Episodios

  • Mega Edition: Billionaire Playboy's Club...A Memoir By Virginia Roberts (Part 10) (1/22/26)

    Mega Edition: Billionaire Playboy's Club...A Memoir By Virginia Roberts (Part 10) (1/22/26)
    Jan 23 2026
    Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s unpublished memoir The Billionaire’s Playboy Club recounts her recruitment into Jeffrey Epstein’s world as a 16-year-old working at Mar-a-Lago, where she says Ghislaine Maxwell lured her in with promises of opportunity and travel. The manuscript describes how she became trapped in Epstein’s orbit, allegedly forced into sexual encounters with powerful men, including Prince Andrew, and ferried across his properties in New York, Florida, and the Virgin Islands. Giuffre paints a detailed picture of coercion, psychological manipulation, and the disturbing normalization of exploitation within Epstein’s high-society circle.


    In this episode, we begin our journey through that memoir.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    Virgina Giuffre Billionaire's Playboy Club | DocumentCloud
    Más Menos
    48 m
  • Miami John Doe's Motion To Proceed Anonymously Has Been Denied

    Miami John Doe's Motion To Proceed Anonymously Has Been Denied
    Jan 23 2026
    In the on going battle being waged by Diddy in the courtroom, his victories have been far and few between. However, in his lawsuit with "Miami John Doe", Judge Kaplan has ordered that his accuser will have to unmask himself if he wants to move forward with his lawsuit.


    In this episode, we take a look at that order.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.632026.17.0.pdf
    Más Menos
    14 m
  • Miami John Doe And His Diddy Allegations (Part 3)

    Miami John Doe And His Diddy Allegations (Part 3)
    Jan 23 2026
    Another day, another Diddy lawsuit to dive into...





    In Case 1:24-cv-08810, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, involves a plaintiff identified as John Doe, who has lodged serious allegations against Sean "Diddy" Combs and affiliated entities, including Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, Inc. and Bad Boy Records LLC. The lawsuit is classified under personal injury, alleging harm that stems from Combs' actions and potentially those of his associates. The plaintiff has requested to proceed anonymously, reflecting concerns over privacy and safety due to the sensitive nature of the claims.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.632026.1.0.pdf
    Más Menos
    10 m
  • Miami John Doe And His Diddy Allegations (Part 2)

    Miami John Doe And His Diddy Allegations (Part 2)
    Jan 23 2026
    Another day, another Diddy lawsuit to dive into...





    In Case 1:24-cv-08810, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, involves a plaintiff identified as John Doe, who has lodged serious allegations against Sean "Diddy" Combs and affiliated entities, including Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, Inc. and Bad Boy Records LLC. The lawsuit is classified under personal injury, alleging harm that stems from Combs' actions and potentially those of his associates. The plaintiff has requested to proceed anonymously, reflecting concerns over privacy and safety due to the sensitive nature of the claims.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.632026.1.0.pdf
    Más Menos
    12 m
  • Miami John Doe And His Diddy Allegations (Part 1)

    Miami John Doe And His Diddy Allegations (Part 1)
    Jan 22 2026
    Another day, another Diddy lawsuit to dive into...





    In Case 1:24-cv-08810, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, involves a plaintiff identified as John Doe, who has lodged serious allegations against Sean "Diddy" Combs and affiliated entities, including Bad Boy Entertainment Holdings, Inc. and Bad Boy Records LLC. The lawsuit is classified under personal injury, alleging harm that stems from Combs' actions and potentially those of his associates. The plaintiff has requested to proceed anonymously, reflecting concerns over privacy and safety due to the sensitive nature of the claims.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com


    source:

    gov.uscourts.nysd.632026.1.0.pdf
    Más Menos
    11 m
  • Judge Engelmayer Denies The Request Made By Khanna And Massie For A Special Master (1/21/26)

    Judge Engelmayer Denies The Request Made By Khanna And Massie For A Special Master (1/21/26)
    Jan 22 2026
    A federal judge in the Southern District of New York has rejected a bipartisan effort by Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY) to appoint a special master or independent monitor to oversee the Department of Justice’s compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act, which requires the DOJ to release all investigative materials related to Jeffrey Epstein by a December 19, 2025 deadline. The lawmakers argued that the department’s slow pace — with only a small fraction of millions of documents disclosed so far — and extensive redactions suggested noncompliance with the law and harmed survivors seeking transparency. They pressed Judge Paul Engelmayer to intervene in the matter of the files’ release, citing serious concerns about the DOJ’s handling of the disclosures.


