The Epstein Rewind: Judge Rakoff Asks For Specific Reasons Why JP Morgan Can't Challenge The USVI Lawsuit

JP Morgan and Deutsche Bank will both have to answer the allegations against them in court after Judge Jed Rakoff ruled that portions of the lawsuit would move forward while others would not.In this episode, we take a look at the ruling and what it might mean moving forward.(commercial at 9:20)to contact me:[email protected]:Jeffrey Epstein victims can sue JPMorgan and Deutsche (lawandcrime.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Pandora Papers is a massive leak of financial documents that was made public in October 2021. It exposed the hidden wealth and financial dealings of numerous world leaders, politicians, celebrities, and business figures. The leak contained around 11.9 million documents from offshore financial service providers, including emails, contracts, and financial records, and it is one of the largest leaks of its kind.Key points and findings from the Pandora Papers include:Offshore Accounts: The leak revealed how many wealthy individuals and public figures used offshore tax havens to hide their assets and avoid paying taxes in their home countries. These offshore accounts were often created through complex legal structures.Prominent Individuals: The documents implicated a wide range of prominent figures, including politicians, government officials, monarchs, and celebrities. Notable names from various countries were linked to these offshore holdings.Conflict of Interest: Some politicians and public officials were found to have financial interests in companies and industries they were responsible for regulating, which raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest.Secrecy and Anonymity: The Pandora Papers highlighted the use of anonymous shell companies and trusts, making it difficult to trace the true owners of these assets and holdings.Global Impact: The revelations had global implications, as they shed light on how offshore financial systems facilitated corruption, money laundering, and tax evasion on a massive scale, which, in turn, can undermine the financial stability and fairness of nations.Calls for Reform: In response to the Pandora Papers, there were calls for greater transparency in financial systems and increased efforts to combat tax evasion and money laundering. Many countries promised to investigate the individuals and entities named in the leak.In this episode we dive into the President of Ukraine and his appearance in the Pandora papers. to contact me:[email protected]:Revealed: ‘anti-oligarch’ Ukrainian president’s offshore connections | Volodymyr Zelenskiy | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

JP Morgan has been firmly under the microscope when it comes to Jeffrey Epstein and the enabling of his criminal enterprise. However, they are not the only ones who were complicit with Epstein and who helped his machine move and now, JP Morgan is turning the tables on the USVI and calling them out for their part in fostering a safe environment for Epstein to operate within their territory, pointing out that Stacey Plaskett received more than $30,000 dollars from Epstein plus a whole host of other play for pay type of relationships that they allege helped Epstein not only abuse girls, but also to protect him from prying eyes while he did so.(commercial at 15:53)to contact me:[email protected]:JPMorgan Chase calls U.S. Virgin Islands complicit in Jeffrey Epstein crimes (cnbc.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The backyard, bareknuckle brawl between the USVI and JP Morgan continues to rage inside of the courtroom, with both sides dropping bombs on each other with every filing, each looking to paint the other as the bad guy. Judge Rakoff, for his part, has kept things moving at a nice clip and has managed to keep things as orderly as possible. Now, however, he is asking the USVI for specific reasons why JP Morgan shouldn't be able to challenge the lawsuit against the bank. The USVI has yet to reply to the court filing that hit the docket yesterday.(commercial at 8:26)to contact me:[email protected]:Federal Judge Asks for Specific Reasons Why Epstein’s Bank Can’t Challenge V.I.’s Lawsuit | St. Thomas Source (stthomassource.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case Doe 1 et al. v. Government of the United States Virgin Islands et al., No. 1:23-cv-10301-AS, defendant Cecile de Jongh filed a reply in support of her motion to dismiss and/or strike the plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint. In her reply, de Jongh argues that the plaintiffs' allegations are insufficient to establish a legal claim against her. She contends that the complaint lacks specific factual allegations linking her to the alleged misconduct and fails to meet the required legal standards for the claims asserted. De Jongh also asserts that certain portions of the complaint are irrelevant or prejudicial and should be stricken from the record. She requests that the court dismiss the claims against her or, alternatively, strike the specified portions of the complaint.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.610915.160.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prosecutors have opposed Sean "Diddy" Combs' latest $50 million bail request, citing concerns over potential witness tampering and obstruction of justice. They allege that Combs has attempted to influence witnesses and manipulate public opinion from jail, referencing recorded calls where he directed his family to contact potential victims and shape narratives through social media campaigns. Combs, who faces charges including sex trafficking and racketeering, has been denied bail twice before due to perceived risks of flight and danger to the community. A hearing for this renewed bail request is scheduled for November 22.In our second segment...In late October 2024, radio personality Funkmaster Flex publicly criticized former rapper and current Belizean politician Shyne Barrow over statements made in the trailer for Shyne's upcoming documentary, "The Honorable Shyne." In the trailer, Shyne alleges he was the "fall guy" for Sean "Diddy" Combs during the 1999 Manhattan nightclub shooting incident. Flex responded by calling Shyne a "stone-cold-faced liar," disputing Shyne's portrayal of events and accusing him of fabricating his narrative. Flex also referenced past altercations involving Shyne and questioned his credibility, asserting that Shyne's version of the nightclub incident was misleading.