The Moscow Murders and More

 President Trump's repeated denials and distractions are intensifying the Epstein controversy rather than defusing it. Despite his claims of cutting ties with Jeffrey Epstein—such as citing a falling-out over employees and denying visits to Epstein's private island—Trump's name reportedly appears in newly surfaced documents, and he was even briefed about Epstein-related matters by then–Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. His constant insistence that any questions about Epstein are a “hoax” has only deepened public suspicion, particularly among members of his own base who expected transparency and accountability. By refusing to address his past relationship with Epstein in a clear, candid way, Trump has allowed unanswered questions to fester.At the same time, Trump has leaned heavily into his usual playbook of political distractions—attacking opponents, manufacturing controversies, and pushing sensational narratives to draw attention away from his Epstein ties. He's raged about everything from sports team names to the Federal Reserve, all while ignoring the growing pile of Epstein-related headlines that continue to surface. This strategy, once effective, now appears desperate and disjointed. The more Trump attempts to deflect, the more the Epstein issue dominates the conversation, undermining his credibility and fueling speculation. In trying to outrun the story, Trump is only dragging it closer.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The document MJ v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 9:10-cv-81111-WPD, filed on September 17, 2010 in the Southern District of Florida, involves a civil lawsuit brought by a plaintiff identified as “MJ” against Jeffrey Epstein. According to publicly available summaries of this and similar filings from the same time period, MJ was a minor at the time of the alleged abuse. The complaint accuses Epstein of sexually abusing and trafficking MJ while exploiting his wealth and power to silence and control her. MJ alleged that Epstein engaged in a pattern of recruiting underage girls under the guise of offering them money for massages, only for the encounters to turn sexually exploitative. The suit contends that Epstein used his Palm Beach residence as a base for this operation and that he was enabled by associates who helped him procure and manipulate the victims.The complaint further claims that Epstein committed multiple violations of federal and state laws, including sexual battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of civil rights statutes protecting minors. MJ's legal team argued that the long-term psychological damage from Epstein's abuse warranted significant compensatory and punitive damages. The case forms part of a broader group of lawsuits filed by various women against Epstein around that time, many of whom described nearly identical patterns of abuse. These cases contributed to the growing body of evidence surrounding Epstein's trafficking network long before his 2019 arrest and death.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.flsd.365238.1.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The document MJ v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 9:10-cv-81111-WPD, filed on September 17, 2010 in the Southern District of Florida, involves a civil lawsuit brought by a plaintiff identified as “MJ” against Jeffrey Epstein. According to publicly available summaries of this and similar filings from the same time period, MJ was a minor at the time of the alleged abuse. The complaint accuses Epstein of sexually abusing and trafficking MJ while exploiting his wealth and power to silence and control her. MJ alleged that Epstein engaged in a pattern of recruiting underage girls under the guise of offering them money for massages, only for the encounters to turn sexually exploitative. The suit contends that Epstein used his Palm Beach residence as a base for this operation and that he was enabled by associates who helped him procure and manipulate the victims.The complaint further claims that Epstein committed multiple violations of federal and state laws, including sexual battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of civil rights statutes protecting minors. MJ's legal team argued that the long-term psychological damage from Epstein's abuse warranted significant compensatory and punitive damages. The case forms part of a broader group of lawsuits filed by various women against Epstein around that time, many of whom described nearly identical patterns of abuse. These cases contributed to the growing body of evidence surrounding Epstein's trafficking network long before his 2019 arrest and death.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.flsd.365238.1.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The document MJ v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 9:10-cv-81111-WPD, filed on September 17, 2010 in the Southern District of Florida, involves a civil lawsuit brought by a plaintiff identified as “MJ” against Jeffrey Epstein. According to publicly available summaries of this and similar filings from the same time period, MJ was a minor at the time of the alleged abuse. The complaint accuses Epstein of sexually abusing and trafficking MJ while exploiting his wealth and power to silence and control her. MJ alleged that Epstein engaged in a pattern of recruiting underage girls under the guise of offering them money for massages, only for the encounters to turn sexually exploitative. The suit contends that Epstein used his Palm Beach residence as a base for this operation and that he was enabled by associates who helped him procure and manipulate the victims.The complaint further claims that Epstein committed multiple violations of federal and state laws, including sexual battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of civil rights statutes protecting minors. MJ's legal team argued that the long-term psychological damage from Epstein's abuse warranted significant compensatory and punitive damages. The case forms part of a broader group of lawsuits filed by various women against Epstein around that time, many of whom described nearly identical patterns of abuse. These cases contributed to the growing body of evidence surrounding Epstein's trafficking network long before his 2019 arrest and death.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.flsd.365238.1.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ever since Bryan Kohberger was arrested we have heard from people who have known him throughout his life. We have heard the stories about his drug use and bullying and how he had a problem with his weight. However, we have also learned more disturbing things about Bryan Kohberger as well.In this episode we take a look at some of the allegations against Bryan Kohberger and what some of the people around him were/are saying about his arrest.