Podcast
The True Crime Tapes pulls you into the shadowy depths of the criminal underworld, where the line between justice and chaos is razor-thin. Each episode dissects the minds of history’s most infamous serial killers, unravels the inner workings of organized crime syndicates, and investigates baffling missing person cases that still haunt the public’s imagination. From the bloody reign of ruthless mob bosses to the chilling patterns of elusive predators, True Crime Time delivers gripping, deeply researched storytelling that leaves no stone unturned.
With a relentless pursuit of truth, True Crime Time goes beyond the headlines, diving into the psychology, motives, and investigations behind the world’s most shocking crimes. You’ll hear firsthand accounts, expert analysis, and rare archival material that shed new light on cases both well-known and obscure. Whether it’s the brutality of cartel wars, the sinister precision of serial murderers, or the eerie last-known moments of vanished souls, this podcast brings you face-to-face with the darker side of human.
Every week, True Crime Time takes you on a journey through the twisted corridors of crime, guided by immersive storytelling and chilling attention to detail. Expect heart-pounding narratives, intricate conspiracy threads, and unsettling truths that will leave you questioning everything you thought you knew. If you crave the rush of uncovering the darkest mysteries, brace yourself—because in this world, the truth is often stranger, and far more terrifying, than fiction.
The True Crime Tapes
Hosted by Bobby Capucci · EN
The True Crime Tapes pulls you into the shadowy depths of the criminal underworld, where the line between justice and chaos is razor-thin. Each episode dissects the minds of history’s most infamous serial killers, unravels the inner workings of organized crime syndicates, and investigates baffling missing person cases that still haunt the public’s imagination. From the bloody reign of ruthless mob bosses to the chilling patterns of elusive predators, True Crime Time delivers gripping, deeply researched storytelling that leaves no stone unturned.
With a relentless pursuit of truth, True Crime Time goes beyond the headlines, diving into the psychology, motives, and investigations behind the world’s most shocking crimes. You’ll hear firsthand accounts, expert analysis, and rare archival material that shed new light on cases both well-known and obscure. Whether it’s the brutality of cartel wars, the sinister precision of serial murderers, or the eerie last-known moments of vanished souls, this podcast brings you face-to-face with the darker side of human.
Every week, True Crime Time takes you on a journey through the twisted corridors of crime, guided by immersive storytelling and chilling attention to detail. Expect heart-pounding narratives, intricate conspiracy threads, and unsettling truths that will leave you questioning everything you thought you knew. If you crave the rush of uncovering the darkest mysteries, brace yourself—because in this world, the truth is often stranger, and far more terrifying, than fiction.
860episodes
Episodes
Newest firstAll episodes
Murder In Moscow: Transcripts From The Closed IGG Hearing (Part 4)
3w ago00:12:22Tap to summarizeOn January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl
Transcribe →Murder In Moscow: Transcripts From The Closed IGG Hearing (Part 3)
3w ago00:10:55Tap to summarizeOn January 23, 2025, a closed hearing was held in the case of State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger before Judge Steven Hippler. The primary focus was the defense's motion to suppress evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG), which they argued violated Kohberger's Fourth Amendment rights. Detective Brett Payne testified that the IGG lead was treated as a tip, with further independent investigation conducted to substantiate its validity. Defense expert Dr. Leah Larkin suggested potential violations of FBI policy and genealogy database terms of service during the IGG process. However, Judge Hippler expressed skepticism regarding the defense's claims, noting the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy for DNA left at a crime scene.Following the hearing, Judge Hippler ordered the release of a redacted transcript, balancing public interest with privacy concerns. Redactions included the names of surviving roommates and distant relatives identified through IGG. The unsealed portions provide insight into the investigative methods used and the defense's challenges to the evidence's admissibility. This development underscores the ongoing legal debates surrounding the use of IGG in criminal investigations and its implications for privacy and constitutional rights.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.ecl
Transcribe →Ted Waitt And The Transcript From His Epstein Related Trip To Congress (Part 4) (7/31/26)
3w ago00:12:07Tap to summarizeTed Waitt told the House Oversight Committee that he met Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein at a Hong Kong dinner in November 2003 and began dating Maxwell the following year, remaining in a relationship with her until September 2010. Waitt portrayed his own contact with Epstein as extremely limited, saying he had only a brief introduction at the dinner, one arranged meeting at Maxwell’s New York residence and two later chance encounters. He said he never communicated with Epstein by phone or email and had no business or financial relationship with him. Waitt testified that Maxwell described Epstein positively as a brilliant investor and money manager and told him that, after their romantic relationship ended, she continued working as an estate manager overseeing his properties and staff.Waitt said he wanted Maxwell to stop working for Epstein because Epstein was her former boyfriend, but claimed he had no knowledge at the time of their criminal conduct and never witnessed abuse, coercion or trafficking. He repeatedly said he could not confirm how much work Maxwell continued doing for Epstein while they dated, despite their seven-year relationship, and he denied knowing whether Epstein manipulated or abused her. Waitt also acknowledged that Maxwell had been around his four children, three of whom were girls, and said that had he known then what he knows now, he never would have befriended her or allowed her near them. His testimony largely presented him as someone who was intimately involved with Maxwell for years while remaining unaware of the reality of her relationship with Epstein and the crimes for which she was later convicted.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:GO120551
