Danya Perry And Her Role Within The Leon Black Defense Team

Danya Perry, a former federal prosecutor and now defense attorney, built her reputation handling high-profile cases and often siding with survivors in abuse scandals, including speaking out against powerful men like Andrew Cuomo and Eric Schneiderman. She now represents billionaire Leon Black, and has explained her decision as rooted in what she believes is a misuse of the legal system by accusers. Perry argues that some of the claims against Black are inconsistent with recordings, texts, and other evidence she’s reviewed, framing her role as pushing back against allegations she sees as fabricated and harmful to the credibility of genuine survivor cases.Leon Black, meanwhile, faces multiple civil lawsuits accusing him of sexual misconduct, rape, and abuse, including cases brought by Guzel Ganieva, Cheri Pierson, and others. He has denied all wrongdoing, characterizing the allegations as false and defamatory, and has pursued aggressive counter-litigation. His legal team, including Perry, has fought attempts to disqualify them from his cases, arguing that their defense is legitimate and grounded in evidence that contradicts the accusations. Perry has been central to that defense, reinforcing Black’s strategy of denying misconduct while casting doubt on his accusers’ credibility.to contact me:[email protected]:https://www.businessinsider.com/danya-perry-attorney-profile-leon-black-cuomo-cohen-schneiderman-2022-5Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Leon Black, CEO of Apollo Global Management, wrote to his investors expressing regret over his past relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, but he strongly denied wrongdoing or any inappropriate conduct. Black acknowledged that he transferred between $50 million and $75 million to Epstein as far back as 2008, and detailed that Epstein provided professional services to Black’s family partnership — services such as estate planning, tax advice, and philanthropic consulting.Black insisted that all of his dealings with Epstein were in a personal capacity and that Apollo itself did not conduct business with Epstein. He said he was “completely unaware” of, and appalled by, the wrongdoing revealed in late 2018 that led to the criminal charges against Epstein. He also pledged to cooperate with ongoing investigations, including that by the U.S. Virgin Islands, while maintaining that none of the conduct was illegal.to contact me:[email protected]:https://www.reuters.com/article/us-people-jeffrey-epstein-apollo-global/apollo-ceo-black-says-he-regrets-ties-to-epstein-denies-any-wrongdoing-idUSKBN26X2PDThe letter:https://www.axios.com/leon-black-jeffrey-epstein-0eff63bd-6549-4c03-a93a-bb99766dcade.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

According to excerpts from Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York, a new biography by Andrew Lownie, a tense encounter occurred following a storm in Northern Ireland in 2005. When the head of Hillsborough Castle informed Prince Andrew that the storm-damaged item had been planted by “the Queen Mother,” Andrew reportedly mocked the wording, asking, “Did you mean Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother?” He then allegedly continued, "And you still don't know the proper way to refer to my grandmother? You f-king imbecile. Get out." A royal aide characterized the Duke’s behavior as “unbelievably cruel,” with reports that he often insisted, “I want this done and I want this done now. Do it!”This incident reinforces a broader portrayal of Prince Andrew as someone with a pattern of abrasive and demanding behavior toward staff. Royal sources and authors have frequently described such outbursts—whether through reported profanity, humiliation of aides, or other demeaning treatment—as symptomatic of his entitled demeanor behind the palace walls.o contact me:[email protected]:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11268467/Prince-Andrew-launched-torrent-foul-language-Queens-press-secretary-new-book-claims.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The USVI claims JPMorgan Chase knowingly enabled and profited from Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking operation. According to court filings, the bank kept Epstein as a client for years—even after red flags such as his 2006 arrest and subsequent criminal behavior—and continued some business with him until not long before his 2019 arrest. The USVI also alleges that JPMorgan ignored internal warnings, accepted referrals to Epstein, financed transactions tied to his operations (including payments to his associates and victims), and helped facilitate his activities through cash and wire transfers.On top of that, the USVI says that local officials helped Epstein by granting him tax incentives, waiving requirements for monitoring registered sex offenders, and looking the other way in certain regulatory and oversight functions—all in exchange for donations, cash, or other benefits from Epstein. The territory alleges that through its banking relationship and its influence operations, JPMorgan played a role in concealing Epstein’s abuses and limiting the enforcement of laws meant to protect victims.to contact me:[email protected]:Jeffrey Epstein had 'close ties' to Gov. Albert Bryan: Doc (lawandcrime.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