(commercial at 7:29)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Disturbing details emerge about Idaho murders suspect Bryan Kohberger and his 'treatment of women' | The US Sun (the-sun.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this episode we dive into the court documents and take a look at Gabriella Vargas declaration in support of Bryan Kohberger. (commercial 5:40)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:081723-Notice-of-Filing-Declaration-of-Gabriella-Vargas.pdf (amazonaws.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The evidence that has been presented against Bryan Kohberger is very strong. With not only DNA evidence tying him to the crime scene, but also a detailed digital map of his behavior has him at that house not only on the date of the murders, but at least 12 times previously. Not only that, but one of the surviving roommates saw a man leaving the house that fit his description. With all of that evidence, it would seem like a foregone conclusion that a conviction would come at the end of a trial.However, some experts are pointing out that the evidence in the affidavit alone might not be enough to get the conviction that the government and the families want and expect.Let's dive in and take a look!(commercial at 7:02)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger's Affidavit Has 'Bad Facts' for Defense: (lawandcrime.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

From the archives: 12-27-22In part one of this two part deep dive, we take a look at twelve of the biggest questions in the investigation into the murder of Xana, Ethan, Madison and Kaylee and where the investigators are currently at in regards to each of the questions presented.Let's dive in!(commercial at 8:21)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Idaho murders: Key questions to solve what happened in university student slayings | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

From the archives: 12-27-22In part one of this two part deep dive, we take a look at twelve of the biggest questions in the investigation into the murder of Xana, Ethan, Madison and Kaylee and where the investigators are currently at in regards to each of the questions presented.Let's dive in!(commercial at 8:21)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Idaho murders: Key questions to solve what happened in university student slayings | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The document MJ v. Jeffrey Epstein, Case No. 9:10-cv-81111-WPD, filed on September 17, 2010 in the Southern District of Florida, involves a civil lawsuit brought by a plaintiff identified as “MJ” against Jeffrey Epstein. According to publicly available summaries of this and similar filings from the same time period, MJ was a minor at the time of the alleged abuse. The complaint accuses Epstein of sexually abusing and trafficking MJ while exploiting his wealth and power to silence and control her. MJ alleged that Epstein engaged in a pattern of recruiting underage girls under the guise of offering them money for massages, only for the encounters to turn sexually exploitative. The suit contends that Epstein used his Palm Beach residence as a base for this operation and that he was enabled by associates who helped him procure and manipulate the victims.The complaint further claims that Epstein committed multiple violations of federal and state laws, including sexual battery, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and violations of civil rights statutes protecting minors. MJ's legal team argued that the long-term psychological damage from Epstein's abuse warranted significant compensatory and punitive damages. The case forms part of a broader group of lawsuits filed by various women against Epstein around that time, many of whom described nearly identical patterns of abuse. These cases contributed to the growing body of evidence surrounding Epstein's trafficking network long before his 2019 arrest and death.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.flsd.365238.1.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Former President Trump's repeated denials and distractions are intensifying the Epstein controversy rather than defusing it. Despite his claims of cutting ties with Jeffrey Epstein—such as citing a falling-out over employees and denying visits to Epstein's private island—Trump's name reportedly appears in newly surfaced documents, and he was even briefed about Epstein-related matters by then–Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. His constant insistence that any questions about Epstein are a “hoax” has only deepened public suspicion, particularly among members of his own base who expected transparency and accountability. By refusing to address his past relationship with Epstein in a clear, candid way, Trump has allowed unanswered questions to fester.At the same time, Trump has leaned heavily into his usual playbook of political distractions—attacking opponents, manufacturing controversies, and pushing sensational narratives to draw attention away from his Epstein ties. He's raged about everything from sports team names to the Federal Reserve, all while ignoring the growing pile of Epstein-related headlines that continue to surface. This strategy, once effective, now appears desperate and disjointed. The more Trump attempts to deflect, the more the Epstein issue dominates the conversation, undermining his credibility and fueling speculation. In trying to outrun the story, Trump is only dragging it closer.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Former President Trump's repeated denials and distractions are intensifying the Epstein controversy rather than defusing it. Despite his claims of cutting ties with Jeffrey Epstein—such as citing a falling-out over employees and denying visits to Epstein's private island—Trump's name reportedly appears in newly surfaced documents, and he was even briefed about Epstein-related matters by then–Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi. His constant insistence that any questions about Epstein are a “hoax” has only deepened public suspicion, particularly among members of his own base who expected transparency and accountability. By refusing to address his past relationship with Epstein in a clear, candid way, Trump has allowed unanswered questions to fester.At the same time, Trump has leaned heavily into his usual playbook of political distractions—attacking opponents, manufacturing controversies, and pushing sensational narratives to draw attention away from his Epstein ties. He's raged about everything from sports team names to the Federal Reserve, all while ignoring the growing pile of Epstein-related headlines that continue to surface. This strategy, once effective, now appears desperate and disjointed. The more Trump attempts to deflect, the more the Epstein issue dominates the conversation, undermining his credibility and fueling speculation. In trying to outrun the story, Trump is only dragging it closer.