(commercial at 7:20)to contact me:[email protected]:Sean 'Diddy' Combs is trying to obstruct justice from jail, prosecutors say - ABC NewsFunkmaster Flex Calls Shyne 'Stone Cold Liar' Over Diddy 'Scapegoat' ClaimsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The document titled "The Government’s Opposition to the Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Bail" in the case of 24 Cr. 542 (AS), authored by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams, presents the government's arguments against granting the defendant bail. The government asserts that the defendant poses a serious risk of flight and danger to the community if released. The opposition emphasizes the weight of the evidence against the defendant, the severity of the alleged crimes, and the potential lengthy prison sentence upon conviction, which collectively create strong incentives for the defendant to flee. Additionally, the government argues that the defendant's proposed bail package, including financial assurances and conditions, fails to mitigate these risks adequately.The filing also highlights the defendant's history of alleged criminal behavior, lack of ties to the jurisdiction, and access to resources that could facilitate escape. The government underscores its obligation to ensure the safety of the community and prevent obstruction of justice. Ultimately, the document concludes that no set of conditions can reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance in court or public safety, urging the court to deny the motion for bail.(commercial at 8:44)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.69.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The document titled "The Government’s Opposition to the Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Bail" in the case of 24 Cr. 542 (AS), authored by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams, presents the government's arguments against granting the defendant bail. The government asserts that the defendant poses a serious risk of flight and danger to the community if released. The opposition emphasizes the weight of the evidence against the defendant, the severity of the alleged crimes, and the potential lengthy prison sentence upon conviction, which collectively create strong incentives for the defendant to flee. Additionally, the government argues that the defendant's proposed bail package, including financial assurances and conditions, fails to mitigate these risks adequately.The filing also highlights the defendant's history of alleged criminal behavior, lack of ties to the jurisdiction, and access to resources that could facilitate escape. The government underscores its obligation to ensure the safety of the community and prevent obstruction of justice. Ultimately, the document concludes that no set of conditions can reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance in court or public safety, urging the court to deny the motion for bail.(commercial at 7:57)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.69.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The document titled "The Government’s Opposition to the Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Bail" in the case of 24 Cr. 542 (AS), authored by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams, presents the government's arguments against granting the defendant bail. The government asserts that the defendant poses a serious risk of flight and danger to the community if released. The opposition emphasizes the weight of the evidence against the defendant, the severity of the alleged crimes, and the potential lengthy prison sentence upon conviction, which collectively create strong incentives for the defendant to flee. Additionally, the government argues that the defendant's proposed bail package, including financial assurances and conditions, fails to mitigate these risks adequately.The filing also highlights the defendant's history of alleged criminal behavior, lack of ties to the jurisdiction, and access to resources that could facilitate escape. The government underscores its obligation to ensure the safety of the community and prevent obstruction of justice. Ultimately, the document concludes that no set of conditions can reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance in court or public safety, urging the court to deny the motion for bail.(commercial at 8:12)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.69.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The document titled "The Government’s Opposition to the Defendant’s Renewed Motion for Bail" in the case of 24 Cr. 542 (AS), authored by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams, presents the government's arguments against granting the defendant bail. The government asserts that the defendant poses a serious risk of flight and danger to the community if released. The opposition emphasizes the weight of the evidence against the defendant, the severity of the alleged crimes, and the potential lengthy prison sentence upon conviction, which collectively create strong incentives for the defendant to flee. Additionally, the government argues that the defendant's proposed bail package, including financial assurances and conditions, fails to mitigate these risks adequately.The filing also highlights the defendant's history of alleged criminal behavior, lack of ties to the jurisdiction, and access to resources that could facilitate escape. The government underscores its obligation to ensure the safety of the community and prevent obstruction of justice. Ultimately, the document concludes that no set of conditions can reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance in court or public safety, urging the court to deny the motion for bail.(commercial at 8:20)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.69.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.