A Look Back: Prince Andrew And The Rules For Royals

As the fallout in the aftermath of the arrest of Rex Heuermann continues to rain down on all of those involved, his wife, Asa Ellerup and her two children Victoria and Christopher gave an update through their lawyer about their ordeal. It was revealed that not only is Asa Ellerup dealing with her husband being an alleged serial killer, she also has breast and skin cancer. Her insurance, according to the lawyer, is due to expire in sixty days since it was tethered to Rex Heuermann's employment. On the flip side, the lawyer for the Gilbert family, John Ray had a completely different take on things. In this episodee we take a look at both sides of the coin and break down the latest news. (commercial at 7:31)to contact me:[email protected]:Rex Heuermann’s wife struggling to pay for cancer treatment, wants to sue police – NBC New YorkBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A Detective from Mamaroneck, a town in Westchester county New York has contacted the task force in regard to a cold case that shares siimilarities with some of the victims in Long Island. According to the report he's trying to make a connection and hopes that the task force might be able to provide some insight that might turn into a lead. The unidentified woman has been dubbed Cherries due to a tattoo of two cherries above her right breast. (commercial at 10:06)to contact me:[email protected]:NY cold case investigator seeks info from Gilgo task force (pix11.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Megan Waterman was a young woman from Scarborough, Maine, who tragically became a victim of a serial killer. Born in 1986, she led a troubled life marked by struggles with drug addiction and other personal challenges. However, those issues shouldn't define who she was and the fact that she was loved. Megan Waterman and all of the other victims were much more than just sex workers. They were people who were loved and who loved and who deserved much better from the authorities and society itself. In June 2010, Megan Waterman went missing from a hotel in Hauppauge, New York, while she was in the area with a friend for an escort job. Her disappearance was part of a string of similar cases, and it raised concerns about the safety of sex workers in the area. Sadly, in December 2010, Megan's remains were discovered in a remote area of Long Island. Her murder, along with the murders of several other women, became known as the "Long Island Serial Killer" case.In this episode we hear from Megan Waterman's sister who details the time that they spent together growing up and how her sisters murder has effected her throughout the years.(commerial at 13:25)to contact me:[email protected]:Sister Of Gilgo Beach Victim Megan Waterman: 'She Was My Best Friend' | Riverhead, NY PatchBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Rex Heuermann is facing quite the challenge as his legal starts to understand the vast amount of evidence that they have to go through. From DNA evidence, to surveillance footage to an eye witness tip, there has already been over 2500 pages of discovery handed over to the defense. Now, the question is, how much of that evidence is exculpatory? (commercial at 8:18)to contact me:[email protected]:Rex Heuermann’s defence buried in mountain of evidence as he faces court in Gilgo Beach murders case | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Enrique "Kiki" Camarena was a DEA agent who was abducted, tortured, and murdered in 1985 by members of the Guadalajara cartel in Mexico. His abduction and murder were ordered by cartel leaders, including Rafael Caro Quintero, Ernesto Fonseca Carrillo, and Miguel Ángel Félix Gallardo, in retaliation for Camarena's successful efforts in uncovering and disrupting their drug operations.Camarena was kidnapped in broad daylight in Guadalajara, and his body was discovered a month later, showing signs of severe torture. His death shocked both the Mexican and American governments, leading to a massive investigation and a strained relationship between the two countries.The subsequent trial and investigations, known as "Operation Leyenda," involved extensive cooperation between U.S. and Mexican authorities. Many cartel members and corrupt officials were arrested and prosecuted. Rafael Caro Quintero and Ernesto Fonseca Carrillo were captured and sentenced to lengthy prison terms in Mexico. Miguel Ángel Félix Gallardo was eventually arrested in 1989 and sentenced to 37 years in prison.(commercial at 12:45)to contact me:[email protected]:SEPTEMBER 1989.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Rachel Morin was found murdered in August 2023 on a popular hiking trail in Bel Air, Maryland. Her body was discovered after she was reported missing by her boyfriend when she did not return from a walk. The case quickly gained widespread attention due to the brutal nature of the crime and the community's shock.Following an extensive investigation, authorities arrested a suspect linked to the murder. The suspect, whose identity was not immediately disclosed, was identified through DNA evidence found at the crime scene. This breakthrough came after the DNA was matched to a profile in a national database, which led to the suspect's arrest.The suspect, a man here illegally from El Salvador, whose name is Victor Martinez Hernandez has been charged with first-degree murder and other related offenses including rape. (commercial at 7:16)to contact me:[email protected]:Arrest made in killing of Maryland mother of five Rachel Morin | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 6:54)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:09)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 8:49)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum in law in opposition to a motion for sanctions is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to argue against the imposition of sanctions that have been requested by the opposing party. Here are the key components and purposes of this document:Purpose:Counter Argument: The memorandum aims to counter the claims made in the motion for sanctions, presenting reasons why the court should not grant the requested sanctions.Defense: It serves as a defense against allegations of improper conduct or violations of court rules or orders.Content:Introduction: An introduction that outlines the context and purpose of the memorandum.Statement of Facts: A section that provides a factual background, often challenging or clarifying the facts as presented in the motion for sanctions.Legal Arguments: Detailed legal arguments explaining why the motion for sanctions should be denied. This includes citing relevant laws, rules, and case precedents.Justification of Conduct: Explanation and justification of the actions or behavior that led to the motion for sanctions, demonstrating that there was no misconduct or that any alleged misconduct does not warrant sanctions.Conclusion: A conclusion summarizing the main points and reiterating the request for the court to deny the motion for sanctions.Common Arguments:Compliance: Demonstrating that the party has complied with all court orders and procedural rules.Lack of Harm: Arguing that the alleged conduct did not cause any significant harm or prejudice to the opposing party.Good Faith: Showing that any actions taken were in good faith and not intended to obstruct or delay the legal process.Proportionality: Arguing that the proposed sanctions are disproportionate to the alleged misconduct.Supporting Evidence:The memorandum may include supporting evidence such as affidavits, exhibits, and other documents that back up the arguments presented.Legal Standards:It will address the legal standards that the court must apply when deciding on a motion for sanctions, explaining why those standards have not been met in this case.In this episode, we dive back into the Diddy situation and this time we are taking a look at Tyrone Blackburn's memorandum in law in opposition to sanctions.(commercial at 7:53)to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.616406.58.0.pdf (courtlistener.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.