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ghislaine Maxwell, currently serving a 20‑year sentence for sex‑trafficking convictions, signaled willingness to testify before Congress—but only on a strict set of terms. In a letter to House Oversight Committee Chair Rep. James Comer, her attorney David Markus spelled out that Maxwell would require formal immunity from prosecution, advance access to all deposition questions, a venue outside of prison, and a delay in testimony until after her appeal, including a potential Supreme Court review, is resolved. Markus even floated the possibility of presidential clemency, stating that under such conditions, Maxwell would be “willing—and eager—to testify openly and honestly, in public, before Congress.” Otherwise, she plans to invoke her Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to answer questionsHowever, the Oversight Committee promptly rejected her request to be granted immunity. In a response to Maxwell's letter, the committee reaffirmed that it will not consider offering congressional immunity as a precondition for her testimony and has declined to accommodate her other stipulated conditions. With Maxwell's cooperation effectively hinging on assurances that lawmakers have refused to entertain, the invitation to testify remains in a legal and political stalemate.Also:President Trump stated that he severed ties with Jeffrey Epstein after discovering that Epstein had repeatedly “stolen” young women who worked at the spa in Trump's Mar‑a‑Lago resort—referring specifically to employees being “taken out of the spa, hired by him.” Trump said this betrayal prompted him to ban Epstein from the club, and when asked about Virginia Giuffre—one of Epstein's most well-known accusers—he replied that he believed she worked at the spa and was among those “stolen,” despite having “no complaints” about Mar‑a‑Lago herself.     to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ghislaine Maxwell wants immunity or a pardon before congressional deposition - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Despite the DOJ's claims that the nearly 11-hour surveillance video of Jeffrey Epstein's cell on the night of his death was “raw” and unedited, metadata analysis tells a different story. Forensic experts discovered that the footage was actually stitched together from at least two MP4 files and had been opened and saved using Adobe Premiere Pro, a professional video editing software. Additionally, nearly three minutes of footage were trimmed off the beginning of the file—precisely before the so-called “missing minute” at midnight—raising serious concerns about tampering. Although the file was labeled as “raw,” multiple forensic video analysts have stated that a true raw export from a surveillance system would never look like what was released. The DOJ's explanation that the missing segment resulted from a daily system reboot has not been corroborated by providing equivalent footage from any other night.Unnamed DOJ sources continue to insist everything is above board, that the edited file is legitimate, and that no foul play occurred. But the government's narrative remains riddled with inconsistencies, and their refusal to address the video anomalies in detail only deepens public skepticism. Experts have stated that the format and processing history of the file would make it inadmissible in a courtroom if chain of custody and authenticity were questioned. The DOJ's handling of this critical piece of evidence feels more like damage control than transparency. If this case truly has no deeper layers, then why present a version of the tape that raises more questions than it answers? The claim that “there's nothing to see here” is losing credibility—especially when the video evidence appears to have been tampered with before it ever reached the public eye.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:There was no "missing minute" in Epstein jail video, government source says - CBS NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Bryan Kohberger and his "I was out for a gander at the stars" routine isn't sitting well with the Goncalves family and they had no  problem calling it absurd and a delay.In this episode, we hear from the Goncalves family in the wake of the alibi claimed by Bryan Kohberger and what we might expect as the process continues to grind forward.An alibi in a criminal trial is a defense strategy where the accused presents evidence to show that they were somewhere else at the time the crime was committed, thereby making it impossible for them to have committed the crime. It's essentially a form of proof of innocence by demonstrating that the accused couldn't have been at the scene of the crime.Corroborating an alibi using digital evidence involves gathering electronic records or data that can confirm the accused's presence elsewhere. Here's how it can be done:Surveillance footage: If there are surveillance cameras in the area where the accused claims to have been at the time of the crime, the footage can be reviewed to verify their presence.Cell phone records: Mobile phone records can show the location of the accused at the time of the crime, either through cell tower pings or GPS data if enabled. This can be corroborated with witness testimonies or other evidence.Social media or online activity: Posts, check-ins, or messages on social media platforms or other online services can provide a digital footprint of the accused's whereabouts. However, these can sometimes be manipulated, so additional evidence may be needed to corroborate them.Credit card transactions: Credit card transactions or ATM withdrawals can provide evidence of the accused's whereabouts if they made purchases or withdrew money around the time of the crime.Email or electronic communication: Emails, text messages, or other forms of electronic communication can provide timestamps that establish the accused's location or activities at a particular time.Digital photos or videos: If the accused or someone else took photos or videos at the time in question, these can serve as evidence of their presence elsewhere.