saying, like who is actually supposed to do it? Who is supposed to take the lead of make sure that that's done? Or we just move this guy Control, you know, like key that out. Like how is that supposed to be done? Because otherwise it's always going to fall apart because then everyone is going to say, well, that person could have done it. That person could have done it. Answer yeah. Question so is there anybody that's supposed to do it? Answer to notify Question yeah. To make sure the notification to the numbers you can be changed on the E1. Answer yeah, I would say the shoe staff. Question Shoe staff. Answer they kind of say, hey, this guy is not up there. Check to see where he's at. Question all right. Answer maybe key him to R D. Question Sorry, I didn't mean to. He gets cut Off. No, no, that's exactly what I was thinking or trying to get to. You said the shoe staff could also key it in. If they keyed it in one, would this E1 document get updated or would control have to update it? Control will update it. Question. So no matter even if the shoe staff decided if they wanted to update it, control manually has to update the document Specifically, yeah, put a number on it because this is the last one that was printed. And then you make a change after that, it's not going to show. Question okay, this was. Answer 9:30. Question 9:30. But let's see the 4:00pm count. I just want to see what time that was printed. Answer 340. And according to that, the inmate was supposed to be moved at 3:15. Answer again, no question. The daily log. Answer well, you said two different I was going back to that. You said one time you said 3:15 and the other time you said 4:00pm Are you able to tell? Question yeah, it looks like. Okay, so let's start with this. This is the 9th right? Answer yeah. Question so you got nobody starting the shift on dry cell. So this is 3:15 inmate redacted, placed on dry cell from shoe. Question can you just put a star next to that? All right, so then you believe that this is where things got screwed up. They never keyed him out. Answer yeah, inmate redacted, placed on dry cell 75. And shoe, I do believe, redacted. All right, so at 9 on August 9th, Friday, he goes in at 3:15 in dry cell and he stays in there overnight. So the 4pm Count, he's still keyed in there though, right? Question well, that's what we're trying to figure out because it's not caught until. So we believe from people that we talk to it was caught at midnight. And that person who caught it said, like this person is on Drysil. And then revise the numbers and the count. Now we're trying to determine were the counts ever conducted in the shoe. It doesn't appear to us that they would have been because they would have caught that at 4pm and the 10pm they would have said, this is the number of people we physically have present. And even at midnight it still says 73. And it's changed to 72. And as it suggests and everyone else that we're talking to that we haven't shared this information with many people. You're one of the very select few that we're even showing this to. But the people that we've showed it to before says, hey, the fact that they're reporting 73 and the actual count is 72, they're basically getting the number from this and just writing that down. They're not actually conducting the counts. Would you agree with that statement? Answer they could do that or they could actually be counting but not counting, making sure that they're just walking and making sure they're alive. Question so doing more of a round than account. Answer yeah. Question and that is also one of the things that we believe happened is that at least on one of the instances they did not do the round, but they didn't do an actual count. Answer yeah, because honestly, I don't see it on this end. At 4 and a 10 question you don't see what answer the missing of 4 and 10. Question yeah. And the fact that they missed both seems very unlikely. Answer yeah. Question if they are actually counting correct. Answer yeah. Question and that's why we believe and it sounds like you agree they didn't actually do the 4, the 10, or the midnight count. Answer no, I mean, I'm thinking they did to the 4 and the 10. Question even though the numbers are wrong? Answer yeah, they probably just went off the numbers. Question so you think they conducted a round not account? Answer yeah. Or something. Question I mean, because they can't miss the number if they're actually counting numbers both at 4 or not all, but both at 4 and 10 and at midnight all of the count slips are wrong? Answer yeah, but that's when that those indiscernible to plus one, it's like they know they got someone, but then it's like. Like maybe they was told he gets cut off by the investigator, but they're still using the 73/1. It should be 72/1 if they're doing that. Answer yeah, yeah. Question unless it was 73 minus 1, then they could do it. But 73 plus 1 seems to indicate that they're using the number that's provided on the E1 and saying we got, you know, one more down there. Answer yeah, I don't know what was going on with that. That's baffling. All right, we're gonna wrap up right there. And in the next episode, dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up where we left off. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone? And welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to pick back up where we left off with the unnamed lieutenant and his interview with the oig. Investigators. Question all right, to your knowledge, if they're doing the count, though, that's all on the shoe, the people that are in there right now, nothing to do with lieutenants? Answer no. Question okay, there is no way for like anyone else other than the people in the shoe, or let me ask it a different way. Is there any way for anyone other than the shoe to know that they're not doing the counts? Answer no question no. Okay, anything that you didn't initial just again to say that we showed it to you. Answer so what does this pertain to, Thomas and Noel? Question well, it's everybody you know, because everybody that's in the shoe, right? We've got to talk to them. Hey, did you conduct these counts or these. You know, because this just brought to light the fact that it doesn't appear that the counts were ever being conducted. So we've got to. That's why we've got to talk to the people that we want to talk to first. People like yourself that were lieutenants on duty. Hey, do you know anything about this? Did you. Do you know? Answer I mean, they wasn't counting. Question yeah, I know, but I mean, just letting you know, like, oh, yeah, first we want to talk to, you know, about the cellmate. Hey, did you know anything about this? Did you. It looks like from the way that this memo reads, we assume that either you or redacted told redacted hey, he's wab make sure he gets a cellmate because that's one of the reasons why we want to talk. He gets cut off by the lieutenant based on that memo. Question yeah, because like the fact he's saying I knew I knew he was going wab and I told him, hey, make sure he gets to have a cellmate. So the assumption that we were going off of is that either you and or redacted spoke to redacted and said he's going wab make sure he gets a cellmate. But it sounds like what you're saying is you don't. You didn't even know and you never had that conversation. Answer with redacted and everything. No, I don't even know. I never knew the dude until that thing came out. You know what I mean? He would be would have been notified. Question right? Answer but again, I mean, we do get notified, but usually R D calls us up, hey, those two guys ain't coming back. Question and is it your belief, all right, if you said you didn't speak with them, so probably he was notified directly from control or R D Answer. I would say probably R D. Question. So R D wouldn't call control, and control wouldn't call him. R D would call directly to the shoe. Answer. That's how we used to do it. Question. Okay. And that's how it would always be. So when you were in the shoe, R D would call you directly. Answer. But again, that's evening watch. Again, that's on evening watch. That's guys not coming back. Question. But at 1:50, that's early, and that's when it's notified. All right, so if he doesn't have Wab listed on his name on the court list that morning, and that's what people have told us. So we're going on the assumption that, and this is an assumption, that he was. Somebody was contacted in the shoe, saying, hey, it looks like he's not coming back. He did, right? Possibly. But that's the first that we're seeing Wab. So the thought is that someone contacted, redacted. We haven't. We've got to talk to him. But like I said, hey, it doesn't look like he's coming back. You know, we're just notifying you now. And again, we were told typically the way it works, and it sounds like you're correcting us. R and D typically calls Control. Control calls Ops, Ops calls the shoe. Is that correct? Answer. What? When an inmate doesn't come back? Question, yeah. Answer no. Question no, it doesn't work that way. So R D, you're saying typically just would go straight to shoe? Answer. That's a heads up. That's a courtesy question, right? Answer. Hey, this guy is not coming back. Control knows. Control knows. They call Control too, but usually they call in, you know, why would you call me? You know, you in the shoe. Question. That's just what we were told. Answer. Hey, this guy's not coming back. Question. And then again, we're only as good as the people who we talk to. Whatever information we get is like, people like yourself trying to like, hey, I know it's probably like yourself. It sounds like at least in the beginning of this thing, you seem pretty nervous to talk to us because we're really just trying to. He gets cut off by the lieutenant. No, no, the thing about it, the thing is, I know this, this is a high profile case. People looking to point fingers, blame someone who dropped the ball, who did this? And that question. I totally get it. I mean, two years later now it's still like, okay, let's go down and see. Question. And the reason why I'M sure you saw on the papers what happened recently. Answer yeah. Question well, that now allows us to try and come back and try to figure out. All right, now we can do. He gets cut off by the lieutenant. Yeah, but you're going to go after a whole shift, you know. Question it's not necessarily go after the whole shift, but we've got to figure out what went wrong at the MCC and what needs to be fixed. Do you know what I'm saying? But I get it. Trust me. He gets cut off by the Lieutenant just to deal. They have suicides, man. Like they do. Yeah, yeah, totally.

