Podcasts about Disgraced

12-31-25 - Brady's Idea Of A Rehabilitation Teaching Program For Disgraced Teachers Like Brittany Zamora - BOSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

12-31-25 - Brady's Idea Of A Rehabilitation Teaching Program For Disgraced Teachers Like Brittany Zamora - BOSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

The Night that Wouldn't End- An EMP Thriller is David's newest release. This is a brand new series with brand new characters. Here is the description from the back of the book:"Disgraced former police officer Tyler Garrett only wanted one thing—to disappear. But when a devastating EMP and cyberattack bring the power grid crashing down, hiding is no longer an option. As society crumbles around him and hunger fuels desperation, ordinary people become prey. Gangs and predators rise as law and order vanish.Reluctantly, Tyler steps back into the role he tried to leave behind. With a past that haunts him and a city falling into chaos, he must decide what kind of man he will be when survival itself is on the line. In a world without phones, without help, and without rules, one man's choices still matter. He can walk away. Or he can fight.The Night That Wouldn't End delivers gritty realism, pulse-pounding action, and unforgettable characters who must fight not only for their lives—but for their humanity.Perfect for fans of Black Autumn, One Second After, and The Borrowed World."Thanks for listening. I hope you'll check out The Night that Wouldn't End. I'm working hard on Book Two and will let you know when it is available.

Sean “Diddy” Combs, also known as Puff Daddy and P Diddy, remains at the center of one of the most consequential celebrity legal sagas in modern music history. According to Access Hollywood, the disgraced music mogul was arrested in September 2024 and later tried on five federal counts, including sex trafficking, transportation for prostitution, and racketeering. After an eight‑week trial that featured 34 witnesses, including former girlfriend Cassie Ventura, a jury convicted Combs on two of the five counts, and in October 2025 he was sentenced to 50 months in federal prison, with a projected release in mid‑2028. Access Hollywood reports that he has already filed an appeal challenging that outcome.That appeal has now become the latest headline. The Associated Press, via The Hollywood Reporter and the New York Post, reports that Combs' legal team has asked the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York to order his immediate release or send the case back for a lighter sentence. His lawyers argue the trial judge improperly let evidence from charges on which he was acquitted influence the punishment, and contend that the four‑plus‑year term under the Mann Act is excessively harsh. Rolling Stone likewise notes that the filing portrays Combs as unfairly sentenced and pushes for resentencing on a fast track.Meanwhile, the story around Combs has expanded far beyond a single courtroom. The Hollywood Reporter details how he is serving his time at a low‑security federal facility in New Jersey, while Deadline and TV Insider chronicle the continuing fallout from a wave of civil lawsuits and a surge of media projects dissecting his past. Netflix's documentary “Sean Combs: The Reckoning,” executive produced by Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson, digs into years of allegations against the Bad Boy Records founder, while a spokesperson for Combs has issued statements insisting he has “never sexually assaulted anyone” and categorically denies the accusations highlighted in the film, as noted by CBS News.The reverberations reach his family and former artists. AllHipHop reports that streaming platform Zeus has ordered a 2026 docuseries giving Justin Combs and Christian “King” Combs their own space to address life in the shadow of their father's trial and its impact on their careers and identity. CBS News recently featured former Danity Kane member Aubrey O'Day, who discussed learning of an affidavit alleging a sexual assault involving Combs, claims he firmly rejects through his representatives.As appeals play out, dozens of civil claims and a growing catalog of documentaries, interviews, and podcasts are reshaping how the public understands Sean Combs' legacy: from hit‑making icon and business mogul to a central figure in a broader reckoning over power, abuse, and accountability in entertainment.Thank you for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production and, for me, check out QuietPlease dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

A prominent college football program has hired a new coach after a scandal. Correspondent Gethin Coolbaugh reports.

We are away for Christmas, so this is a repeat of a previous episode. In September, President Trump and the U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. held a press conference in which they made extraordinary new claims about autism. They suggested a potential link between the use of Tylenol during pregnancy and the development of autism. They also advocated spacing out childhood vaccinations. The two men's interest in the link between vaccines and autism goes back decades but these claims did not originate in the US. They trace back to the UK in 1998, when disgraced former doctor Andrew Wakefield first published his now-debunked theory linking MMR vaccines to autism cases in children. The science journalist Adam Rutherford explains to the Global Story how the Wakefield vaccine conspiracy became the biggest medical disinformation disaster in recent history, and how these ideas found fertile ground in the Trump administration. Producers: Viv Jones, Valerio Esposito Executive producer: Annie Brown, James Shield Mix: Travis Evans Senior news editor: China Collins Photo: President Trump & Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

Sean Combs, also known as Puff Daddy, P. Diddy, or Diddy, remains at the center of one of the most closely watched celebrity and legal dramas in America, as fresh reporting, new documentaries, and ongoing investigations continue to reshape how the public sees the once-untouchable hip-hop and business mogul.According to CBS News, renewed attention has surged following the release of the Netflix documentary series “Sean Combs: The Reckoning,” which compiles years of abuse and misconduct allegations from multiple accusers, former employees, and industry insiders. In an exclusive CBS News interview tied to the documentary, singer Aubrey O'Day, who rose to fame under Combs' Bad Boy umbrella in the group Danity Kane, describes herself as “speaking for the underdogs” as she details the power dynamics and alleged emotional and sexual abuse she says were embedded in working for Combs and his companies. CBS News reports that O'Day also learned of an affidavit from an unidentified witness who claims to have seen Combs and another man sexually assault her, an allegation Combs denies in the Netflix series and through his attorneys, insisting he has never assaulted anyone.These new on-camera accounts arrive after a cascade of civil lawsuits filed over the past two years, including a high-profile suit by singer and former partner Cassie Ventura that accused Combs of years of physical violence, coercion, and sex trafficking behavior before it was rapidly settled out of court. Major outlets such as the New York Times, Rolling Stone, and the Associated Press have chronicled how that settlement did not end Combs' problems: multiple additional plaintiffs soon came forward, prompting a broader cultural reexamination of his legacy in music, fashion, television, and nightlife.In parallel, federal law-enforcement interest has intensified. National outlets including CNN and NBC News have reported on Homeland Security raids of properties linked to Combs and on an ongoing investigation exploring whether any of the alleged conduct could rise to criminal charges tied to trafficking or racketeering, though no criminal indictment has been announced and Combs continues to deny all criminal wrongdoing through his legal team. Legal analysts interviewed by outlets like ABC News note that even without charges, the combination of civil suits, video leaks, and documentary testimony has already inflicted severe damage on his brand partnerships, media ventures, and once-lucrative reputation as a mentor and kingmaker.As the story continues to develop, major news organizations emphasize that many allegations remain unproven in court, that Combs is legally presumed innocent of any crime, and that several cases are either sealed, settled, or still pending, leaving listeners in a moment where ongoing reporting, whistleblower testimony, and potential future filings could further alter the narrative.Thank you for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for more from me check out QuietPlease dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