(commercial at 9:17)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Family of Idaho murders victim Kaylee Goncalves bite back at Bryan Kohberger's 'moon and stargazing' alibi, saying 'if it had weight, it would have been submitted months ago' | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Bryan Kohberger's defense team has filed a motion to change the venue for his upcoming trial from Latah County, Idaho, citing concerns that an unbiased jury cannot be found locally due to extensive pretrial publicity. Kohberger is accused of murdering four University of Idaho students in November 2022, a case that has garnered significant media attention both nationally and internationallyKohberger's attorneys argue that the small size and interconnectedness of the Latah County community, combined with the pervasive and often inflammatory media coverage, make it impossible to select an impartial jury. They propose moving the trial to Ada County, approximately 300 miles away, which has a larger population and may offer a better chance of finding unbiased jurors.The prosecution, however, contends that the high-profile nature of the case would make it difficult to find an impartial jury anywhere, suggesting that moving the trial might not address the issue of pretrial publicity. They argue that efforts should be made to seat a jury in Latah County, as the local community deserves the attempt to seek closure.A hearing on the motion for a venue change is scheduled for August 29, 2024, where both sides will present their arguments. The trial itself is currently set for June 2025.(commercial at 11:42)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger Defense Reveals 6 Shocking Rumors Tainting Possible Jurors - NewsweekBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Bryan Kohberger and his legal team have been attempting to have the indictment against Kohberger thrown out for months now and they have run up against a wall known as Judge John Judge each time.In this episode, we dive into Kohberger's latest attempt to get the charges against him tossed and we get an update on where things currently stand and where things might be headed in the coming months.(commercial at 7:06)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger Tries Last-Ditch Effort to Get Case Thrown Out (newsweek.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​Recent court documents have revealed that DNA from three different individuals was discovered under the fingernails of Madison Mogen, one of the four University of Idaho students tragically murdered in November 2022. This finding suggests that Mogen may have struggled with her assailant, potentially collecting crucial forensic evidence during the attack. However, defense attorneys for the primary suspect, Bryan Kohberger, contend that the DNA tests were inconclusive and have filed motions to exclude this evidence from the upcoming trial..Kohberger, a former criminology Ph.D. student, is accused of fatally stabbing Mogen and her three housemates. Prosecutors have presented additional evidence linking Kohberger to the crime, including DNA found on a knife sheath at the scene, surveillance footage of a vehicle resembling his, and cell phone records placing him near the victims' residence before and after the murders. The defense is challenging the admissibility of much of this evidence, arguing that certain investigative methods and the breadth of search warrants could mislead the jury or infringe upon Kohberger's rightsto contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Idaho murders trial rocked by curveball DNA evidence found under victim's fingernails | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Bryan Kohberger keeps to himself and doesn't talk to anyone in the lock up that he is currently in. According to sources, he is constantly watching the news about the murders in moscow and when he's not doing that, he's sitting down with a pastor exploring his new found faith in god.We also get a look at how much money it cost Pennsylvania to fly Bryan Kohberger from Pennsylvania to Idaho after Kohberger was extradited.(commercial at 6:26)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger's Secluded Life Inside Jail: Reports (newsweek.com)source:How much did it cost to fly Bryan Kohberger across the country? | ktvb.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In her reply supporting the petition for a writ of certiorari, Ghislaine Maxwell—referred to as Sealed Defendant 1—argues that the Second Circuit Court of Appeals erred in denying her appeal and that the Supreme Court must intervene to correct what she claims are fundamental constitutional violations. Maxwell's legal team contends that the trial was tainted by extensive pretrial publicity, juror misconduct, and decisions that unfairly limited her ability to present a full defense. Central to her argument is the assertion that the lower courts failed to safeguard her Sixth Amendment rights to an impartial jury and effective counsel, especially given the media firestorm surrounding her case and her association with Jeffrey Epstein.Maxwell also challenges the handling of jury selection and post-trial revelations regarding a juror who failed to disclose a history of sexual abuse during voir dire, which her attorneys argue should have triggered a new trial. Her legal team insists that the appellate court's deference to the district court's findings undermines the integrity of the judicial process, especially in a case involving such serious allegations and public scrutiny. The reply urges the Supreme Court to take up the case to ensure that high-profile defendants are not denied due process and to reaffirm standards that protect the fairness of criminal trials nationwide.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:20250728111721067_24-1073ReplyInSupportOfPetitionForWritOfCertiorari.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ghislaine Maxwell is currently serving her 20-year sentence at the Federal Correctional Institution in Tallahassee, a low-security prison that has come under scrutiny for serious issues including overcrowding, malfunctioning surveillance equipment, and understaffing. Concerns have been raised about her safety, with family members warning that the conditions resemble those that preceded Jeffrey Epstein's death. Despite official assurances that her well-being is being safeguarded, critics argue that the prison's systemic failures could still leave her vulnerable to harm, especially given the high-profile nature of her case and her potential cooperation with authorities.Investigative journalist Julie K. Brown, whose reporting was instrumental in exposing Epstein's crimes, has publicly expressed grave concern for Maxwell's safety. She has pointed out that prisons like FCI Tallahassee are often plagued by lax oversight, broken cameras, and corrupt or negligent staff—conditions that make it easy for misconduct or even violence to occur without accountability. Brown also questioned whether the federal government's interest in speaking with Maxwell could involve coercive tactics, drawing parallels to the controversial deals struck with Epstein in the past. According to Brown, the risks Maxwell faces behind bars are very real, and the public should not assume she is secure just because she's in federal custody.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ghislaine Maxwell's life could be in danger in Florida prison after she met with Justice Department to reveal new Jeffrey Epstein details, top investigative reporter warns | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

