Murder In Moscow: Judge Hippler's Order Denying Kohbergers Motion To Suppress IGG Data (Part 1) (3/5/25)

Geoffrey Berman, former prosecutor at the SDNY has made some pretty bold claims in the past and in this episode, we hear more from Mr. Berman and how the Prince Andrew situation directly impacted the tragedy of Harry Dunn. to contact me:[email protected]:https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/19979343/prince-andrew-harry-dunn-extradition/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The Joe Exotic of the Windsor family is once again skulking around in the shadows of Buckingham Palace as he tries to finagle his way back into his role as a working royal.To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/13074387/prince-andrew-night-visits-to-queen/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In a brazen show of support for her disgraced son, the Queen of England thought it would be a good idea to show up arm and arm with him to the memorial service of her late husband. In what can only be explained as a terrible idea, the Queen now opens herself up to a whole new line of criticism.(commercial at 7:03)To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.thedailybeast.com/queen-elizabeth-to-attend-prince-philip-memorial-service-despite-health-issues?ref=scrollBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

As reality starts to set in for Ghislaine Maxwell and the fate that she sealed for herself with her actions, her legal team is already looking towards the appeal. However, some lawyers are saying she should drop the appeal in favor of naming names to try and shave time off of her sentence. The question is, what does she have to offer and will the Government bite?(commercial at 12:52)to contact me:[email protected]:https://www.newsweek.com/ghislaine-maxwell-should-start-naming-names-shave-years-off-sentence-1720162Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In Ada County Case No. CR01-24-31665, the defendant, Bryan C. Kohberger, sought to suppress genetic evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG) and a subsequent "trash pull," arguing that these methods violated his Fourth Amendment rights. His legal team contended that law enforcement's use of IGG techniques to identify him as a suspect, followed by the collection of familial DNA from discarded trash, constituted an unreasonable search and seizure. They asserted that such investigative methods required a warrant and that their use without one infringed upon Kohberger’s expectation of privacy regarding his genetic information.The court, however, rejected these arguments, ruling that the defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy over genetic material lawfully obtained from public databases and trash discarded in a public space. The judge determined that law enforcement’s methods were legally sound and did not violate constitutional protections. As a result, the genetic evidence collected through IGG and the trash pull remains admissible in court, dealing a significant blow to Kohberger’s defense strategyto contact me:[email protected]:021925-Order-Defendants-Motion-Suppress-Genetic-Information.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In Ada County Case No. CR01-24-31665, the defendant, Bryan C. Kohberger, sought to suppress genetic evidence obtained through Investigative Genetic Genealogy (IGG) and a subsequent "trash pull," arguing that these methods violated his Fourth Amendment rights. His legal team contended that law enforcement's use of IGG techniques to identify him as a suspect, followed by the collection of familial DNA from discarded trash, constituted an unreasonable search and seizure. They asserted that such investigative methods required a warrant and that their use without one infringed upon Kohberger’s expectation of privacy regarding his genetic information.The court, however, rejected these arguments, ruling that the defendant had no reasonable expectation of privacy over genetic material lawfully obtained from public databases and trash discarded in a public space. The judge determined that law enforcement’s methods were legally sound and did not violate constitutional protections. As a result, the genetic evidence collected through IGG and the trash pull remains admissible in court, dealing a significant blow to Kohberger’s defense strategyto contact me:[email protected]:021925-Order-Defendants-Motion-Suppress-Genetic-Information.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the Bryan Kohberger murder case, 4th District Judge Steven Hippler has issued an order criticizing both defense attorneys and prosecutors for their excessive filing of sealed documents, stating that this practice has become "the norm rather than the exception." He emphasized that such actions undermine the public's First Amendment rights to access court proceedings and directed the parties to employ less restrictive measures to protect confidential information, such as redacting sensitive details or using initials instead of full names.Judge Hippler's directive comes as numerous motions have been filed under seal in the lead-up to Kohberger's trial, scheduled to begin on August 11, 2025. These sealed motions include the defense's request to remove the death penalty, citing Kohberger's autism spectrum disorder, and discussions on whether terms like "psychopath" or "sociopath" can be used during the trial. The judge's order mandates that any requests to seal documents must be justified under Idaho Court Administrative Rule 32, and parties should seek the least restrictive methods to protect sensitive information, thereby promoting greater transparency in the judicial process.to contact me:[email protected]:Bryan Kohberger judge cracks down on 'pervasive' filings under seal in Idaho murders | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​Sarah Kellen Vickers, also known as Sarah Kensington or Sarah Vickers, served as Jeffrey Epstein's assistant from the early 2000s until at least 2013. During this period, she was responsible for scheduling Epstein's "massages," sessions during which many victims reported being sexually assaulted. Witnesses have testified that Kellen played a pivotal role in facilitating Epstein's abuse, with some alleging she coordinated and assisted in recruiting minors for these encounters. Despite these serious allegations, Kellen has not faced criminal charges, partly due to a 2007 non-prosecution agreement that granted immunity to certain Epstein associates. She has since portrayed herself as one of Epstein's victims, asserting that she was also subjected to his manipulations and abuse.In the Phase 1 release of Epstein-related documents, Kellen's name surfaced multiple times, underscoring her involvement in his operations. These documents revealed that attorneys representing Epstein's victims sought to depose Kellen, highlighting her as a key witness due to her extensive interactions with both Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. However, attempts to serve her with subpoenas were reportedly unsuccessful, suggesting possible evasion. The unsealed documents further detailed allegations that Kellen maintained a list of underage girls for Epstein, arranging their visits for illicit purposes. Despite these revelations, Kellen continues to live a private life, reportedly residing in luxury properties in Miami and New York, and has not publicly addressed the recent document disclosures.to contact me:[email protected]:Jeffrey Epstein left wads of cash stuffed in envelopes for 'top recruiter' Sara Kellen raising new questions of why she was never charged | Daily Mail OnlineTo help  support  the  podcast:https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support