Multiple accusers have alleged that Prince Andrew was present at Jeffrey Epstein's residences during periods when sexual abuse of minors was actively occurring, placing him not on the margins of Epstein's world, but squarely inside it. These accusations stem most prominently from Virginia Giuffre, who stated under oath that Andrew abused her when she was a teenager and that these encounters occurred in locations directly controlled by Epstein, including his Manhattan mansion. Her account was not vague or secondhand; she described specific settings, timelines, and circumstances, asserting that Andrew was not an unwitting guest but an active participant in Epstein's environment of exploitation. The now-infamous photograph of Andrew with his arm around Giuffre inside Epstein's London residence further undercuts claims of distance or ignorance, placing him physically and socially within Epstein's inner circle at a time when abuse was widespread and well-documented.What makes Andrew's position especially damning is not just the allegation itself, but his pattern of denial, evasion, and privilege-driven insulation from scrutiny. Rather than submit to questioning or cooperate meaningfully with investigators, Andrew retreated behind royal status, legal maneuvering, and ultimately a multimillion-dollar civil settlement that allowed him to avoid sworn testimony without ever addressing the substance of the claims in court. His insistence that he has “no recollection” of events at Epstein's properties strains credibility given the volume of corroborating evidence showing he was repeatedly present in Epstein's orbit after Epstein's criminal conduct was already known. Taken together, the accusations portray not a naïve bystander, but a man who benefited from proximity to power, wealth, and protection—one who has never been forced to reconcile his public denials with the serious, specific, and consistent allegations that place him at the scene while abuse was taking place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Best and Last Year of Radio is a series featuring the last year of radio Opie did at SiriusXM4/13 Carl Ruiz, Vic Henley and the Disgraced documentary film makers.The chaos rolls on in Opie's final SiriusXM era as Showtime executive Stephen Espinoza joins Carl Ruiz, and Vic Henley to unpack the explosive 'Disgraced' documentary, revealing the shocking 2003 Baylor basketball murder, cover-up attempts, and NCAA violations that rocked college sports. Expect irreverent rants blending gut-busting comedy with jaw-dropping insights into coach Dave Bliss's infamous smear campaign and the tragic Patrick Dennehy case—proving how far institutions go to protect their image. This unfiltered mid-show slice captures the crew's savage takes and unexpected twists, delivering the rebellious radio fire that defined 2017's most unforgettable moments.

Multiple accusers have alleged that Prince Andrew was present at Jeffrey Epstein's residences during periods when sexual abuse of minors was actively occurring, placing him not on the margins of Epstein's world, but squarely inside it. These accusations stem most prominently from Virginia Giuffre, who stated under oath that Andrew abused her when she was a teenager and that these encounters occurred in locations directly controlled by Epstein, including his Manhattan mansion. Her account was not vague or secondhand; she described specific settings, timelines, and circumstances, asserting that Andrew was not an unwitting guest but an active participant in Epstein's environment of exploitation. The now-infamous photograph of Andrew with his arm around Giuffre inside Epstein's London residence further undercuts claims of distance or ignorance, placing him physically and socially within Epstein's inner circle at a time when abuse was widespread and well-documented.What makes Andrew's position especially damning is not just the allegation itself, but his pattern of denial, evasion, and privilege-driven insulation from scrutiny. Rather than submit to questioning or cooperate meaningfully with investigators, Andrew retreated behind royal status, legal maneuvering, and ultimately a multimillion-dollar civil settlement that allowed him to avoid sworn testimony without ever addressing the substance of the claims in court. His insistence that he has “no recollection” of events at Epstein's properties strains credibility given the volume of corroborating evidence showing he was repeatedly present in Epstein's orbit after Epstein's criminal conduct was already known. Taken together, the accusations portray not a naïve bystander, but a man who benefited from proximity to power, wealth, and protection—one who has never been forced to reconcile his public denials with the serious, specific, and consistent allegations that place him at the scene while abuse was taking place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Multiple accusers have alleged that Prince Andrew was present at Jeffrey Epstein's residences during periods when sexual abuse of minors was actively occurring, placing him not on the margins of Epstein's world, but squarely inside it. These accusations stem most prominently from Virginia Giuffre, who stated under oath that Andrew abused her when she was a teenager and that these encounters occurred in locations directly controlled by Epstein, including his Manhattan mansion. Her account was not vague or secondhand; she described specific settings, timelines, and circumstances, asserting that Andrew was not an unwitting guest but an active participant in Epstein's environment of exploitation. The now-infamous photograph of Andrew with his arm around Giuffre inside Epstein's London residence further undercuts claims of distance or ignorance, placing him physically and socially within Epstein's inner circle at a time when abuse was widespread and well-documented.What makes Andrew's position especially damning is not just the allegation itself, but his pattern of denial, evasion, and privilege-driven insulation from scrutiny. Rather than submit to questioning or cooperate meaningfully with investigators, Andrew retreated behind royal status, legal maneuvering, and ultimately a multimillion-dollar civil settlement that allowed him to avoid sworn testimony without ever addressing the substance of the claims in court. His insistence that he has “no recollection” of events at Epstein's properties strains credibility given the volume of corroborating evidence showing he was repeatedly present in Epstein's orbit after Epstein's criminal conduct was already known. Taken together, the accusations portray not a naïve bystander, but a man who benefited from proximity to power, wealth, and protection—one who has never been forced to reconcile his public denials with the serious, specific, and consistent allegations that place him at the scene while abuse was taking place.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Death gets pink-slipped and sent to Mumbai—so we're unpacking The Many Deaths of Laila Star and why its big ideas and electric colors hit so hard. We also review Inferno Girl Red: Book Two #1, Shiver Suspense Stories Two #1, and The New Space Age #1. Plus: the eternal debate—Wendy's, McDonald's, or Burger King? Major Spoilers Podcast Network Master Feed RSS Feed Show your thanks to Major Spoilers for this episode by becoming a Major Spoilers Patron at http://patreon.com/MajorSpoilers. It will help ensure the Major Spoilers Podcast continues far into the future! Join our Discord server and chat with fellow Spoilerites! (https://discord.gg/jWF9BbF) REVIEWS STEPHEN SHIVER SUSPENSTORIES 2 #1 Writer: Various Artist: Various Publisher: Oni Press Cover Price: $8.99 Release Date: December 10, 2025 AS IF THE HOLIDAYS WEREN'T HORRORIFIC ENOUGH?! EC Comics and Oni Press are BACK to stab your stocking for the second year running with all-new, all-terrifying tales of holiday horror and Christmastime catastrophe as SHIVER SUSPENSTORIES slays again! In this year's giant-sized, 56-page tome of gruesomely gift-wrapped delights: We're tying perpetual naughty-listers David M. Booher (Canto), Melissa Flores (Biker Mice from Mars), George Northy (Yuletide), and Ben H. Winters (Benjamin) to the dried-out Christmas tree in the family parlor . . . and gathering 'round as artistic Tormentors-in-training Sami Kivelä (Abbott), Dan McDaid (Shazam!), and more surprise guests throw a few lit matches their way to get this old-fashioned solstice sacrifice started in style! Yes, we know: It smells like dinner might be getting a little overdone! Never fear, because EC's newest annual tradition also comes complete with an extra-added EC Comics classic—newly restored back to its authentic original coloring! As you sift through the charred remains, just remember: SHIVER SUSPENSTORIES is here to bring the horror back to the holidays . . . and we wouldn't want it any other way! [rating:3.5/5] You can purchase this issue via our Amazon affiliate link - https://amzn.to/4iIZJhN MATTHEW INFERNO GIRL RED: BOOK TWO #1 Writer: Mat Groom Artist: Erica D'Urso Publisher: Image Comics/Massive-Verse Cover Price: $4.99 Release Date: December 3, 2025 INFERNO GIRL RED RETURNS! Cássia Costa has established herself as Apex City's protector — but now, still reeling from a heartbreaking loss, the consequences of her past victories have come back to haunt her. Who are the Twins, what are their plans for Apex, and what shocking revelation will leave Cássia reeling? [rating:3.5/5] You can purchase this issue via our Amazon affiliate link - https://amzn.to/3YflT1Q RODRIGO THE NEW SPACE AGE #1 Writer: Kenny Porter Artist: Mike Becker Publisher: Mad Cave Studios Cover Price: $4.99 Release Date: December 17, 2025 Disgraced astronaut Mark Mitchell has only ever had one true mission—to find his little brother Joey, who was abducted by aliens from a crop circle when they were little. But when Mark's hotshot piloting gets him grounded and the last of the public space program defunded, Mark loses his only means of finding Joey out in space. Until Mark's homemade scanning rig discovers the shocking truth about the crop circles—they're instructions for space travel. Mark will need to uncover the hidden messages that have been left on Earth for years, and reverse engineer the magic that can finally help him find Joey. [rating: 3/5] You can purchase this issue via our Amazon affiliate link - https://amzn.to/4iKY5fD DISCUSSION THE MANY DEATHS OF LAILA STARR Writer: Ram V. Artist: Filipe Andrade Publisher: Archaia Release Date: February 1, 2022 Humanity is on the verge of discovering immortality. As a result, the avatar of Death is cast down to Earth to live a mortal life in Mumbai as twenty-something Laila Starr. Struggling with her newfound mortality, Laila has found a way to be placed in the time and place where the creator of immortality will be born. Will Laila take her chance to stop mankind from permanently altering the cycle of life, or will death really become a thing of the past? You can purchase this issue via our Amazon affiliate link - https://amzn.to/4akSlY7 CLOSE Contact us at podcast@majorspoilers.com A big Thank You goes out to everyone who downloads, subscribes, listens, and supports this show. We really appreciate you taking the time to listen to our ramblings each week. Tell your friends!