If Donald Trump were to issue a presidential pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell for her federal crimes, the doctrine of dual sovereignty could allow the state of New York to pursue separate charges against her without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This legal principle recognizes that the federal government and state governments are distinct sovereigns, each with the authority to enforce their own laws. Therefore, a pardon at the federal level does not immunize a person from state prosecution for conduct that also violates state law. If Maxwell's actions—such as recruiting and trafficking minors—also violated New York state statutes, she could face a new, independent indictment from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office or New York Attorney General, regardless of the federal pardon.New York has already demonstrated its willingness to pursue high-profile sex trafficking and abuse cases, particularly when federal accountability fails or falters. The state has broad human trafficking, sexual abuse, and child endangerment laws that overlap with Maxwell's federally convicted conduct. If prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence that Maxwell's crimes occurred within New York's jurisdiction or harmed residents of the state, they could initiate charges anew under state law. In fact, the political and public appetite for state-level accountability could intensify following a federal pardon, as it would be seen by many as a miscarriage of justice. In that case, dual sovereignty becomes not just a legal tool—but a last-resort mechanism to ensure that Maxwell still faces consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

If Donald Trump were to issue a presidential pardon to Ghislaine Maxwell for her federal crimes, the doctrine of dual sovereignty could allow the state of New York to pursue separate charges against her without violating the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. This legal principle recognizes that the federal government and state governments are distinct sovereigns, each with the authority to enforce their own laws. Therefore, a pardon at the federal level does not immunize a person from state prosecution for conduct that also violates state law. If Maxwell's actions—such as recruiting and trafficking minors—also violated New York state statutes, she could face a new, independent indictment from the Manhattan District Attorney's Office or New York Attorney General, regardless of the federal pardon.New York has already demonstrated its willingness to pursue high-profile sex trafficking and abuse cases, particularly when federal accountability fails or falters. The state has broad human trafficking, sexual abuse, and child endangerment laws that overlap with Maxwell's federally convicted conduct. If prosecutors believe there is sufficient evidence that Maxwell's crimes occurred within New York's jurisdiction or harmed residents of the state, they could initiate charges anew under state law. In fact, the political and public appetite for state-level accountability could intensify following a federal pardon, as it would be seen by many as a miscarriage of justice. In that case, dual sovereignty becomes not just a legal tool—but a last-resort mechanism to ensure that Maxwell still faces consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

t's almost surreal watching the likes of Charlie Kirk and Benny Johnson—professional outrage peddlers who built entire careers feigning moral superiority—suddenly flirt with the idea of a pardon for Ghislaine Maxwell. These are the same figures who spent years branding themselves as protectors of children and self-anointed warriors against elite predators. Now, with a straight face and a nauseating smugness, they're entertaining the possibility that Maxwell—the woman convicted of trafficking minors for Jeffrey Epstein's sex ring—deserves clemency. This pivot isn't just hypocritical—it's a masterclass in opportunism. They know exactly what Maxwell did. They've read the testimony, seen the victim statements, and watched the trial unfold. But instead of doubling down on justice, they're now hinting that she's some misunderstood figure, a pawn in a grander conspiracy that conveniently excuses the people they want to protect. It's not about truth. It's about leverage, about using even a convicted trafficker as a prop in their culture war theater. And if that means rehabilitating the public image of a woman who facilitated some of the most grotesque abuses in recent memory, they're more than willing to take that gamble.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Right-Wing Influencers Say Ghislaine Maxwell Is Key to Unlocking Epstein Case - The New York TimesBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ever since the arrest of Bryan Kohberger, we have not heard much from his family. Now however, we are hearing from his aunt who lives in Las Vegas and she has some very interesting things to say about Bryan Kohberger.In this episode, we hear from his aunt about his behavior as a younger man and what she thinks about the allegations being made against him.(commercial at 7:18)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Idaho murders suspect Bryan Kohberger's aunt breaks silence and reveals whether she thinks he'll be found guilty | The US Sun (the-sun.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