Transcribe →Ted Waitt And The Transcript From His Epstein Related Trip To Congress (Part 3) (7/31/26)
3w ago00:14:07Tap to summarizeTed Waitt told the House Oversight Committee that he met Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein at a Hong Kong dinner in November 2003 and began dating Maxwell the following year, remaining in a relationship with her until September 2010. Waitt portrayed his own contact with Epstein as extremely limited, saying he had only a brief introduction at the dinner, one arranged meeting at Maxwell’s New York residence and two later chance encounters. He said he never communicated with Epstein by phone or email and had no business or financial relationship with him. Waitt testified that Maxwell described Epstein positively as a brilliant investor and money manager and told him that, after their romantic relationship ended, she continued working as an estate manager overseeing his properties and staff.Waitt said he wanted Maxwell to stop working for Epstein because Epstein was her former boyfriend, but claimed he had no knowledge at the time of their criminal conduct and never witnessed abuse, coercion or trafficking. He repeatedly said he could not confirm how much work Maxwell continued doing for Epstein while they dated, despite their seven-year relationship, and he denied knowing whether Epstein manipulated or abused her. Waitt also acknowledged that Maxwell had been around his four children, three of whom were girls, and said that had he known then what he knows now, he never would have befriended her or allowed her near them. His testimony largely presented him as someone who was intimately involved with Maxwell for years while remaining unaware of the reality of her relationship with Epstein and the crimes for which she was later convicted.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:GO120551
Transcribe →Ted Waitt And The Transcript From His Epstein Related Trip To Congress (Part 2) (7/31/26)
3w ago00:11:55Tap to summarizeTed Waitt told the House Oversight Committee that he met Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein at a Hong Kong dinner in November 2003 and began dating Maxwell the following year, remaining in a relationship with her until September 2010. Waitt portrayed his own contact with Epstein as extremely limited, saying he had only a brief introduction at the dinner, one arranged meeting at Maxwell’s New York residence and two later chance encounters. He said he never communicated with Epstein by phone or email and had no business or financial relationship with him. Waitt testified that Maxwell described Epstein positively as a brilliant investor and money manager and told him that, after their romantic relationship ended, she continued working as an estate manager overseeing his properties and staff.Waitt said he wanted Maxwell to stop working for Epstein because Epstein was her former boyfriend, but claimed he had no knowledge at the time of their criminal conduct and never witnessed abuse, coercion or trafficking. He repeatedly said he could not confirm how much work Maxwell continued doing for Epstein while they dated, despite their seven-year relationship, and he denied knowing whether Epstein manipulated or abused her. Waitt also acknowledged that Maxwell had been around his four children, three of whom were girls, and said that had he known then what he knows now, he never would have befriended her or allowed her near them. His testimony largely presented him as someone who was intimately involved with Maxwell for years while remaining unaware of the reality of her relationship with Epstein and the crimes for which she was later convicted.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:GO120551
Transcribe →Ted Waitt And The Transcript From His Epstein Related Trip To Congress (Part 1) (7/31/26)
3w ago00:13:51Tap to summarizeTed Waitt told the House Oversight Committee that he met Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein at a Hong Kong dinner in November 2003 and began dating Maxwell the following year, remaining in a relationship with her until September 2010. Waitt portrayed his own contact with Epstein as extremely limited, saying he had only a brief introduction at the dinner, one arranged meeting at Maxwell’s New York residence and two later chance encounters. He said he never communicated with Epstein by phone or email and had no business or financial relationship with him. Waitt testified that Maxwell described Epstein positively as a brilliant investor and money manager and told him that, after their romantic relationship ended, she continued working as an estate manager overseeing his properties and staff.Waitt said he wanted Maxwell to stop working for Epstein because Epstein was her former boyfriend, but claimed he had no knowledge at the time of their criminal conduct and never witnessed abuse, coercion or trafficking. He repeatedly said he could not confirm how much work Maxwell continued doing for Epstein while they dated, despite their seven-year relationship, and he denied knowing whether Epstein manipulated or abused her. Waitt also acknowledged that Maxwell had been around his four children, three of whom were girls, and said that had he known then what he knows now, he never would have befriended her or allowed her near them. His testimony largely presented him as someone who was intimately involved with Maxwell for years while remaining unaware of the reality of her relationship with Epstein and the crimes for which she was later convicted.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:GO120551
Transcribe →The Mega Edition: Alan Dershowitz, The Teleconference And The Plethora Of Epstein Denials (8/1/26)