For years, palace insiders whispered that Prince Andrew harbored ambitions far beyond his station and that he quietly maneuvered to keep Charles from ever reaching the throne. According to these rumors, Andrew believed that Charles was unfit to reign and that the monarchy would be better served—meaning more tightly controlled—if the succession somehow skipped the heir and went directly to Andrew's preferred candidate: Prince William. These accounts painted Andrew as a behind-the-curtain operator, leveraging his mother's affection, exploiting internal rivalries, and feeding narratives that Charles lacked the temperament and stability to lead. None of it was overt, of course. Andrew was said to work in nods, whispers, and subtle pressure campaigns, all designed to chip away at Charles's inevitability.The speculation grew particularly intense during Queen Elizabeth II's later years, when Andrew—despite his spiraling scandals—seemed to position himself as a gatekeeper around his mother. Rumor had it he tried to control access, influence her perception of Charles, and push the idea that the monarchy's public image would recover faster under a younger, fresher sovereign. The irony was brutal: here was a man drowning in the Epstein scandal allegedly trying to steer the future of the Crown as if anyone still saw him as credible. In the end, the whispers amounted to nothing; Charles ascended, Andrew collapsed, and the schemes attributed to him now read like the last gasps of a fading prince who wildly overestimated both his pull and his relevance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Disgraced reporter and alleged criminal Damiana Garcia is back with one of the most disturbing episodes yet. Is it about LOUNGE SINGING -- or an idea that will haunt your nightmares? Only one way to find out. Episode Links: Michael Lucid's IG Michael Lucid's TikTok Sasha's Writing Class Joe's Patreon Mr. Owl's Website

Sean Combs, also known as Puff Daddy, Puffy, and P. Diddy, remains at the center of a storm of legal drama, documentary exposés, and family backlash, as his fall from music mogul to convicted felon continues to unfold in the headlines.USA Today reports that Combs is currently serving a federal prison sentence of just over four years after his conviction on charges of transportation to engage in prostitution, part of a wider federal case that publicly aired allegations of sex trafficking, drugs, and violent “freak-off” parties tied to his inner circle. According to the Federal Bureau of Prisons data cited by USA Today, his projected release date is in 2028, though that may shift with time served and any successful appeals.The most explosive new chapter is Netflix's multi-part docuseries Sean Combs: The Reckoning, executive produced by his longtime rival Curtis “50 Cent” Jackson. USA Today explains that the series traces Combs' rise from Bad Boy Records architect and hitmaker to a symbol of celebrity excess and alleged abuse, featuring never-before-seen footage and interviews with former insiders who describe how “something darker” began to color his ambitions. Director Alexandria Stapleton has said the project was in part inspired by Combs' ex-girlfriend Cassie Ventura and her 2023 sexual assault lawsuit, and she frames the series as a mirror held up to a culture that puts stars on pedestals they may not deserve.The Netflix release has reignited the decades-long feud between Combs and 50 Cent. LadBible breaks down how their rivalry, once mostly about business competition and trolling, has now escalated into a high-stakes battle over narrative and reputation, with 50 Cent positioning himself as a truth-teller exposing industry secrets while capitalizing on Combs' downfall.Inside the Combs family itself, the pushback is fierce. RadarOnline reports that Sean Combs' mother, Janice Combs, has publicly blasted Netflix and the docuseries as “lies” and “outrageous and past offensive.” In a statement, she specifically denies a claim in the series that her son once slapped her after the tragic 1991 City College event, calling that allegation “patently false” and accusing former Bad Boy executive Kirk Burrows of exploiting a tragedy for personal gain. She argues the series was intentionally designed to be salacious, and Combs' legal team has sent Netflix a cease-and-desist letter, labeling the project a corporate “hit piece.” Netflix, for its part, denies any retaliation and insists no one was paid to participate and that 50 Cent does not have creative control over the final cut.Through it all, Combs sits behind bars, appealing his conviction while the public continues to reassess his legacy: visionary hitmaker, ruthless mogul, alleged abuser—or all of the above. The story of Sean Combs is no longer just about chart-topping hits, but about power, accountability, and what happens when a cultural icon faces the full weight of the legal system and the court of public opinion at the same time.Thanks for tuning in, and come back next week for more. This has been a Quiet Please production, and for me, check out QuietPlease dot A I.Some great Deals https://amzn.to/49SJ3QsFor more check out http://www.quietplease.aiThis content was created in partnership and with the help of Artificial Intelligence AI