A DNA profile is a unique genetic fingerprint derived from an individual's DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid). DNA is the fundamental genetic material found in the cells of all living organisms, and it carries the instructions that determine our physical characteristics and biological traits.A DNA profile is created by analyzing specific regions of an individual's DNA known as short tandem repeats (STRs) or single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). These regions exhibit variations between individuals, making them useful for identification purposes. DNA profiling involves extracting DNA from a biological sample, such as blood, saliva, hair, or semen, and then amplifying and analyzing the specific DNA regions of interest.Law enforcement agencies use DNA profiling in several ways:Criminal Investigations: When biological evidence is found at a crime scene, such as bloodstains or hair, DNA profiling can be performed to create a DNA profile from the sample. This profile can then be compared to profiles in DNA databases or against known suspects to identify or exclude potential perpetrators.Missing Persons and Unidentified Remains: DNA profiling plays a crucial role in identifying missing persons and unidentified remains. By comparing DNA profiles from unidentified remains to profiles of missing individuals or their relatives, law enforcement can establish familial relationships or make direct identifications.Cold Case Investigations: In cold cases, where the investigation has gone unresolved for an extended period, DNA profiling can be used to reexamine evidence and potentially link it to a known individual or identify new suspects.Forensic Intelligence: DNA profiles obtained from crime scenes can be stored in DNA databases, such as CODIS (Combined DNA Index System), which allows law enforcement agencies to compare profiles from different cases. This can help link previously unrelated crimes and provide leads for investigations.In this episode, we take a look at the new claims by Bryan Kohberger's legal team that 3 other unknown male DNA profiles were found at the crime scene and what it might mean moving forward.(commercial at 8:30)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger claims DNA from three other men found at scene of Idaho murders | The IndependentBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

We are learning more about Anne Taylor and her prior work with not only one parent of the murdered college students in Moscow, but now we're finding out that she also represented Madison Mogen's father and step mother as well.In this episode, we hear from more experts about what this might mean for the trial and what sort of ramifications, if any, might arise in the wake of these possible instances of a conflict of interest.(commercial at 8:38)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger Public Defender Represented Father and Stepmother of Murder Victim Madison Mogen | Inside EditionBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Madison Mogen's father has spoken out about his daughters murder expressing that he believes that the killer left clues that will eventually lead the police to the person responsible for murdering Madison. He also expressed his gratitude for the law enforcement officers working hard to find the person responsible for the heinous crimes.(commercial at 7:08)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Idaho victim Maddie Mogen's dad convinced murderer made mistake that will lead to their capture | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ever since the murders in Moscow took place, people have been firing off all kinds of theories about what happened. One of those theories that caught hold early on was the accomplice theory.In this epsiode, we take a look at that theory and why it doesn't hold up when scrutinized.(commercial at 6:12)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Bryan Kohberger: Expert debunks wild 'accomplice' theory about accused quadruple killer | US | News | Express.co.ukBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In this civil lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on March 31, 2010, the plaintiff—identified by the initials C.L.—accuses Jeffrey Epstein of sexual abuse and related misconduct. C.L., a resident of Palm Beach County at the time of the alleged incidents, brings this complaint based on events that occurred when she was underage and in vulnerable circumstances. The complaint outlines Epstein's pattern of grooming and exploiting young girls in the Palm Beach area, suggesting that C.L. was one of his many victims targeted during a period when Epstein operated a network designed to recruit and abuse minors under the guise of offering financial help or mentorship.The suit claims Epstein engaged in a deliberate and manipulative scheme to solicit C.L. for sexually exploitative acts and that these acts resulted in significant emotional and psychological trauma. The complaint seeks damages for the abuse endured and accuses Epstein of violating both civil and statutory obligations designed to protect minors. Although this is just the first page, the document is consistent with the broader pattern of civil actions filed against Epstein in the wake of his non-prosecution agreement and subsequent revelations about his long-running sex trafficking operation.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

At Ghislaine Maxwell's sentencing in June 2022, survivors delivered powerful and emotional victim impact statements that left no doubt about the damage she had inflicted. One woman stated plainly, “I never would have met Jeffrey Epstein if not for you,” holding Maxwell personally responsible for the years of abuse that followed. Another described her as a “monster,” recounting how Maxwell's grooming, manipulation, and betrayal left her permanently scarred. The survivors spoke about shattered lives, ruined trust, and emotional damage that will never fully heal. Maxwell wasn't a passive bystander—she was the architect of their exploitation, intimately involved in luring and preparing underage girls for sexual abuse under the guise of mentorship and opportunity.Anyone attempting to refurbish Maxwell's image would do well to stop and truly absorb what she did—and who she did it to. These weren't abstract victims or peripheral crimes. They were calculated acts committed against vulnerable girls, many of whom were already struggling. Maxwell used charm, privilege, and social power as tools of entrapment, playing the role of the "trusted woman" to disarm and deliver victims to a predator. Her refusal to accept responsibility, her lies under oath, and her ongoing lack of remorse only deepen the stain of her crimes.There can be no public rehabilitation due the wreckage she left behind.