3w ago00:39:55Tap to summarizeAlan Dershowitz has repeatedly and vehemently denied any wrongdoing in connection with Jeffrey Epstein, insisting that he never engaged in sexual misconduct with Virginia Giuffre or any other woman tied to Epstein’s trafficking network. He has publicly stated that he never met Giuffre, called her accusations “a complete fabrication,” and pointed to travel records, phone logs, and witness statements as proof of his innocence. Dershowitz has long maintained that he only represented Epstein in legal matters and that any personal contact was limited to professional obligations, not illicit behavior.Beyond denying the specific allegations, Dershowitz has framed himself as a victim of false accusations, portraying the claims against him as part of a broader smear campaign. He has launched defamation lawsuits against Giuffre and her legal team, seeking to clear his name, and has gone on the offensive in media appearances, daring accusers to provide evidence and branding them as liars. Despite the consistency of his denials, his close association with Epstein has kept him under a cloud of suspicion in the public eye, with critics arguing that his combative defense has done little to erase the stain of his proximity to one of history’s most notorious predators.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
Transcribe →Mega Edition: The DOJ Jeffrey Epstein And The CVRA Deception Aimed At Survivors (8/1/26)
3w ago00:40:57Tap to summarizeThe Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA) was meant to guarantee Epstein’s survivors a voice in the legal process, but in practice their rights were ignored during the 2007–2008 non-prosecution agreement between Epstein’s legal team and federal prosecutors in Florida. Survivors were never told about the deal in advance, even though the CVRA required that they be notified of and consulted on major decisions in the case. Instead, prosecutors secretly arranged a sweetheart plea bargain that allowed Epstein to avoid federal charges and serve minimal county jail time under highly privileged conditions. The survivors only learned of the agreement after it had already been finalized, stripping them of their chance to object or even weigh in.Federal courts later acknowledged that prosecutors had violated the CVRA by keeping survivors in the dark, but the rulings stopped short of overturning the deal. This left survivors furious, as the law meant to protect them had been functionally useless in one of the most high-profile sex trafficking cases in U.S. history. Instead of being treated with the dignity and participation promised by the CVRA, they were sidelined to protect Epstein and the powerful figures around him. The episode stands as one of the clearest examples of how prosecutorial discretion and political pressure can render victims’ rights laws toothless when influential defendants are involved.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
Transcribe →Larry Summers, Jeffrey Epstein and the Middle East Briefing (7/31/26)
3w ago00:12:32Tap to summarizeA two-page Middle East policy briefing bearing former Treasury secretary Larry Summers’s name was found among the Jeffrey Epstein documents released through the House Oversight Committee. Dated to early 2013, the briefing summarized political and security developments across ten countries during the upheaval of the Arab Spring, including Egypt, Syria, Israel, Iran, Libya, Tunisia and Saudi Arabia. Its contents ranged from political assassinations and civil unrest to Iranian nuclear negotiations, Israeli military activity and regional diplomatic maneuvering. The sophistication and breadth of the analysis suggested it was prepared for a senior policymaker or someone with access to high-level foreign-policy reporting.The document adds another dimension to the long-running relationship between Summers and Epstein, showing that material connected to Summers and involving sensitive international affairs ended up in Epstein’s possession. However, the document alone does not establish whether Summers personally wrote it for Epstein, forwarded it to him or whether Epstein obtained it through someone else. Combined with later emails showing Summers seeking personal advice from Epstein and testimony that Summers introduced Bill Clinton to him, the briefing illustrates the extraordinary level of intellectual, political and institutional access Epstein cultivated. What Epstein intended to do with the information remains unknown, but its presence in his files raises further questions about why powerful officials continued providing him with privileged access long after his criminal conduct had become public.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Larry Summers' 2013 Middle East Briefing in the Epstein Files
Transcribe →Murder In Moscow: Bryan Kohberger Is Appointed Legal Counsel By The Court (7/31/26)
3w ago00:13:08Tap to summarizeBryan Kohberger’s request for a new trial will first have to survive an initial review by the Idaho court, which must determine whether his post-conviction petition presents specific, legally sufficient claims that warrant further proceedings. Kohberger alleges that his guilty plea was produced by coercion, misinformation, false promises and the withholding or misrepresentation of potentially exculpatory evidence by his defense team. Should the court find that those allegations merit examination, the case could advance to responses from prosecutors, additional filings and potentially an evidentiary hearing where Kohberger, his former attorneys and other witnesses could be questioned. A new trial would not be automatic; he must first convince the court that his plea was not knowing, voluntary or supported by effective legal counsel.Credibility could become the decisive issue because Kohberger’s current account directly conflicts with what he repeatedly told Judge Steven Hippler when entering his plea. Under oath, Kohberger admitted killing Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle and Ethan Chapin, said he understood the agreement, denied being threatened or improperly pressured and expressed satisfaction with his attorneys. The court would therefore have to weigh his new accusations against that extensive plea-hearing record and the testimony of the lawyers he now blames. Even if Kohberger secured permission to withdraw the plea, the prosecution could revive the original murder case and potentially seek the death penalty again, leaving him to face the trial and punishment that the plea agreement allowed him to avoid.to contact me:bobbycapuccI@protonmail.comsource:How Bryan Kohberger’s post-conviction legal process works | Idaho Statesman
Transcribe →