In early 2022, Andrew's attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, contending that Giuffre's complaint did not “articulate what supposedly happened” with sufficient detail. They argued the claims were too general — lacking precise dates, clear descriptions of where alleged events occurred, and specific conduct — which, they said, made it impossible for Andrew to respond meaningfully or defend himself. This line of attack framed the allegations as legally insufficient because they allegedly failed to meet the standards required to bring a viable civil case.The court rejected that argument. A federal judge overseeing the case found that Giuffre had provided enough detail — about timing (early 2000s), locations (including a London residence and properties tied to Jeffrey Epstein), and context (her status as a minor and trafficking victim) — to allow the lawsuit to proceed. The judge ruled that the complaint was not “too vague” to survive a motion to dismiss, meaning that Giuffre's core claims had been sufficiently described to proceed toward discovery or resolution.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The allegations that Prince Andrew participated in an Epstein-related orgy are among the most disturbing and consequential claims connected to the Epstein operation. Virginia Roberts Giuffre has stated consistently for years that she was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein and forced to participate in sexual encounters with powerful men — including Prince Andrew — at various locations that were central hubs in Epstein's network. One of the most serious accusations is that Andrew took part in an orgy on Epstein's private island, Little Saint James, surrounded by multiple underage girls. Giuffre has described this event in sworn legal filings, interviews, and public testimony, asserting that she was 17 years old at the time and that Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell orchestrated the encounter.These claims have never wavered, and they are supported by overlapping pieces of circumstantial evidence — from flight logs placing Andrew in the same locations as Epstein and Giuffre, to photographs, to supporting statements from other accusers who have described similar scenes involving groups of trafficked minors being exploited on the island. Rather than engaging directly with the allegations, Prince Andrew has relied on blanket denials and public relations maneuvers, including his disastrous BBC interview where he insisted he had “no recollection” of ever meeting Giuffre while dodging every detailed question. The combination of Giuffre's consistent testimony, corroborating context from Epstein's victims, and the sheer specificity of her descriptions has left many observers convinced that the alleged orgy was not an outlandish claim — but a glimpse into the true depravity and scale of Epstein's trafficking machine, and the powerful men who believed they would never be held accountable.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

For years, Prince Andrew held dozens — some estimates put it around 200 — of charity patronages and official royal-charity affiliations. Through Prince Andrew Charitable Trust (PACT), and initiatives such as his youth-education and entrepreneurship efforts, he presented himself as a public-spirited royal using his status to do good. That network of charities and institutions provided him with a veneer of respectability and influence: being associated with educational causes, technology and enterprise awards, youth outreach, and philanthropic work helped him cultivate an image of legitimacy and public service. This charitable web likely served as a buffer — intended to reassure the public and institutions that despite the scandal swirling around him, he remained a committed royal working for social good.But as the scandal involving Jeffrey Epstein and abuse allegations gained traction, that armor cracked. After his controversial 2019 media interview, many charities began severing ties: dozens publicly removed him as patron, fearing reputational damage.  Moreover, regulatory scrutiny exposed mis-management in his own charity: the watchdog closed PACT after finding unlawful payments (hundreds of thousands of pounds) to a trustee linked to his staff, forcing the charity to return the money.   What began as a shield against scandal became, for many observers, proof that his charitable works lacked proper governance — and that the network he hoped would protect him instead deepened the perceived misconduct.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

For years, palace insiders whispered that Prince Andrew harbored ambitions far beyond his station and that he quietly maneuvered to keep Charles from ever reaching the throne. According to these rumors, Andrew believed that Charles was unfit to reign and that the monarchy would be better served—meaning more tightly controlled—if the succession somehow skipped the heir and went directly to Andrew's preferred candidate: Prince William. These accounts painted Andrew as a behind-the-curtain operator, leveraging his mother's affection, exploiting internal rivalries, and feeding narratives that Charles lacked the temperament and stability to lead. None of it was overt, of course. Andrew was said to work in nods, whispers, and subtle pressure campaigns, all designed to chip away at Charles's inevitability.The speculation grew particularly intense during Queen Elizabeth II's later years, when Andrew—despite his spiraling scandals—seemed to position himself as a gatekeeper around his mother. Rumor had it he tried to control access, influence her perception of Charles, and push the idea that the monarchy's public image would recover faster under a younger, fresher sovereign. The irony was brutal: here was a man drowning in the Epstein scandal allegedly trying to steer the future of the Crown as if anyone still saw him as credible. In the end, the whispers amounted to nothing; Charles ascended, Andrew collapsed, and the schemes attributed to him now read like the last gasps of a fading prince who wildly overestimated both his pull and his relevance.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

After legal pressure mounted on Black for his close relationship with Epstein — including revelations that Black paid Epstein tens of millions of dollars for “tax and estate planning” even after Epstein's 2008 conviction — new lawsuits and investigations began to cast a wider net. Among those subpoenaed in a broad civil case against financial institutions linked to Epstein was Zuckerman, as part of efforts to trace the money trails and financial networks that may have funded or facilitated Epstein's enterprise. The inclusion of Zuckerman's name signaled a legal strategy aiming to pull in other wealthy associates and financiers who might have had business or financial exposure to Epstein — effectively broadening liability beyond Black.Black's own legal maneuvers complicated matters further. While he faced civil lawsuits (for alleged sexual misconduct) and regulatory scrutiny over his payments to Epstein, the broader legal actions — including suits against banks and other financial players — sought to implicate individuals like Zuckerman in chains of financial relationships tied to Epstein's operations. By doing this, Black's case became not just about his personal associations, but part of a larger legal attempt to map and hold accountable the network of affluent, high-profile individuals and institutions whose money may have indirectly supported Epstein's activities.to  contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In early 2022, Andrew's attorneys filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, contending that Giuffre's complaint did not “articulate what supposedly happened” with sufficient detail. They argued the claims were too general — lacking precise dates, clear descriptions of where alleged events occurred, and specific conduct — which, they said, made it impossible for Andrew to respond meaningfully or defend himself. This line of attack framed the allegations as legally insufficient because they allegedly failed to meet the standards required to bring a viable civil case.The court rejected that argument. A federal judge overseeing the case found that Giuffre had provided enough detail — about timing (early 2000s), locations (including a London residence and properties tied to Jeffrey Epstein), and context (her status as a minor and trafficking victim) — to allow the lawsuit to proceed. The judge ruled that the complaint was not “too vague” to survive a motion to dismiss, meaning that Giuffre's core claims had been sufficiently described to proceed toward discovery or resolution.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