George Mitchell, the former Senate Majority Leader and respected peace negotiator, was named under oath by Virginia Giuffre as one of the men Jeffrey Epstein trafficked her to. Despite the gravity of the allegation, Mitchell’s name was quietly pushed aside, his denial accepted without serious challenge, and the story faded from public discourse. Unlike figures such as Prince Andrew or Donald Trump, who were relentlessly scrutinized, Mitchell received soft handling from the media and political class, his ties to Epstein treated as an uncomfortable detail best ignored. His presence at Epstein’s townhouse and social connection to the disgraced financier raised obvious questions, but few dared to pursue them. The result was a glaring double standard that exposed how power and prestige protect certain names from accountability.This selective amnesia reveals how the Epstein scandal has been weaponized rather than fully exposed. Survivors’ testimony is amplified when it serves partisan purposes, but buried when it implicates figures like Mitchell who belong to the establishment’s “safe” circles. The hypocrisy is stark: those screaming about “the other team’s” monsters go silent when their own are implicated. Mitchell’s erasure from the mainstream narrative shows how survivors were betrayed not just by their abusers, but by a system that cherry-picks justice. His story underscores the bipartisan rot at the core of the Epstein saga—proof that truth has been traded for theater, and survivors’ voices have been muffled in service of political convenience.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Bill Richardson’s ties to Jeffrey Epstein highlight the grotesque double standard that protects the powerful. Despite being named under oath by Virginia Giuffre as one of the men she was trafficked to, Richardson—former New Mexico governor, U.N. ambassador, and establishment insider—faced almost no scrutiny. His denials were delivered with the bland, calculated tone of a man confident that his reputation and connections would shield him. The media, which treats lesser figures with endless outrage, politely buried his name, turning what should have been a career-ending scandal into a forgotten footnote. That silence was not oversight—it was a deliberate choice by the same machine that has long protected Epstein’s orbit of elites.Richardson’s case is especially damning because Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, rumored to be a hub of trafficking and secrecy, sat in New Mexico under his watch as governor. The coincidence is staggering, yet no questions were asked, no investigations launched, and no accountability pursued. His inclusion in Virginia’s sworn testimony wasn’t random—it fit a consistent pattern of Epstein surrounding himself with powerful, insulated men unlikely to face consequences. Richardson’s polished career may remain intact in polite circles, but his name is forever entwined with the Epstein scandal, serving as a perfect example of how justice bends when it brushes up against the untouchables.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The first story focuses on Jeffrey Epstein’s notorious 50th birthday scrapbook, compiled by Ghislaine Maxwell, which has resurfaced as a source of fresh outrage and renewed scrutiny. The book is filled with messages from some of the most powerful and influential men in politics, finance, and entertainment, including one alleged note from Donald Trump laced with sexual innuendo. Among the disturbing details is also the image of a $22,500 check written in Trump’s name, raising new questions about the depth of Epstein’s financial and social ties. The scrapbook, far from being an innocent memento, reads like a who’s-who of elite figures who either tolerated or outright embraced Epstein even after his predatory behavior had been whispered about in elite circles.The second story zeroes in on Prince Andrew, who is once again under the microscope as reports suggest that more than 100 secret emails linked to Epstein could soon be released. These emails, reportedly involving Andrew, Maxwell, and Epstein, are being described as potentially devastating—enough to “destroy” what little remains of Andrew’s public reputation following his disastrous legal entanglements and ties to Epstein’s network. If the emails are made public, they may further expose not only Andrew’s role in Epstein’s world but also raise difficult questions about how much the monarchy knew, tolerated, or overlooked. The looming shadow of these unreleased communications has reignited fears inside Buckingham Palace of another scandal explosion that could eclipse past embarrassments.