[Bluff]

Hanging out at the pool is great. Relaxing and playing Vegas style games on my phone at the same time. Drink in one hand and a blackjack in the other. It's all at spinquest. Over a thousand games including your favorite slots and table games. Be cool with this summer special. New players get $30 coin packs for

[SpinQuest Announcer]

[e-mail] SpinQuest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.

[OnDeck Announcer]

On Deck is built to back small businesses like yours. Whether you're buying equipment, expanding your team or bridging cash flow, gaps on Deck's loans up to $400,000 make it happen fast. Rated A Plus by the Better Business Bureau and earning thousands of five star trust pilot reviews, OnDeck delivers funding you can count on. Apply in [e-mail] depending on certain loan attributes, your business loan may be issued by On Deck or Celtic Bank. On Deck does not lend in North Dakota. All loans and amounts subject to lender approval.

[Unnamed Lieutenant]

He just happened to be a high profile one Question right? And because it's so high profile and the fact that we were. He gets cut off by the lieutenant. The other things with. Yeah, yeah, I know. Question all those other things are going on now. It looks like there was some false, you know, slips that were created. Answer yeah. Question they weren't doing counts. You know, we're getting these signs saying that hey, you're supposed to check on them every gets cut off by the lieutenant. Yeah. That's not normal. Definitely. Question yeah, so yeah, and you're right. It's because it's a high profile. Gets cut off by the lieutenant. I was there for 10 years. I used to do that stuff and all that. That's not normal. Question what's not normal? Answer. Miscounts and all that. Yeah. Question and so you're saying that this seems to be abnormal. Answer it's definitely abnormal. Question when you were in the shoe, did you ever. Were you ever. Did you ever experience people not doing counts? Answer. No. Question. People always did counts when you were there. Answer. Yeah, but here. Question. And that's, you know, that's what people. That's what the conspiracy theorists come in and all that kind of stuff like, wow, this one day. And that's where we've got to. All right, well, let's figure out what actually happened. Is this abnormal or is it normal? You're saying that this seems to be very abnormal day Answer I'm talking about. That's why the counts and the slips and the rounds and the falsifying stuff like that. But everything else, I mean, this place is a busy place. Question. Yeah. Answer. You know, they lose. Inmates go out wab all the time. New inmates come in. So this is a revolving door. Question. All right, I know we're talking a lot longer than we thought. Let me just go through a lot of these things now, just back to the round sheet, where what is the purpose of a supervisor actually signing this round sheet? Answer. Making sure that the officer is following and doing their rounds. How they're supposed to be. Question. And we don't really need to look at it. All right, so it's not to verify that they were done. It's to verify that the sheets are being kept up. Question. So if I go up there and I see the times you all made around after 40 minutes, what happened there? Question. So you ask them about that. Answer. Right. Question. But on this date, you can't. You don't remember going and speaking to them. Answer. I said I could have went. I don't recall. Question. Okay. And again, just going forward, know that these are just simply questions to see what we can find out about that day. And as well as, you know, the point being, you saying that this is such an abnormal day and it was such a big event that's been in the news now for two years. Just try and really place yourself. What was your role on that day? Answer. Yeah, like I said, I just know I worked and that was it. All right. And as far as you know, were rounds being conducted in the shoe at that time? Yeah, it's day watch. You've got to make your rounds. Question. On day watch, you've got to. There's no way you can avoid a round on day watch. What about for. And I'm not talking about just your shift. I'm saying the shoe in general. Are you aware that rounds weren't being conducted on the evening watch or morning watch? Answer warrant. Question. Yeah, we're not. Answer Evening watch. You've got to make rounds, too. I worked at the Shoe for years. You have to. You've gotta go. Question so when, when you were there, they were being conducted? Answer yeah, that's what I'm saying. The whole mess of the count thing, I'm like, I don't know. Question Any of those people that we discussed that were on the day watch and you know, anybody working in the shoe on August 9th and 10th, do you have any recollection of speaking with any of those people about morning watch or I mean, not morning watch, about speaking with about rounds or counts? Answer no. Question no. And now being that you were an ops, the ops lieutenant, it sounds like your quarterly post. Would that be something that you would visit with them and just say, hey guys, make sure what you're doing and that you're doing your rounds or anything like that. Would that be a duty or responsibility of an ops lieutenant? Answer yeah, but not, it's not really my responsibility. It's the