For years, Prince Andrew held dozens — some estimates put it around 200 — of charity patronages and official royal-charity affiliations. Through Prince Andrew Charitable Trust (PACT), and initiatives such as his youth-education and entrepreneurship efforts, he presented himself as a public-spirited royal using his status to do good. That network of charities and institutions provided him with a veneer of respectability and influence: being associated with educational causes, technology and enterprise awards, youth outreach, and philanthropic work helped him cultivate an image of legitimacy and public service. This charitable web likely served as a buffer — intended to reassure the public and institutions that despite the scandal swirling around him, he remained a committed royal working for social good.But as the scandal involving Jeffrey Epstein and abuse allegations gained traction, that armor cracked. After his controversial 2019 media interview, many charities began severing ties: dozens publicly removed him as patron, fearing reputational damage.  Moreover, regulatory scrutiny exposed mis-management in his own charity: the watchdog closed PACT after finding unlawful payments (hundreds of thousands of pounds) to a trustee linked to his staff, forcing the charity to return the money.   What began as a shield against scandal became, for many observers, proof that his charitable works lacked proper governance — and that the network he hoped would protect him instead deepened the perceived misconduct.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Prince Andrew being stripped of the Order of the Garter marked one of the most severe and humiliating blows the Royal Family has dealt him yet. The Order of the Garter is not just any accolade. It is the oldest and most prestigious chivalric order in the United Kingdom, reserved for monarchs, prime ministers, and figures of national significance. Losing it wasn't simply a matter of public relations. It was the Royal Family publicly acknowledging that Andrew's entanglement with Jeffrey Epstein was no longer something they could distance themselves from with polite statements or vague platitudes. This was a symbolic execution: the monarchy cutting away a limb that had become too infected, too toxic, too indefensible to keep attached.The decision also made it abundantly clear that Andrew's days of skating by on privilege were over. For decades, he lived as though the rules applied only to the peasants, never to him. But once the Epstein revelations reached a boiling point and the public recoil became impossible to ignore, even the Palace had to abandon the fantasy that Andrew could be rehabilitated through a carefully staged interview or a temporary retreat from public life. Stripping him of the Garter was the monarchy admitting, without saying it out loud, that he is a liability. A fallen prince, tarnished beyond repair, and a cautionary tale of what happens when scandal finally outweighs lineage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:King Charles strips Prince Andrew of his final royal titles amid scandal | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

After Virginia Giuffre filed her lawsuit against Prince Andrew, major inconsistencies quickly emerged between Andrew's formal legal claims and the established facts already in public record. Andrew repeatedly asserted in legal correspondence and interviews that he had no memory of ever meeting Giuffre — yet the well-known photograph showing Andrew with his arm around her waist, with Ghislaine Maxwell in the background, stands in direct conflict with that claim. In addition, Andrew insisted he had never been in locations tied to the allegations, including the London townhouse where the photo was taken and Epstein-connected properties. Flight logs, witness statements, and travel records, however, placed him in the same cities and environments at the same times cited in the lawsuit. These contradictions fueled widespread skepticism regarding his denials.Andrew also attempted to argue, through legal filings, that Giuffre's 2009 settlement agreement with Epstein released him from liability, and tried to frame the case as outside the court's jurisdiction. The known facts did not support those arguments. The settlement never named Andrew or clearly released unnamed third parties, and the judge ultimately rejected the effort to dismiss the case based on that claim. Furthermore, Andrew publicly insisted he could not have been with Giuffre on a date she identified because he was at a Pizza Express birthday party with his daughter — an alibi widely viewed as improbable and poorly substantiated. When the legal and factual record was compared to Andrew's statements, the discrepancies only intensified the perception that he was attempting to distance himself through evasive explanations rather than truthfully addressing the allegations.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Disgraced former political staffer Bruce Lehrmann has lost his bid to overturn a court finding that he probably raped his colleague Brittany Higgins in Parliament House; An internal review into the coalition's election loss has pinned some blame on US President Donald Trump for turning voters away from Peter Dutton; A study by the University of South Australia has found the fastest growing cohort of people using long term antidepressants are younger Aussies; YouTube has confirmed it will comply with Australia's world-first under-16s social media ban; Hugh Jackman has sent Oprah to Bill's in Sydney to try their renowned ricotta hotcakes Support independent women's media CREDITS Host/Producer: Taylah Strano Audio Production: Lu HillBecome a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Prince Andrew being stripped of the Order of the Garter marked one of the most severe and humiliating blows the Royal Family has dealt him yet. The Order of the Garter is not just any accolade. It is the oldest and most prestigious chivalric order in the United Kingdom, reserved for monarchs, prime ministers, and figures of national significance. Losing it wasn't simply a matter of public relations. It was the Royal Family publicly acknowledging that Andrew's entanglement with Jeffrey Epstein was no longer something they could distance themselves from with polite statements or vague platitudes. This was a symbolic execution: the monarchy cutting away a limb that had become too infected, too toxic, too indefensible to keep attached.The decision also made it abundantly clear that Andrew's days of skating by on privilege were over. For decades, he lived as though the rules applied only to the peasants, never to him. But once the Epstein revelations reached a boiling point and the public recoil became impossible to ignore, even the Palace had to abandon the fantasy that Andrew could be rehabilitated through a carefully staged interview or a temporary retreat from public life. Stripping him of the Garter was the monarchy admitting, without saying it out loud, that he is a liability. A fallen prince, tarnished beyond repair, and a cautionary tale of what happens when scandal finally outweighs lineage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:King Charles strips Prince Andrew of his final royal titles amid scandal | Fox NewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Dave Smith brings you the latest in politics! On this episode of Part Of The Problem, Dave and Robbie "The Fire" Bernstein talk about the exposed findings about the death toll of the Covid vaccine trials, Dan Bongino complaining about his job on Fox, the failures of Trump's administration so far, and more.Order Lauren Smith's book here: https://a.co/d/67djjBpSupport Our Sponsors:The Wellness Company Cyber Monday Sale! Head to www.twc.health/problem to save 25% off Ivermectin products, 25% off all Nutraceuticals, and 20% off Emergency Kits and Memberships. Discounts automatically applied at checkout. Sale ends 12/2.MASA Chips - https://www.masachips.com/DAVE Tuttle Twins - https://www.tuttletwins.com/problemMy Patriot Supply - https://www.mypatriotsupply.com/problemPart Of The Problem is available for early pre-release at https://partoftheproblem.com as well as an exclusive episode on Thursday!PORCH TOUR DATES HERE:https://www.eventbrite.com/cc/porch-tour-2025-4222673Find Run Your Mouth here:YouTube - http://youtube.com/@RunYourMouthiTunes - https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/run-your-mouth-podcast/id1211469807Spotify - https://open.spotify.com/show/4ka50RAKTxFTxbtyPP8AHmFollow the show on social media:X:http://x.com/ComicDaveSmithhttp://x.com/RobbieTheFireInstagram:http://instagram.com/theproblemdavesmithhttp://instagram.com/robbiethefire#libertarianSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

