Prince Andrew, Jeffrey Epstein And The Themed Shooting Trip

​In the retrial of Karen Read for the 2022 death of her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O'Keefe, prosecutors face significant challenges. The initial trial ended in a mistrial due to a hung jury, indicating jurors' doubts about the prosecution's case. Central to the prosecution's difficulties is the credibility of the investigation, particularly concerning lead investigator Michael Proctor, who was dismissed after revelations of derogatory texts about Read, suggesting potential bias. The defense contends that Read is being framed to protect other law enforcement officers, alleging that O'Keefe was killed inside a fellow officer's home and his body placed outside to implicate Read. This narrative has gained traction, bolstered by media coverage and public skepticism about the investigation's integrity.Further complicating the prosecution's efforts are disputes over forensic evidence and expert testimonies. The defense has introduced experts to challenge the assertion that O'Keefe's injuries resulted from being struck by a vehicle, suggesting instead that they could be consistent with an assault inside the house. Additionally, the defense has accused the prosecution of misconduct, alleging improper coordination with expert witnesses and raising concerns about the admissibility of certain evidence. These factors, combined with the high-profile nature of the case and intense public scrutiny, create an uphill battle for the prosecution in securing a conviction in the retrial.to contact me:[email protected]:Karen Read prosecutors face ‘uphill battle’ in Massachusetts case’s retrial, expert says | Massachusetts | The GuardianBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the motion filed on April 17, 2025, Sean Combs' legal team seeks to exclude video evidence related to a March 5, 2016 incident at the InterContinental Hotel in Los Angeles. The defense argues that the CNN footage presented by the government is inadmissible due to alterations, manipulations, and being out of sequence. They assert that CNN paid for, copied, and presented the footage in unknown ways, ultimately destroying the original, rendering it inaccurate. Additionally, the defense challenges two iPhone videos, claiming they are re-recordings of surveillance footage that differ materially from the CNN compilation. The defense contends that these videos cannot be authenticated under Federal Rule of Evidence 901, violate the "Best Evidence" Rule (Rule 1002) due to the absence of original footage, and should be excluded under Rule 403 as their prejudicial impact outweighs any probative value.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.243.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the motion filed on April 17, 2025, Sean Combs' legal team seeks to exclude video evidence related to a March 5, 2016 incident at the InterContinental Hotel in Los Angeles. The defense argues that the CNN footage presented by the government is inadmissible due to alterations, manipulations, and being out of sequence. They assert that CNN paid for, copied, and presented the footage in unknown ways, ultimately destroying the original, rendering it inaccurate. Additionally, the defense challenges two iPhone videos, claiming they are re-recordings of surveillance footage that differ materially from the CNN compilation. The defense contends that these videos cannot be authenticated under Federal Rule of Evidence 901, violate the "Best Evidence" Rule (Rule 1002) due to the absence of original footage, and should be excluded under Rule 403 as their prejudicial impact outweighs any probative value.to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.243.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In this look back episode...Disgraced Prince Andrew thought it was a good idea to host a shooting party on the eve of his case being heard by a judge. In the ultimate thumb of the nose at the upcoming proceedings, Andrew, instead of huddling up with his crisis team, decided to host a shooting party instead.(Commercial at 13:07)To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/16113252/prince-andrew-shooting-party-sexual-assault-court-hearing/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein had extensive ties to the academic community. His reach spanned across the country when it came to donating to professors.From the deserts of Arizona to the Pacific Coast and everywhere in between, proffesors and universities accepted his patronage.None of these institutions had the relationship with Epstein that Harvard had however. Today we take a look at that relationship.(commercial at 13:44)To contact me:[email protected]:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8279193/Jeffrey-Epstein-OFFICE-Harvard-damning-report-reveals.htmlBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Amy Robach was caught on a hot mic complaining about ABC and how they handled the information she was able to obtain from Virginia Roberts in a never aired interview. According to Robach, the interview was quashed by the big shots at ABC because "who knows who Jeffrey Epstein is" and "We don't want to lose our access to the royal family." Just another day in the legacy media. (commercial at 12:19)to contact me:[email protected]:https://www.vox.com/2019/11/5/20949839/jeffrey-epstein-abc-news-leaked-tape-project-veritasBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein chose New Mexico for a reason. Or several. Why did the state of New Mexico punt the ball to the feds instead of impaneling a grand jury to pursue charges themselves? Let's dive in and see what we can find out.(commercial at 9:03)To contact me:[email protected]:https://nmpoliticalreport.com/2019/07/18/no-epstein-indictment-here-for-now/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Jeffrey Epstein was enabled by some of the most powerful people in the financial sector. One of the most glaring examples of this, is when JP Morgan dropped Epstein as a client after Jes Staley left the company, Deustche Bank was right there to soften his landing and provide the financial backing for him to continue on with his criminal behavior.(Commercial at 9:20)To contact me;[email protected]:https://fortune.com/2020/07/09/deutsche-bank-clients-jp-morgan-chase-fines/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In a recent ruling, Judge Steven Hippler denied Bryan Kohberger's motion to exclude expert testimony identifying a white sedan seen near the crime scene as a 2014–2016 Hyundai Elantra. The defense argued that linking various surveillance videos to the same vehicle was speculative and could prejudice the jury. However, the judge determined that law enforcement's conclusions were based on logical inferences drawn from multiple surveillance sources, including footage from 1112 King Road and 1125 Ridge Road. These videos captured a white sedan making several passes near the crime scene shortly before the murders, supporting the identification of the vehicle's make and model.Judge Hippler emphasized that expert opinions derived from such evidence are permissible and do not infringe upon the jury's role in determining guilt. He noted that the investigators' analysis, based on their training and experience, provided a reasonable basis for their conclusions. As a result, the prosecution is allowed to present expert testimony regarding the vehicle's identification during the trial, while the jury will ultimately assess the credibility and significance of this evidence.​to contact me:[email protected]:041825+Order+on+Defendants+Motion+in+Limine+RE+Make+and+Model+of+Suspect+Vehicle.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In an affidavit filed in April 2025, forensic video analyst Connor McCourt provided expert testimony supporting Sean "Diddy" Combs' legal team's efforts to exclude a surveillance video from evidence in Combs' federal sex crimes trial. McCourt's analysis focused on a video depicting a 2016 incident at the InterContinental Hotel in Los Angeles, where Combs is seen physically assaulting singer Cassie Ventura. According to McCourt, the video had been significantly altered, including being "sped up," which distorted the natural movement of individuals and misrepresented the timing of events. He also noted inconsistencies in the timestamps and indicated that the video file was created using ClipChamp.com, a video editing software, raising concerns about its authenticity and reliabilityFurthermore, McCourt's affidavit addressed additional iPhone-recorded footage, asserting that these clips distorted Combs' appearance, making him seem "more domineering" by altering his stature. He argued that the selective framing of these videos, focusing on specific details like footwear, potentially omitted crucial context. McCourt's findings were presented to bolster the defense's claim that the video evidence was misleading and should not be admissible in court. ​to contact me:[email protected]:gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.246.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.