shoe lieutenant. Question yeah, yeah. Did you have any conversations with the shoe lieutenant at that time? Answer yeah, I talked to the shoe lieutenant. Redacted yeah. Question yeah, yeah. Answer oh, no, you said it was redacted, Right? Question Right. Answer yeah. Question do you remember talking to him at all about Epstein or Redacted. I ain't seen him since that day. Question prior. What I'm asking about is up until August 10th, no. Question do you remember ever conversing with redacted about making sure you're going to do these rounds and that Epstein's being, you know, looked at or he's got a cellmate or anything like that? Answer Man, I don't recall that. Question no. Answer yeah, but we all know it's you. You got the email question, right? The email saying he needs a cellmate. Answer yeah, and all the lieutenants know, they say, oh, such and such got we got the email. He was off of watch, you know. Question do you think it's acceptable for any lieutenant to say that they didn't know that Epstein needed a soulmate? Answer Some people say they didn't know the cellmate left. Question no. If they're saying that, let's just talk about the people on that day. Let's talk about like for instance, somebody that maybe wasn't normally a lieutenant. Can you redacted Question all right, so she's in, you said basically she's in training. She's like an acting lieutenant. She's the person he gets cut off by the lieutenant. I don't think she was acting that day either, though. Question well, I just mean that she was activities lieutenant. Answer yeah, yeah. Question Sorry, she was the activities lieutenant and she was either training or she's typically an SOS at the time, though. Should she have known by Epstein being on the hot list and Epstein, you know, coming off suicide watch, should she have just known that he was required to have a cellmate? Answer no. Question no. What about redacted? Should he have known? Answer I mean, that's only if you're aware, though. If I'm not aware the guy left Question I thought you said if you're first of all, I thought you said that everybody knows that in the shoe you're supposed to have a cellmate unless you're a certain classification. Answer yeah, but sometimes it be an odd number and they can't have one. Question but then the second thing would be that he's on the hot list. Everybody knows that if you're on the hot list, you're supposed to have a cellmate, right? Answer yeah. Question and then the third thing would be that there's an actual email that was sent out and that said he's supposed to have a cellmate. Answer right. Question so that's where with all that in mind and I'm not pointing the one person out in particular, what I'm just asking is these people that were working so you're not like throwing somebody under the bus? I'm just asking like as far as these people go, should redacted have known that there should have been redacted And I'm not saying that he knew. These people may very well not have known what was going on. I'm just asking like in general with their positions Answer in general. Well, I probably redacted. Never got the email Question like you're saying you knew. So yes, he knew. Should redacted have known. Answer I think all lieutenants should have known. Question what about he gets cut off by the lieutenant. But then again, we all have if you're not aware to the inmate leaving, there's no reason to follow up. Question and that's why I started after you. So at this point you said at least by eight people should have known that he's not coming back. So that's where I'm going off of all right, there's three lieutenants from that point, after you leave, there's three lieutenants, right? There's redacted, redacted and redacted. And then the next morning redacted. Lane should redacted who replaced you should she have known that he needed a cellmate? Answer I could see her not knowing. Question and is that because she wasn't a lieutenant? Not a lieutenant. Question okay, what about redacted? He's not a lieutenant. Question should he have known? Answer yeah, or new. Like I said, we all knew because we got the email. Question and then what about redacted? Lane not only the email, though, it sounds like there was at least three checks. One, he's in the shoe, should have a cellmate. Two, he came off of suicide watch, should have a cellmate. Three, an email was sent out to all the lieutenants, should have a cellmate. Answer yeah, but 2 and 3 happens all the time though. Like the guy comes off suicide watch, you put him in shoe with the cellmate. And then again that's not forever. Question but in this case, you know, July 30th to August 9th or 10th. Answer but is it said I don't think that's up to psychology because we have other guys on suicide watch, same thing. Once they leave, they didn't commit suicide and it's nothing. Question so if you get this email then on July 30 saying, make sure that he's got a cellmate. Answer there's no time on it. Question in your mind is that, well, two weeks from now he doesn't need one anymore. Answer there's no set time. It's just immediately this guy's coming off. A guy maybe got kicked out of the unit. Question okay, so in this case, all right, how should it have been? What kind of notification should have been made then? Answer this is a tough one, but if he's a guy and he