New reporting has intensified scrutiny around Prince Andrew following allegations that he sent a young woman to Jeffrey Epstein, who subsequently reported being sexually abused by Epstein. According to accounts now under renewed examination, Andrew allegedly facilitated the introduction under the guise of networking and opportunity, despite the well-known concerns already circulating within elite circles about Epstein's predatory behavior. If accurate, the allegation positions Andrew not as a peripheral figure who exercised poor judgment, but as an active participant who enabled access to a victim who later suffered harm. It also raises profound questions about what Andrew knew, when he knew it, and whether he deliberately ignored the warning signs attached to Epstein's reputation.The allegation further undermines Andrew's long-standing public defense that he was simply “unaware” of Epstein's criminal behavior and maintained only a surface-level association. Instead, it depicts a scenario in which he may have used his status to funnel women into Epstein's social orbit while simultaneously portraying himself as detached and uninvolved. Legal analysts and victim-advocacy groups argue that this development demands formal investigation rather than public relations statements or royal damage control. If corroborated, this would represent a grave escalation in Andrew's alleged misconduct — shifting the narrative from questionable association to potential facilitation of abuse, with implications that extend far beyond personal embarrassment or reputational decline.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Andrew told Epstein victim: I know he's been 'inappropriate' with another woman... a YEAR before ex-prince met his accuser Virginia Giuffre, lawyers for abused actress claim | Daily Mail Online

Weight loss drugs have once again dominated health headlines.The World Health Organization has endorsed Ozempic-type drugs for long-term obesity treatment, while Australia's TGA has issues new safety alerts - so what's going on here? Plus, we dive into the contentious Oxford Word of the Year, and why it was some people raging... literally. And in headlines today, A suppression order has been lifted allowing reporting on the dark history of Greg Lynn; Disgraced former political staffer Bruce Lehrmann will learn today whether a an appeal to overturn a court ruling he probably raped colleague Brittany Higgins is successful; Palestinian militant group Hamas says it is handing over the remains of one of the two last hostage bodies still in the Gaza Strip; The Prada Group has officially purchased Milan fashion rival Versace in a 1.25 billion euro ($A2.21 billion) deal; Miley Cyrus is engaged to musician Maxx Morando THE END BITS Support independent women's media Check out The Quicky Instagram here GET IN TOUCHShare your story, feedback, or dilemma! Send us a voice note or email us at thequicky@mamamia.com.au CREDITS Hosts: Taylah Strano & Claire Murphy Guests: Dr Terri-Lynne South, Chair of RACGP Specific Interests Obesity ManagementMyf Warhurst, cultural commentator & host of The Moment podcast Audio Producer: Lu Hill Become a Mamamia subscriber: https://www.mamamia.com.au/subscribeSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

For years, Prince Andrew held dozens — some estimates put it around 200 — of charity patronages and official royal-charity affiliations. Through Prince Andrew Charitable Trust (PACT), and initiatives such as his youth-education and entrepreneurship efforts, he presented himself as a public-spirited royal using his status to do good. That network of charities and institutions provided him with a veneer of respectability and influence: being associated with educational causes, technology and enterprise awards, youth outreach, and philanthropic work helped him cultivate an image of legitimacy and public service. This charitable web likely served as a buffer — intended to reassure the public and institutions that despite the scandal swirling around him, he remained a committed royal working for social good.But as the scandal involving Jeffrey Epstein and abuse allegations gained traction, that armor cracked. After his controversial 2019 media interview, many charities began severing ties: dozens publicly removed him as patron, fearing reputational damage.  Moreover, regulatory scrutiny exposed mis-management in his own charity: the watchdog closed PACT after finding unlawful payments (hundreds of thousands of pounds) to a trustee linked to his staff, forcing the charity to return the money.   What began as a shield against scandal became, for many observers, proof that his charitable works lacked proper governance — and that the network he hoped would protect him instead deepened the perceived misconduct.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

New reporting has intensified scrutiny around Prince Andrew following allegations that he sent a young woman to Jeffrey Epstein, who subsequently reported being sexually abused by Epstein. According to accounts now under renewed examination, Andrew allegedly facilitated the introduction under the guise of networking and opportunity, despite the well-known concerns already circulating within elite circles about Epstein's predatory behavior. If accurate, the allegation positions Andrew not as a peripheral figure who exercised poor judgment, but as an active participant who enabled access to a victim who later suffered harm. It also raises profound questions about what Andrew knew, when he knew it, and whether he deliberately ignored the warning signs attached to Epstein's reputation.The allegation further undermines Andrew's long-standing public defense that he was simply “unaware” of Epstein's criminal behavior and maintained only a surface-level association. Instead, it depicts a scenario in which he may have used his status to funnel women into Epstein's social orbit while simultaneously portraying himself as detached and uninvolved. Legal analysts and victim-advocacy groups argue that this development demands formal investigation rather than public relations statements or royal damage control. If corroborated, this would represent a grave escalation in Andrew's alleged misconduct — shifting the narrative from questionable association to potential facilitation of abuse, with implications that extend far beyond personal embarrassment or reputational decline.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Andrew told Epstein victim: I know he's been 'inappropriate' with another woman... a YEAR before ex-prince met his accuser Virginia Giuffre, lawyers for abused actress claim | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Disgraced lawyer Alex Murdaugh is set to appear in court in 2026 as he seeks a new trial, with the South Carolina Supreme Court agreeing to hear his appeal regarding his murder conviction on February 11, 2026, at 9:30 a.m.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

