The Epstein Rewind: Jeffrey Epstein His Intelligence Ties According To Julie K. Brown

In this look back episode...According to filings made by the prosecution, Ghislaine Maxwell barred entry to the video room at the lockup by using the book cart to block the doorway.(Commercial at 12:46)To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9929661/Ghislaine-Maxwell-barricaded-prison-conference-room.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The article explores investigative journalist Julie K. Brown’s perspective on Jeffrey Epstein’s possible links to Israeli intelligence, specifically through his close association with Robert Maxwell. Brown, who broke key details in the Epstein case, suggests that Epstein’s connections with Maxwell—who had long been rumored to have worked for Mossad—deserve deeper scrutiny. She draws parallels between Maxwell’s suspicious 1991 death and Epstein’s 2019 jailhouse suicide, highlighting inconsistencies in official accounts. Brown argues that Epstein’s financial dealings with Maxwell and the Maxwell family's reliance on Epstein after Robert Maxwell’s death may indicate hidden intelligence ties. She questions why Epstein would have taken his own life before trial and points to anomalies in the circumstances surrounding his death.The piece also examines Robert Maxwell’s history, his financial scandals, and his connections to Israeli intelligence, noting that his funeral was attended by high-ranking Israeli officials. Brown suggests that Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s longtime associate and Robert Maxwell’s daughter, may have been privy to classified information her father took to the grave.To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.timesofisrael.com/for-writer-who-broke-epstein-case-a-rumored-mossad-link-is-worth-digging-into/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

As we predicted on the podcast, JP Morgan and the survivor of Jeffrey Epstein who brought the suit against the banking giant have now settled for an undetermined amount of money. The settlement effectively ends the lawsuit against JP Morgan. JP morgan and their lawsuit against Jes Staley is still active and the lawsuit brought by the USVI against JP Morgan and Jes Staley also remain in the system.(commercial at 8:10)to contact me:[email protected]:JPMorgan agrees to settle Jeffrey Epstein victim class action lawsuit | Fox BusinessBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this episode we take a trip back to May of 2021 and take a look at the reports that co-conspirators were talking to the federal government. With all of these reports that surrounded the Co-conspirators and then them basically not even playing a part in the Maxwell trial, one must ask the question...will the alleged co-conspirators ever be brought to justice?(Commercial 11:09)To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9618419/Jeffrey-Epsteins-alleged-conspirators-set-testify-against-Ghislaine-Maxwell.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein had a long history working for and with the government, even if they do not want to acknowledge it. One example of this is when he turned snitch on his former company and helped the feds put some of his colleagues away. Somehow, just like every other time he had a brush with the law, he ended up landing on his feet. The reason? He was being protected by certain elements in the government.Let's dive in and discuss it!(commercial at 8:34)To contact me:[email protected]:https://nypost.com/2018/11/28/pedophile-millionaire-dodged-harsh-sentence-by-ratting-out-bear-stearns-execs/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In July 2023, Rex Heuermann, a 59-year-old architect from Massapequa Park, Long Island, was arrested in connection with the Gilgo Beach serial killings. Heuermann was charged with three counts of first-degree and three counts of second-degree murder for the deaths of Melissa Barthelemy, Megan Waterman, and Amber Costello, whose remains were discovered in 2010 near Gilgo Beach. He was also named the prime suspect in the disappearance and death of Maureen Brainard-Barnes.The arrest followed an extensive investigation that linked Heuermann to the victims through several key pieces of evidence. Cellphone records indicated communications between Heuermann and three of the victims. Additionally, an email account associated with him had been used to monitor the investigation's progress. DNA analysis played a crucial role; mitochondrial DNA from a pizza crust discarded by Heuermann matched DNA found on one victim. Further, hairs discovered on or near three victims were consistent with samples taken from items in the trash outside Heuermann's residence. Notably, during the times the murders occurred, Heuermann's wife and children were reportedly out of the state, aligning with the timeline of the killings. ​to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Parham v. Combs et al (Case No. 3:24-cv-07191-RFL), plaintiff Ashley Parham filed an amended complaint against defendants Sean Combs, Kristina Khorram,Druski, Odell Beckham and Shane Pearce, alleging personal injury claims related to assault, libel, and slander under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The original complaint was filed on October 15, 2024, in the Northern District of California, with Parham seeking a jury trial to address these allegations.to contact me:[email protected]:Parham complaint FINAL-3Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Parham v. Combs et al (Case No. 3:24-cv-07191-RFL), plaintiff Ashley Parham filed an amended complaint against defendants Sean Combs, Kristina Khorram,Druski, Odell Beckham and Shane Pearce, alleging personal injury claims related to assault, libel, and slander under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The original complaint was filed on October 15, 2024, in the Northern District of California, with Parham seeking a jury trial to address these allegations.to contact me:[email protected]:Parham complaint FINAL-3Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR01-24-31665), the defense filed Motion in Limine #6 on February 24, 2025, seeking to exclude the testimony of Idaho State Police forensic scientist Rylene Nowlin regarding "touch" or "contact" DNA. The defense argues that such terms are misleading, as they imply a definitive method of DNA deposition, which cannot be scientifically determined. They contend that allowing testimony on how DNA was transferred to the knife sheath found at the crime scene would confuse the jury and unfairly prejudice the defendant.The motion emphasizes that current DNA technology cannot conclusively determine when or how DNA was deposited on an item, whether through direct contact or secondary transfer. The defense references studies and expert opinions highlighting the complexity of DNA transfer mechanisms and the potential for indirect transfer. They assert that permitting Nowlin to testify about the manner of DNA deposition exceeds her expertise and could mislead the jury, violating Idaho Rules of Evidence 402 and 403.to contact me:[email protected]:022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-6-RE-Rylene-Nowlin-Reference-Touch-Contact-DNA.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In State of Idaho v. Bryan C. Kohberger (Case No. CR01-24-31665), the defense filed Motion in Limine #6 on February 24, 2025, seeking to exclude the testimony of Idaho State Police forensic scientist Rylene Nowlin regarding "touch" or "contact" DNA. The defense argues that such terms are misleading, as they imply a definitive method of DNA deposition, which cannot be scientifically determined. They contend that allowing testimony on how DNA was transferred to the knife sheath found at the crime scene would confuse the jury and unfairly prejudice the defendant.The motion emphasizes that current DNA technology cannot conclusively determine when or how DNA was deposited on an item, whether through direct contact or secondary transfer. The defense references studies and expert opinions highlighting the complexity of DNA transfer mechanisms and the potential for indirect transfer. They assert that permitting Nowlin to testify about the manner of DNA deposition exceeds her expertise and could mislead the jury, violating Idaho Rules of Evidence 402 and 403.to contact me:[email protected]:022425-Defense-Motion-inLimine-6-RE-Rylene-Nowlin-Reference-Touch-Contact-DNA.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.