goes to court, then he leaves, you know, and you're doing your daily operation, there's so much going on. Epstein ain't, you know, I know he's high profile to the outside. Question but I mean, he's still on the hot list. Answer yeah. Question so he's on the hot list still. So doesn't that indicate that he needs a cellmate if he's still on the hot list? Answer yeah, but he had one question, right? And that's what I'm saying by we're knocking you and we're knocking redacted out of this thing because you're saying 8 o'. Clock. So now let's look at 8 o' clock on, let's say even for this instance, let's say even redacted and redacted. They didn't know. Now look at redacted Lane certainly by midnight you should have known. Right? Answer. Yeah, but not a lieutenant, though. Question no. Answer like if the information is told to me, he gets cut off by the investigator. But if they're coming in and saying you said that they needed to do around. Right. For the case or needed to do around in the shoe. Correct. Check on all the inmates. Answer. Check inmates feeding or officers making sure they're doing the rounds or go to the shoe. Question redacted. Lane Was she required to check on all the inmates and do a round? Answer when she was probably doing around. Yeah. Question. All right, so as far as her, by that point, now we've only got, you know, we're now, you know, let's say that she's the one that corrected, you know, the count slip she caught that she goes, she visited. She's supposed to go to the shoe. She's supposed to actually visit all the tears and do around. Answer. I mean, our policy is really to say you've got to do a round in the shoe, you know, so in the shoe. You in the shoe. I don't know what she did. Question and that's where I was getting to before. I'm doing a round in the shoe for a lieutenant. Does that mean just walking into the shoe and walking out, or does that entail actually doing something when you're in there? Answer. I don't think there's no guidance on that. Question. So we've talked to other people and they told us when you, a lieutenant is actually required to walk in the tears and and conduct a round, not to list it on the round sheet, but like the people who list those rounds on the round sheet, is that your understanding of what you're supposed to do? I mean. Yeah. So is that what she should have done? She should have walked the line, the tears and checked on the inmates? Yeah. Question by policy, I'm saying by policy, you've got to make a round. Question. And that round is classified as like a round, like the COSOs who are in the shoe to do a round. Answer I've got to double check on that. Question. Okay. Answer. To tell you the truth. Question. And that's what's unsure. Answer. Yeah. Question you're unclear. Okay. And that's where I'm trying to go. Because we've also had less people, but some people have also said no. Around for a lieutenant and around for a CO is different. A round for a lieutenant is visiting the SHU and checking in with the officers. We've had more people say, no, you need to go into the shoe. You need to check with the officers but you also need to walk the tier. And I'm trying to get to like he gets cut off by the lieutenant. It depends on the lieutenant question and their interpretation. Answer yeah, like I said, that's why I really don't. I'll have to check on that part. Question okay, and what policy would that be in? Where would it spell that out? Answer that would be an inmate discipline, which is shoe, which is also would probably be in psychology. Question so it would probably be psychology for the lieutenant that they need to do it. Answer I know it's about 30 and everything. Question but it would also be like gets cut off but for lieutenants. Question it would also be like shoe type. Answer yeah, but I'm thinking it's more policies. Question well, I got the shoe policy. I don't have the psychology. Answer it isn't in there. Question I don't know, I was going to look. Answer yeah, let me see. It might be psychology is definitely the 30 minute rounds. Question again, these aren't gotcha. These are genuine questions. But psychology you think might have had like lieutenants, he gets cut off by the lieutenant. Well, they definitely with the 30 minutes he gets cut off now by the investigator. Yeah, I mean the shoe policy clearly states that rounds need to be conducted. I just haven't seen anything that said lieutenants need to do it. And that's where, I mean, you can look through them if you want. Answer Nah, I think it's in there. And it may not be in there, but it's definitely in there. All right, we're gonna wrap up right here. And in the next episode dealing with the topic, we're gonna pick up where we left off. All the information that goes with this episode can be found in the description box. Hey everybody.

[Lady Luck]

Lady luck here. And we're celebrating America's 250th birthday. Now all summer long I'm going to be celebrating by playing on spinquest.com which is an American owned social casino. It obviously features over a thousand slot games and live blackjack, live craps, live bubble craps. Head on over to spinquest.com get yourself a $30 coin pack for just 10 bucks.

[SpinQuest Announcer]

Spinquest is a free to play social casino void where prohibited. Visit spinquest.com for more details.