New reporting has intensified scrutiny around Prince Andrew following allegations that he sent a young woman to Jeffrey Epstein, who subsequently reported being sexually abused by Epstein. According to accounts now under renewed examination, Andrew allegedly facilitated the introduction under the guise of networking and opportunity, despite the well-known concerns already circulating within elite circles about Epstein's predatory behavior. If accurate, the allegation positions Andrew not as a peripheral figure who exercised poor judgment, but as an active participant who enabled access to a victim who later suffered harm. It also raises profound questions about what Andrew knew, when he knew it, and whether he deliberately ignored the warning signs attached to Epstein's reputation.The allegation further undermines Andrew's long-standing public defense that he was simply “unaware” of Epstein's criminal behavior and maintained only a surface-level association. Instead, it depicts a scenario in which he may have used his status to funnel women into Epstein's social orbit while simultaneously portraying himself as detached and uninvolved. Legal analysts and victim-advocacy groups argue that this development demands formal investigation rather than public relations statements or royal damage control. If corroborated, this would represent a grave escalation in Andrew's alleged misconduct — shifting the narrative from questionable association to potential facilitation of abuse, with implications that extend far beyond personal embarrassment or reputational decline.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Andrew told Epstein victim: I know he's been 'inappropriate' with another woman... a YEAR before ex-prince met his accuser Virginia Giuffre, lawyers for abused actress claim | Daily Mail OnlineBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

For years, Prince Andrew held dozens — some estimates put it around 200 — of charity patronages and official royal-charity affiliations. Through Prince Andrew Charitable Trust (PACT), and initiatives such as his youth-education and entrepreneurship efforts, he presented himself as a public-spirited royal using his status to do good. That network of charities and institutions provided him with a veneer of respectability and influence: being associated with educational causes, technology and enterprise awards, youth outreach, and philanthropic work helped him cultivate an image of legitimacy and public service. This charitable web likely served as a buffer — intended to reassure the public and institutions that despite the scandal swirling around him, he remained a committed royal working for social good.But as the scandal involving Jeffrey Epstein and abuse allegations gained traction, that armor cracked. After his controversial 2019 media interview, many charities began severing ties: dozens publicly removed him as patron, fearing reputational damage.  Moreover, regulatory scrutiny exposed mis-management in his own charity: the watchdog closed PACT after finding unlawful payments (hundreds of thousands of pounds) to a trustee linked to his staff, forcing the charity to return the money.   What began as a shield against scandal became, for many observers, proof that his charitable works lacked proper governance — and that the network he hoped would protect him instead deepened the perceived misconduct.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Following his announcement that he would step back from public royal roles in late 2019/early 2020, the House of Commons and its members began to publicly question the accountability and oversight of members of the royal family. Several MPs raised concerns over Prince Andrew's continued benefits from the Crown Estate, his security protection funded by taxpayers, and the lack of transparency around his finances and relationships—especially given his links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The Commons, traditionally reticent to query royal affairs, saw backbenchers and opposition figures press for measures such as parliamentary debate on his conduct and the possibility of formal motions to strip his titles.While the government repeatedly declined to initiate formal debate or legislation at that time, citing constitutional convention and the royal family's desire to handle internal matters, the pressure in the Commons continued to build. MPs from multiple parties proposed or supported private-member bills aimed at enabling Parliament to remove titles and honours from royalty, and select-committee scrutiny was mooted around his lease of the 30-room Windsor residence, Royal Lodge. In essence, the Commons signalled a shift: even if direct action was deferred, the principle that royals should not be completely shielded from political accountability had gained ground.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Washington DC...along with the rest of America is reeling after the tragic attack on our National Guard Wednesday afternoon. The two National Guard members who were attacked remain in critical condition...and America is praying for their full recovery. Unfortunately...a reporter from MSNOW seems to be defending the DC attacker instead of defending the National Guard. We reveal and react to an MSNOW segment with Ken Dilanian. We question the reporting from Ken Dilanian...and discuss the possibility that MSNOW ended the segment early because they felt Ken Dilanian was being inappropriate. We also react to the attacker being an Afghan national...and question why America continues to harbor people who refuse to assimilate to American culture. SUBSCRIBE TO BEHIND THE LINE - SHORTS: https://www.youtube.com/@btlshorts-84

The 2022 documentary Prince Andrew: Banished (streaming on Peacock) traces the life and fall of Prince Andrew, Duke of York from a privileged royal heir to a pariah within the monarchy. The film lays out how his upbringing—born into the spotlight and dubbed the “spare” heir—combined with a taste for social privilege and celebrity to set the stage for his association with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. It uses archival footage and interviews with royal insiders, journalists, and palace staff to show how Andrew's decisions—his friendship with Epstein, his public gaffes, and his fixation on status—gradually eroded the monarchy's image.In its second half the documentary zeroes in on the scandal that pushed Andrew into disgrace: the accusations of sexual misconduct linked to Epstein's trafficking network and the infamous 2019 interview that became a PR disaster for the royals. The narration details how Andrew's account of his friendship with Epstein and his responses to allegations—such as his “Pizza Express” remark and his professed inability to sweat—were widely ridiculed and damning. The consequence: Andrew stepped back from public duties, lost his patronages, and saw his public reputation collapse. The film positions his downfall not as a sudden event but as the inevitable result of decades of privilege, cronyism, and failure to reckon with accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The 2022 documentary Prince Andrew: Banished (streaming on Peacock) traces the life and fall of Prince Andrew, Duke of York from a privileged royal heir to a pariah within the monarchy. The film lays out how his upbringing—born into the spotlight and dubbed the “spare” heir—combined with a taste for social privilege and celebrity to set the stage for his association with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. It uses archival footage and interviews with royal insiders, journalists, and palace staff to show how Andrew's decisions—his friendship with Epstein, his public gaffes, and his fixation on status—gradually eroded the monarchy's image.In its second half the documentary zeroes in on the scandal that pushed Andrew into disgrace: the accusations of sexual misconduct linked to Epstein's trafficking network and the infamous 2019 interview that became a PR disaster for the royals. The narration details how Andrew's account of his friendship with Epstein and his responses to allegations—such as his “Pizza Express” remark and his professed inability to sweat—were widely ridiculed and damning. The consequence: Andrew stepped back from public duties, lost his patronages, and saw his public reputation collapse. The film positions his downfall not as a sudden event but as the inevitable result of decades of privilege, cronyism, and failure to reckon with accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Following his announcement that he would step back from public royal roles in late 2019/early 2020, the House of Commons and its members began to publicly question the accountability and oversight of members of the royal family. Several MPs raised concerns over Prince Andrew's continued benefits from the Crown Estate, his security protection funded by taxpayers, and the lack of transparency around his finances and relationships—especially given his links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The Commons, traditionally reticent to query royal affairs, saw backbenchers and opposition figures press for measures such as parliamentary debate on his conduct and the possibility of formal motions to strip his titles.While the government repeatedly declined to initiate formal debate or legislation at that time, citing constitutional convention and the royal family's desire to handle internal matters, the pressure in the Commons continued to build. MPs from multiple parties proposed or supported private-member bills aimed at enabling Parliament to remove titles and honours from royalty, and select-committee scrutiny was mooted around his lease of the 30-room Windsor residence, Royal Lodge. In essence, the Commons signalled a shift: even if direct action was deferred, the principle that royals should not be completely shielded from political accountability had gained ground.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The 2022 documentary Prince Andrew: Banished (streaming on Peacock) traces the life and fall of Prince Andrew, Duke of York from a privileged royal heir to a pariah within the monarchy. The film lays out how his upbringing—born into the spotlight and dubbed the “spare” heir—combined with a taste for social privilege and celebrity to set the stage for his association with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. It uses archival footage and interviews with royal insiders, journalists, and palace staff to show how Andrew's decisions—his friendship with Epstein, his public gaffes, and his fixation on status—gradually eroded the monarchy's image.In its second half the documentary zeroes in on the scandal that pushed Andrew into disgrace: the accusations of sexual misconduct linked to Epstein's trafficking network and the infamous 2019 interview that became a PR disaster for the royals. The narration details how Andrew's account of his friendship with Epstein and his responses to allegations—such as his “Pizza Express” remark and his professed inability to sweat—were widely ridiculed and damning. The consequence: Andrew stepped back from public duties, lost his patronages, and saw his public reputation collapse. The film positions his downfall not as a sudden event but as the inevitable result of decades of privilege, cronyism, and failure to reckon with accountability.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Prince Andrew's continued evasion of accountability has transformed him into a central figure in the fallout surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's criminal empire. Born into one of the most privileged positions on earth, he repeatedly placed himself in Epstein's inner circle even after Epstein's conviction, including reportedly staying at his home in New York after the scandal was public. A widely criticized BBC interview intended to clear his name instead became a defining moment of public collapse, in which Andrew offered implausible explanations involving a Pizza Express alibi and a medical claim that he could not sweat—responses that significantly damaged his credibility. The now-iconic photograph of Andrew with Virginia Giuffre and Epstein's documented pattern of exploiting underage girls further intensified scrutiny, raising serious questions about the prince's judgment, integrity, and transparency.Andrew has repeatedly declined opportunities to speak with U.S. authorities and has now let multiple congressional deadlines pass without cooperation, retreating into royal seclusion as public pressure mounts. The royal family has since removed many of his public roles and military honors in an effort to contain the damage, but the strategy has only highlighted the seriousness of the allegations and the depth of Andrew's involvement with Epstein. His silence has become its own indictment, signaling fear rather than innocence, and reinforcing the perception that accountability is being avoided rather than confronted.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Larry Summers spent decades leaving his fingerprints on Greater Boston's academic and political institutions. Now, as details of Summers' friendship with Jeffrey Epstein trickle out, those institutions face a reckoning.

