Epstein Rewind: The FDLE Finds No Wrong Doing In How Epstein's Case Was Handled In Florida

Former Epstein employee and IT worker, Steve Scully has spoken out previously about what he saw on the Island in regards to Virginia and Prince Andrew. He is now ready to give the same statements...but this time under oath. To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.the-sun.com/news/3475613/witness-prince-andrew-virginia-roberts-epstein/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Lesley Groff is crying foul. In a new report we have learned that one of Epstein's key employees has filed a motion to get her name removed from a lawsuit brought by Jennifer Aroaz. Groffs legal team contends her work for Epstein was never anything more than professional and above board but the testimony of the survivors puts her directly in the middle of the Epstein criminal organization. To contact me:[email protected] Source:https://www.ncadvertiser.com/news/article/Assistant-to-Jeffrey-Epstein-says-she-was-falsely-15327361.phpBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) investigation into the handling of Jeffrey Epstein’s 2006–2008 criminal case in Florida was a textbook example of institutional failure and systemic favoritism toward the wealthy and well-connected. Despite overwhelming evidence that the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office (PBSO) blatantly violated its own policies, allowing Epstein to live in luxury while supposedly incarcerated, the FDLE ultimately failed to hold anyone accountable. The report confirmed that Epstein was granted work release privileges he never should have received, spending his supposed jail sentence in an unmonitored office for up to 12 hours a day, six days a week, where he allegedly continued his criminal activities with zero oversight. Deputies reportedly acted as his personal chauffeurs rather than law enforcement officers, underscoring the extent to which the justice system bent over backward for him. Yet, despite uncovering these gross violations, the FDLE chose not to pursue criminal charges, reinforcing the idea that powerful individuals remain untouchable.The investigation's conclusion—that there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing, only procedural failures—was an insult to public intelligence. The FDLE effectively rubber-stamped the corruption within PBSO, whitewashing what amounted to a de facto cover-up of Epstein’s crimes. The decision not to pursue charges against those who facilitated his special treatment reeks of complicity, especially when considering the broader context of Epstein’s infamously lenient 2008 plea deal, orchestrated by the DOJ. By refusing to hold anyone accountable, the FDLE ensured that the cycle of elite protectionism remained unbroken, sending a clear message: if you're rich and powerful, the system will always find a way to shield you, no matter how heinous your crimes.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On 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:[email protected]:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On 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:[email protected]:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jay-Z and Sean "Diddy" Combs are actively pursuing legal action against attorney Tony Buzbee following allegations made in a civil lawsuit. In December 2024, Buzbee filed a lawsuit accusing both artists of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in 2000, claims which Jay-Z and Combs vehemently denied, labeling them as baseless and extortionate. Jay-Z responded by filing a defamation lawsuit against Buzbee, asserting that the attorney's public statements and social media posts were defamatory and intended to inflict emotional distress. Despite the original lawsuit being withdrawn in February 2025, Jay-Z's defamation claim has been deemed substantial enough by a Los Angeles judge to proceed to trial, with the next court hearing scheduled for March 26.Concurrently, Sean Combs is challenging Buzbee's legal maneuvers in other jurisdictions. Buzbee, representing multiple individuals alleging sexual misconduct by Combs, sought permission to practice in the Southern District of New York for these cases. Combs' legal team opposed this request, citing "egregious misconduct" by Buzbee and arguing that such behavior should disqualify him from practicing in that district. This opposition reflects Combs' broader strategy to contest the credibility and legal standing of Buzbee as he defends against the numerous allegations.to contact me:[email protected]:Diddy & Jay-Z Claim "Egregious Misconduct" By Lawyer Behind Dozens Of CasesBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a recent interview on "Jesse Watters Primetime," U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced that the Department of Justice plans to release documents related to Jeffrey Epstein on Thursday, February 27, 2025. Bondi emphasized the gravity of the contents, stating, "This will make you sick," and highlighted the necessity of protecting the identities of over 250 victims involved. She mentioned that the forthcoming release would include flight logs, numerous names, and extensive information pertaining to Epstein's activities.Bondi explained that the delay in releasing these documents was due to meticulous efforts to redact sensitive information to safeguard the victims' privacy. She noted that the files had been under review to ensure that personal details of the victims remained confidential. to contact me:[email protected]:Bondi says some Epstein files coming Thursday | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On 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:[email protected]:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

On 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:[email protected]:KB-25-01-23-Hearing-Redacted.eclBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The U.S. Virgin Islands (USVI) played a central role in enabling Jeffrey Epstein’s vast criminal enterprise, serving as both his primary base of operations and a jurisdiction that allowed his abuse to continue unchecked for decades. Epstein’s private island, Little Saint James, was the epicenter of his sex trafficking network, yet despite widespread knowledge of his illicit activities, local authorities turned a blind eye or, worse, actively facilitated his operations. The government granted Epstein extensive tax incentives and special treatment, allowing him to operate with impunity while funneling millions through shell companies registered in the territory. Even after his 2008 conviction in Florida, Epstein remained deeply entrenched in the USVI’s financial and political circles, securing sweetheart business deals and leveraging his wealth to maintain influence. The failure to regulate or investigate Epstein’s activities—despite glaring red flags—raises serious questions about corruption, complicity, and the true extent of the USVI’s role in protecting him.Recent legal battles have further exposed how deeply the USVI government was entangled with Epstein, with officials benefiting financially from his presence while ignoring repeated warnings about his trafficking network. The territory’s former first lady, Cecile de Jongh, was revealed to have worked directly for Epstein, helping him navigate regulatory loopholes and maintain access to power. Meanwhile, banks and financial institutions in the USVI facilitated the movement of Epstein’s funds, ensuring his trafficking operation remained well-funded and operational. Lawsuits against JPMorgan Chase have uncovered damning evidence suggesting that USVI officials were well aware of Epstein’s activities yet chose to look the other way, likely in exchange for financial incentives. The territory’s recent legal posturing against Epstein’s estate appears to be little more than an attempt to rewrite history, portraying themselves as victims rather than enablers. In reality, the USVI’s complicity in Epstein’s crimes is undeniable, raising broader concerns about the corruption and systemic failures that allowed one of the world’s most notorious predators to operate so freely.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.