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Courtney Wild and Haley Robson, two women who say they were abused by Jeffrey Epstein, filed a defamation lawsuit against journalist Julie K. Brown in 2022. They argue Brown’s book Perversion of Justice contained false claims that harmed their reputations. Wild says the book wrongly described her as having had intercourse with Epstein and being raped, allegations she denies. Robson, meanwhile, claims Brown portrayed her as complicit in Epstein’s operations after she refused to be interviewed for the book.According to the lawsuit, Brown’s reporting left both women branded in ways that distorted their roles in the Epstein saga, causing reputational damage and emotional distress. The plaintiffs allege that Brown pressured them and misrepresented facts for dramatic effect, leaving them to suffer fallout in their personal and professional lives. The case underscores the tensions between journalistic storytelling and survivor testimony in high-profile abuse investigations.Courtney Wild and Haley Robson, both survivors of Jeffrey Epstein’s abuse, wrote powerful letters to top executives at JPMorgan—among them CEO Jamie Dimon—accusing the bank of enabling Epstein’s conduct by keeping him as a client for many years, despite knowing or having reason to know that there were serious abuse allegations. They ask JPMorgan to acknowledge that it benefited from the relationship (through transactions, accounts, etc.), to admit wrongdoing or mistakes, and to take steps to make amends—both to them and to other survivors. Wild and Robson frame their demand not just in moral terms but in legal and institutional accountability: that the bank should own up, not hide behind fine print or internal policies.They also stress that JPMorgan’s public statements and depositions (including Jamie Dimon’s) have downplayed or denied knowledge of Epstein’s abuse or minimized the bank’s role. In their letters, they challenge that narrative: they maintain that JPMorgan had ample warning of red flags and thus cannot claim complete ignorance. They call for transparency—release of internal documents, full cooperation, and concrete reforms—to ensure what happened with Epstein doesn’t happen again under the bank’s watch.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew came under scrutiny after documents revealed he told bankers to call Buckingham Palace when they questioned a £750,000 payment tied to him. The transaction raised compliance concerns, prompting officials to seek clarity on whether it was legitimate. Instead of offering a straightforward explanation, Andrew reportedly directed them to his Palace office, effectively leaning on his royal status to quell the inquiry.The payment’s origins and purpose stirred suspicions, especially given Andrew’s already controversial financial dealings and public scandals. The move highlighted how he allegedly relied on the prestige of the monarchy to shield himself from financial accountability, deepening concerns about his judgment and raising questions over whether he abused his royal position for personal protection.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Mark Epstein, the brother of Jeffrey Epstein, has been one of the most vocal figures challenging the official narrative surrounding his brother’s death. He has repeatedly questioned the circumstances of Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged suicide, citing inconsistencies in the official reports and demanding transparency from authorities. Mark has pointed to the fact that his brother’s injuries—most notably the hyoid bone fracture—were more consistent with homicide than suicide, according to forensic experts such as Dr. Michael Baden, who was hired by the Epstein family to conduct an independent examination. Additionally, he has expressed frustration over the lack of clear surveillance footage from Epstein’s jail cell, the unusual staffing shortages at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) on the night of his death, and the suspicious failure of the guards to check on him at scheduled intervals. To Mark, these irregularities suggest foul play rather than the simple case of suicide the government has put forward.His calls for a deeper investigation into Jeffrey Epstein’s death have fueled broader public skepticism, as many believe Epstein’s extensive network of powerful associates had every reason to silence him. Mark Epstein has called for the release of all available evidence, including unredacted autopsy reports, prison logs, and surveillance footage, arguing that the truth has been deliberately buried. He has accused the authorities of failing to provide a satisfactory explanation and has demanded a congressional inquiry into what he sees as a cover-up. Despite the official ruling of suicide by the New York City medical examiner, Mark and others continue to push for an independent investigation, arguing that the case was closed too quickly and without sufficient scrutiny. His persistent demands highlight the lingering doubts surrounding Epstein’s death, reinforcing the belief that the truth remains hidden behind a wall of political and institutional protection.to contact me:[email protected] a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.