True Crime Rewind: The Idaho Credit Union Warrant

Cecile De Jongh has filed a motion in the court of the USVI attempting to get the lawsuit that has been brought against her by multiple survivors as part of the USVI lawsuit tossed out.   Her defense?  Well, the same old story, and it all begins and ends with secretive deals and payouts structured specifically keep things quiet.    In this episode, we take a look at what Cecile De Jongh had to say in her newest filing and where the survivors might go from here when it comes to a response.   (commercial 9:04)to contact me:[email protected]:Cecile de Jongh Files Motion to Dismiss N.Y. Suit Alleging Collusion with Epstein | St. Thomas Source (stthomassource.com)

In the defamation lawsuit Giuffre v. Maxwell (Case No. 1:15-cv-07433), Virginia Giuffre, formerly known as Virginia Roberts, submitted a Second Amended Supplemental Response and Objections to Ghislaine Maxwell's First Set of Discovery Requests. In this document, Giuffre addresses Maxwell's interrogatories and requests for production of documents, while raising several objections. She contends that many of Maxwell's discovery requests are overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Giuffre also asserts that certain requests violate local civil rules and federal procedural rules, particularly regarding the permissible number of interrogatories and the scope of discovery.Additionally, Giuffre raises concerns about the invasion of her privacy and the potential harassment stemming from Maxwell's discovery demands. She emphasizes that some requests seek information protected by attorney-client privilege or other applicable privileges. Giuffre also notes that certain information sought by Maxwell is already in the defendant's possession or can be obtained through less burdensome means. Throughout her response, Giuffre maintains her objections while providing answers and producing documents where appropriate, aiming to balance compliance with discovery obligations against protecting her rights and interests as a victim of alleged sexual trafficking.to contact me: [email protected]  

In the defamation lawsuit Giuffre v. Maxwell (Case No. 1:15-cv-07433), Virginia Giuffre, formerly known as Virginia Roberts, submitted a Second Amended Supplemental Response and Objections to Ghislaine Maxwell's First Set of Discovery Requests. In this document, Giuffre addresses Maxwell's interrogatories and requests for production of documents, while raising several objections. She contends that many of Maxwell's discovery requests are overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Giuffre also asserts that certain requests violate local civil rules and federal procedural rules, particularly regarding the permissible number of interrogatories and the scope of discovery.Additionally, Giuffre raises concerns about the invasion of her privacy and the potential harassment stemming from Maxwell's discovery demands. She emphasizes that some requests seek information protected by attorney-client privilege or other applicable privileges. Giuffre also notes that certain information sought by Maxwell is already in the defendant's possession or can be obtained through less burdensome means. Throughout her response, Giuffre maintains her objections while providing answers and producing documents where appropriate, aiming to balance compliance with discovery obligations against protecting her rights and interests as a victim of alleged sexual trafficking.

The foray into the court documents continues in this episode, as we take a look at the Idaho Credit Union warrant for all four of the victims.(commercial at 9:53)to contact me:[email protected]:022823+Order+to+Seal+and+Redact+-+Idaho+Central+Credit+Union.pdf (amazonaws.com)

The Moscow Police department was under heavy criticism and pressure to solve these murders and at the start of the investigation, they shot themselves in the foot with poor communication that ended up seeing them walk back previous comments. However, the actual police work behind the scenes was exceptional.In this episode, we take a look at the work behind the scenes by the investigators using the newly released documents as a guide.(commercial at 11:18)to contact me:[email protected]:Idaho search warrants show Moscow homicides police work before Bryan Kohberger’s arrest (yahoo.com)

The family of Kaylee Goncalves has said that they are putting together some fundraisers to help them raise money to offer a reward for information leading to the arrest of the person responsible for her death. The authorities have said that they are still getting plenty of tips and do not think a reward is necessary at this point.Let's take a look.(commercial at 8:54)to contact me:[email protected]:https://www.foxnews.com/us/idaho-victims-family-raising-funds-reward-money-campus-murder-mystery-enters-week-4-no-arrests

We recently heard that a lawmaker in Idaho was attempting to have execution by firing squad reinstated due to the issues with aquiring the chemicals needed to carry out death by lethal injection.In this episode, we hear from a legal scholar from Gonzaga University who gives their opinion about the possiblity of the firing squad coming back to Idaho and what that would look like if it did.(commercial 7:07)to contact me:[email protected]:Local professor shares doubts over firing squads in Idaho | krem.com

Bryan Kohberger allegedly had at least one picture of one of the victims stored on his phone according to sources cultivated by People Magazine. In this episode, we hear from a former FBI agent who discusses the alleged pictures and what it could mean for the prosecution and for Bryan Kohberger moving forward.(commercial at 7:05)to contact me:[email protected]:Bryan Kohberger's Alleged Photos on Phone 'Highly Significant'—Ex-FBI Agent (newsweek.com)

In the case Doe v. Combs et al., No. 23-cv-10628 (JGLC), defendant Harve Pierre has filed an answer to the amended complaint, denying the allegations against him and asserting several affirmative defenses. Pierre contends that the claims are barred by statutes of limitations, lack of personal jurisdiction, and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. He also argues that any actions taken were without malice or intent to harm, and that he did not engage in the alleged conduct. Pierre reserves the right to amend his defenses as the case progresses.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.611545.81.0.pdf

In December 2024, a woman identified as Jane Doe filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs, alleging that he sexually assaulted her during a charity basketball event at the City College of New York on December 28, 1991. According to the lawsuit, Doe and a friend attended the event, which was co-sponsored by Combs, then an emerging music producer. Upon arrival, they were escorted to a makeshift dressing room where Combs was present. Doe alleges that Combs offered her a drink, purportedly Coca-Cola, which caused her to feel disoriented after consumption. She claims that when she attempted to leave, Combs blocked her exit, proceeded to fondle her, and ultimately raped her. The assault allegedly ended when Combs was interrupted by a bodyguard informing him of a developing situation outside—a stampede that tragically resulted in nine fatalities.Combs' legal team has categorically denied the allegations, describing them as "facially ridiculous or demonstrably false." They assert that Combs has never engaged in sexual assault or sex trafficking and express confidence that the judicial process will exonerate him. This lawsuit adds to a series of legal challenges Combs has faced, including multiple allegations of sexual misconduct spanning several decades. As of December 2024, Combs is in federal custody, awaiting trial on charges including sex trafficking and racketeering, to which he has pleaded not guilty.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.633975.1.0_1.pdf