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:M6SQmaxSFBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The financial sector didn't just enable Jeffrey Epstein—they fortified him. For decades, elite institutions like JPMorgan Chase continued to do business with Epstein long after his 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor, ignoring internal warnings, compliance red flags, and credible allegations of abuse. High-ranking executives maintained close relationships, funneled vast sums through opaque accounts, and even joked about his grotesque proclivities in internal emails. Bankers helped him move millions across borders, granted him access to ultra-wealthy clients, and never asked the kind of questions they would demand from an average customer depositing a suspicious $10,000. These weren't oversights—they were decisions. Deliberate, profitable, and saturated with moral rot.At every turn, the financial institutions chose profit over principle. They ignored the trail of victims, the mountain of press coverage, and the glaring signs of criminality, all in exchange for Epstein's connections and capital. Even as civil suits piled up and survivors came forward, these firms were more concerned with protecting their reputations than cutting ties with a known predator. The result wasn't just a financial scandal—it was systemic complicity. The banks didn't just launder his money. They laundered his legitimacy, allowing him to continue operating as a global financier, when in truth he was running an empire built on exploitation and secrecy.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The financial sector didn't just enable Jeffrey Epstein—they fortified him. For decades, elite institutions like JPMorgan Chase continued to do business with Epstein long after his 2008 conviction for soliciting a minor, ignoring internal warnings, compliance red flags, and credible allegations of abuse. High-ranking executives maintained close relationships, funneled vast sums through opaque accounts, and even joked about his grotesque proclivities in internal emails. Bankers helped him move millions across borders, granted him access to ultra-wealthy clients, and never asked the kind of questions they would demand from an average customer depositing a suspicious $10,000. These weren't oversights—they were decisions. Deliberate, profitable, and saturated with moral rot.At every turn, the financial institutions chose profit over principle. They ignored the trail of victims, the mountain of press coverage, and the glaring signs of criminality, all in exchange for Epstein's connections and capital. Even as civil suits piled up and survivors came forward, these firms were more concerned with protecting their reputations than cutting ties with a known predator. The result wasn't just a financial scandal—it was systemic complicity. The banks didn't just launder his money. They laundered his legitimacy, allowing him to continue operating as a global financier, when in truth he was running an empire built on exploitation and secrecy.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Ghislaine Maxwell originally signaled she was ready to comply with the congressional subpoena demanding her testimony before the House Oversight Committee tentatively scheduled for the week of August 11. Her legal team had framed her cooperation with the Department of Justice—during a two‑day interview with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, in which she reportedly answered questions about nearly 100 individuals without invoking privilege—as a sign of willingness to come forward fully. That earlier posture suggested Maxwell might walk the halls of Capitol Hill to finally provide insight into Epstein's network and operations.But following that DOJ sit‑down, she is now openly "undecided" about whether she will testify before Congress. Despite praising her own “truthful” and unrestricted cooperation in front of federal prosecutors, Maxwell has refused to commit to congressional testimony, leaving open the possibility of invoking her Fifth Amendment rights absent formal immunity. Critics are quick to suggest this move is a calculated pivot—falling back into legal limbo just as the political temperature rises. Rather than embracing transparency, she's pulling back into silence until she sees whether immunity or clemency might eventually materialize—casting further doubt on the sincerity of her earlier so-called "willingness."to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Maxwell's lawyer says she's undecided on appearing for congressional testimony - POLITICOBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In Case Number CR01-24-31665, defendant Bryan C. Kohberger has filed a reply to the State's objection concerning his Motion in Limine #6, which seeks to exclude specific opinions of forensic analyst Rylene Nowlin and the use of the terms "touch DNA" and "contact DNA" during trial. Kohberger's defense argues that these terms are misleading and could confuse the jury by implying a certainty about the method of DNA transfer that is not scientifically substantiated. They emphasize that Nowlin's own disclosures acknowledge the complexity of DNA transfer mechanisms and the current inability of DNA technology to conclusively determine how or when DNA was deposited on an item. Therefore, the defense contends that allowing such terminology and speculative testimony would prejudice the jury and should be excluded to ensure a fair trial.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:032425-Defendants-Reply-States-Objection-Defendants-MIL6-RE-Nowlin-Touch-Contact-DNA.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a recent report by The U.S. Sun, legal experts discussed two key pieces of evidence that could influence the upcoming murder trial of Bryan Kohberger, the suspect in the 2022 killings of four University of Idaho students. Kohberger's defense team is pushing to introduce DNA evidence pointing to alternative suspects, arguing that DNA from multiple unidentified individuals was found both at the crime scene and on one of the victims. They suggest that someone else could have planted Kohberger's DNA on the knife sheath found in the house. However, Florida-based trial attorney Mark NeJame called the theory a stretch, pointing to the significance of Kohberger's DNA being found on the sheath and questioning the plausibility of such a setup.The defense also referenced DNA mixtures from unidentified males found in blood samples and under the fingernails of victim Madison Mogen. NeJame acknowledged that such evidence could be used to create reasonable doubt, especially the blood samples, which may be relevant in identifying additional individuals present. However, he cast doubt on the fingernail DNA's value, suggesting it could have resulted from casual contact prior to the murders. NeJame emphasized that blood evidence remains the most critical forensic element, potentially acting as “breadcrumbs” to determine the killer's identity. With the trial approaching, these debates over admissible evidence will play a pivotal role in shaping the courtroom battle.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Two pieces of Bryan Kohberger evidence can completely bring down murder trial by casting doubt about guilt, lawyer warns | The US SunBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The investigation into the murder of the Moscow four and then the arrest and investigation into Bryan Kohberger has been filled with all sorts of curve balls and evolving information and that still remains sthe case today. With court filings coming just about every day, if you pay attention you can see the strategy that is forming for the prosecution.In this episode, we take a look at some of the newest filings and what they tell us about the prosecution and the path that they are currently taking as they build, what they hope, is a rock solid case against Bryan Kohberger.(commercial at 10:09)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Investigators probe Bryan Kohberger's social media in connection with Idaho college murders - ABC News (go.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