​Jes Staley, former CEO of Barclays, is contesting a £1.8 million fine and a lifetime ban imposed by the UK's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) over allegations that he misled regulators about his relationship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The FCA asserts that Staley "recklessly misled" both the regulator and the Barclays board regarding the nature and extent of his association with Epstein, leading to his resignation from Barclays in 2021.In his defense, Staley contends that Barclays was fully aware of his longstanding professional relationship with Epstein, emphasizing that their interactions were primarily business-related. He argues that the FCA's decision was reached unfairly, without providing him or Barclays an adequate opportunity to respond. The ongoing tribunal will scrutinize over 1,200 emails exchanged between Staley and Epstein, with testimonies expected from prominent figures, including Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey and Barclays Chairman Nigel Higginsto contact me:[email protected]:Ex-Barclays boss Jes Staley says bank knew about his ties to paedophile Jeffrey Epstein - as he appeals a £1.8m fine and ban by the City watchdog | Daily Mail OnlineTo help  support  the  podcast:https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support

​Prince Andrew's association with Jeffrey Epstein significantly strained his relationship with Queen Elizabeth II and the broader royal family. Despite the Queen's deep affection for her son, the mounting public and media scrutiny compelled her to take decisive action to protect the monarchy's reputation. In November 2019, following a widely criticized BBC Newsnight interview where Andrew attempted to explain his ties to Epstein, he announced his withdrawal from public duties with the Queen's consent. This decision marked a pivotal moment, reflecting the severity of the situation and the necessity to distance the royal institution from the scandal. ​The repercussions of Andrew's involvement with Epstein extended further. In January 2022, amid a civil lawsuit filed by Virginia Giuffre alleging sexual assault, the Queen stripped Andrew of his military affiliations and royal patronages. This move underscored the monarchy's commitment to accountability, even when it concerned close family members. Although Andrew settled the lawsuit out of court in February 2022, his public image suffered irreparable damage. Throughout these challenges, Queen Elizabeth maintained a delicate balance between her roles as a mother and the sovereign, supporting her son privately while upholding the integrity of the Crown publicly.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.