    In his ruling, Judge Engelmayer acknowledged that the issues Khanna and Massie raised were “undeniably important and timely” and highlighted genuine concerns about whether the DOJ is faithfully complying with federal law. However, he concluded that he does not have the legal authority or jurisdiction in the ongoing criminal proceedings involving Ghislaine Maxwell to oversee or enforce compliance with the civil transparency statute, since the matter of releasing records under the Epstein Files Transparency Act is not part of that criminal case. The judge said the lawmakers lack standing to intervene in this context and suggested they pursue other avenues of oversight outside the Maxwell case, such as civil litigation or congressional tools, leaving the oversight fight over the release of the files to proceed through political and legislative, rather than judicial, channels.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    Microsoft Word - MaxwellOrderJan21PAE
    Más Menos
    11 m
  • The Maxwell Deposition: What Congress Wants — And What She’ll Never Say (1/22/26)

    The Maxwell Deposition: What Congress Wants — And What She’ll Never Say (1/22/26)
    Jan 22 2026
    Ghislaine Maxwell, the convicted associate of Jeffrey Epstein who is serving a 20-year federal prison sentence, is scheduled to give a **virtual deposition before the U.S. House Oversight Committee on February 9, 2026, as part of the committee’s ongoing investigation into Epstein’s criminal network and the federal government’s handling of related cases. Committee Chairman James Comer issued a subpoena for Maxwell’s testimony, which comes amid growing pressure from lawmakers to uncover additional information about Epstein’s operations and his circle of powerful associates. Maxwell’s lawyers have indicated she may invoke her Fifth Amendment rights during the deposition rather than answer substantive questions, and she had previously resisted congressional questioning while pursuing appeals of her conviction. The deposition is being conducted in closed session, and while Maxwell already participated in an extensive interview with Department of Justice officials last year, congressional leaders see her testimony as a potentially critical piece in efforts to understand the broader Epstein network and related government responses.


    The context of Maxwell’s appearance is entangled with broader political and legal battles over the release of Epstein-related documents, compliance with subpoenas by other high-profile figures, and disputes between Congress and both the DOJ and the Supreme Court over access to evidence. Republicans and Democrats alike have pushed for more transparency, while some subpoenaed individuals, including former officials, have resisted testifying, triggering threats of contempt proceedings. Maxwell’s deposition thus comes at a moment of heightened scrutiny on how federal authorities handled Epstein and his network — and whether powerful individuals connected to that network will ever be compelled to speak under oath to lawmakers seeking accountability.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    Ghislaine Maxwell summoned before Congress for grilling over Epstein secrets | Daily Mail Online
    Más Menos
    11 m
  • Kathryn Ruemmler And Her Relationship With Jeffrey Epstein (Part 2) (1/22/26)

    Kathryn Ruemmler And Her Relationship With Jeffrey Epstein (Part 2) (1/22/26)
    Jan 22 2026
    Recent disclosures from congressional investigations and documents tied to the Epstein estate have exposed a far deeper and more personal relationship between Kathryn Ruemmler and Jeffrey Epstein than previously acknowledged, raising serious questions about her judgment and fitness to serve as general counsel of Goldman Sachs. Emails and schedules show she met with Epstein dozens of times between 2014 and 2019 — long after his 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor — and that their communication ranged from career advice and personal travel planning to repeated informal exchanges, which some insiders view as far beyond the scope of mere professional interaction. She was even named as a backup executor in an early version of Epstein’s will, a detail that triggered internal alarm at Goldman once it became public, and suggests a level of trust and intimacy that many observers find profoundly inappropriate given Epstein’s crimes. The revelations directly undermine her role on Goldman’s Reputational Risk Committee, where she helps decide which clients and relationships could endanger the firm’s ethical standing.

    Even after Goldman’s leadership publicly defended Ruemmler and denied any formal plans to replace her, the controversy has not dissipated; critics argue that the firm’s insistence on keeping her in a top legal and governance role reflects a troubling tolerance for ethical ambiguity when it benefits powerful insiders. Some executives reportedly view Ruemmler as a potential liability whose past associations were not fully disclosed or understood at the time of her hiring, and whose continued presence on ethics-related committees sends a poor message about the bank’s commitment to accountability and moral judgment. The fact that these revelations emerged only through released documents and not proactive disclosure further fuels skepticism about transparency at the highest levels of Goldman Sachs, intensifying scrutiny from investors, lawmakers, and corporate governance watchdogs.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    New court doc asserts former Obama WH counsel advised Jeffrey Epstein during critical reputational and legal battles | CNN Politics
    Más Menos
    16 m