From the archives: 12-26-22As Christmas passes and no arrest in the murder of Xana, Ethan, Madison and Kaylee more and more questions are being asked about the profile of the person or persons responsible for the murders and what the motivation to commit such a heinous act could be.In this episode, we hear from Jennifer Coffidaffer who offers up one possible explanation at what might have motivated the killer.(commercial at 7:30)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Ex-FBI Agent Shares 'Femicide' Theory On Idaho Murders (newsweek.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In case number 19 CR. 490 (RMB), the United States government brought formal criminal charges against Jeffrey Epstein, leading to a court-issued Decision & Order Remanding Defendant. This order came after Epstein's arrest in July 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges involving underage girls. The court reviewed Epstein's bail proposal—which included offering his Manhattan townhouse as collateral and agreeing to strict conditions—but ultimately found that no set of conditions could guarantee his appearance at trial or ensure the safety of the community. The decision emphasized both the serious nature of the charges and Epstein's substantial financial resources and international ties, which posed a clear flight risk.As a result, the court ordered Epstein to be remanded to custody, meaning he was to remain in federal detention without bail until trial. The ruling rejected arguments from Epstein's legal team that he could be trusted to comply with any pretrial release conditions. The court also cited concerns about witness tampering and the possibility of further harm to victims. This decision effectively kept Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, where he remained until his controversial death one month later.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-berman.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In case number 19 CR. 490 (RMB), the United States government brought formal criminal charges against Jeffrey Epstein, leading to a court-issued Decision & Order Remanding Defendant. This order came after Epstein's arrest in July 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges involving underage girls. The court reviewed Epstein's bail proposal—which included offering his Manhattan townhouse as collateral and agreeing to strict conditions—but ultimately found that no set of conditions could guarantee his appearance at trial or ensure the safety of the community. The decision emphasized both the serious nature of the charges and Epstein's substantial financial resources and international ties, which posed a clear flight risk.As a result, the court ordered Epstein to be remanded to custody, meaning he was to remain in federal detention without bail until trial. The ruling rejected arguments from Epstein's legal team that he could be trusted to comply with any pretrial release conditions. The court also cited concerns about witness tampering and the possibility of further harm to victims. This decision effectively kept Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, where he remained until his controversial death one month later.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-berman.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In case number 19 CR. 490 (RMB), the United States government brought formal criminal charges against Jeffrey Epstein, leading to a court-issued Decision & Order Remanding Defendant. This order came after Epstein's arrest in July 2019 on federal sex trafficking charges involving underage girls. The court reviewed Epstein's bail proposal—which included offering his Manhattan townhouse as collateral and agreeing to strict conditions—but ultimately found that no set of conditions could guarantee his appearance at trial or ensure the safety of the community. The decision emphasized both the serious nature of the charges and Epstein's substantial financial resources and international ties, which posed a clear flight risk.As a result, the court ordered Epstein to be remanded to custody, meaning he was to remain in federal detention without bail until trial. The ruling rejected arguments from Epstein's legal team that he could be trusted to comply with any pretrial release conditions. The court also cited concerns about witness tampering and the possibility of further harm to victims. This decision effectively kept Epstein at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan, where he remained until his controversial death one month later.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Epstein-berman.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In a videotaped deposition taken in April 2016, Maxwell was questioned under oath about Giuffre's allegations of being groomed and trafficked by Epstein and Maxwell—allegations that she vehemently denied, calling Giuffre an “absolute liar” and asserting she had no involvement in recruiting or abusing her. Maxwell repeatedly refused to answer questions about alleged sexual activity with minors—labeling them as inquiries into “consensual adult sex”—and insisted she had no knowledge of underage abuse. She denied any wrongdoing or participation in Epstein's trafficking network, attempting to distance herself from all aspects of Giuffre's claims.Critics and federal prosecutors later pointed to this deposition as a key piece of evidence in her criminal indictment: they argue Maxwell knowingly made false statements under oath, which became the basis for two counts of perjury in her 2021 criminal charges. Despite her denials, corroborating evidence—including testimony about threesomes with minor girls, flight logs, and recruitment patterns—cast serious doubt on her credibility. Giuffre's suit was ultimately settled in 2017, reportedly for millions of dollars, but the unsealed deposition—and Maxwell's fierce denials—now serve as a stark contrast to the weight of testimony and documentation later vetted in court.source:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.