Prince Andrew's continued evasion of accountability has transformed him into a central figure in the fallout surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's criminal empire. Born into one of the most privileged positions on earth, he repeatedly placed himself in Epstein's inner circle even after Epstein's conviction, including reportedly staying at his home in New York after the scandal was public. A widely criticized BBC interview intended to clear his name instead became a defining moment of public collapse, in which Andrew offered implausible explanations involving a Pizza Express alibi and a medical claim that he could not sweat—responses that significantly damaged his credibility. The now-iconic photograph of Andrew with Virginia Giuffre and Epstein's documented pattern of exploiting underage girls further intensified scrutiny, raising serious questions about the prince's judgment, integrity, and transparency.Andrew has repeatedly declined opportunities to speak with U.S. authorities and has now let multiple congressional deadlines pass without cooperation, retreating into royal seclusion as public pressure mounts. The royal family has since removed many of his public roles and military honors in an effort to contain the damage, but the strategy has only highlighted the seriousness of the allegations and the depth of Andrew's involvement with Epstein. His silence has become its own indictment, signaling fear rather than innocence, and reinforcing the perception that accountability is being avoided rather than confronted.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

Prince Andrew's continued evasion of accountability has transformed him into a central figure in the fallout surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's criminal empire. Born into one of the most privileged positions on earth, he repeatedly placed himself in Epstein's inner circle even after Epstein's conviction, including reportedly staying at his home in New York after the scandal was public. A widely criticized BBC interview intended to clear his name instead became a defining moment of public collapse, in which Andrew offered implausible explanations involving a Pizza Express alibi and a medical claim that he could not sweat—responses that significantly damaged his credibility. The now-iconic photograph of Andrew with Virginia Giuffre and Epstein's documented pattern of exploiting underage girls further intensified scrutiny, raising serious questions about the prince's judgment, integrity, and transparency.Andrew has repeatedly declined opportunities to speak with U.S. authorities and has now let multiple congressional deadlines pass without cooperation, retreating into royal seclusion as public pressure mounts. The royal family has since removed many of his public roles and military honors in an effort to contain the damage, but the strategy has only highlighted the seriousness of the allegations and the depth of Andrew's involvement with Epstein. His silence has become its own indictment, signaling fear rather than innocence, and reinforcing the perception that accountability is being avoided rather than confronted.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

People like Prince Andrew live by a rule book that the rest of us don't even get to see. When ordinary people get accused of wrongdoing, they face real consequences — investigations, charges, public humiliation, the works. But when it's a royal, the system suddenly becomes very delicate, very cautious, and very secretive. Doors that slam shut for everyone else magically open for them. Andrew, for instance, managed to dodge law enforcement interviews, avoid depositions for years, and settle a major sexual abuse lawsuit without ever admitting guilt. Every step of the way, his titles, connections, and family name served as a kind of diplomatic armor — the privilege of being born above accountability.That's the true “Rule Book for Royals”: deny everything, hide behind tradition, and let the palace machinery manage the damage. The same institutions that claim moral leadership close ranks to protect their own, wrapping scandal in ceremony and silence. For men like Andrew, shame isn't career-ending — it's just an image problem to be managed by courtiers, PR consultants, and lawyers on retainer. The royal playbook isn't about justice or truth; it's about preservation. And as long as the crown still glitters, the rule book that governs them will always have different laws — and fewer consequences.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Calls for Prince Andrew to speak with the FBI began in late 2019, shortly after Jeffrey Epstein's arrest and subsequent death, when U.S. investigators turned their attention to Epstein's inner circle. Andrew's long-standing friendship with Epstein — including his stays at Epstein's New York mansion and the widely circulated photo with Virginia Giuffre — made him a person of interest in the ongoing probe. U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman publicly urged the Duke of York to cooperate, revealing that Andrew had provided “zero cooperation” despite his earlier public pledge to assist investigators. The announcement set off a firestorm in both the UK and U.S., with media outlets accusing the prince of hiding behind royal privilege and fueling public outrage over perceived double standards.By early 2020, the pressure only intensified. Lawmakers, victims' advocates, and legal experts demanded that Andrew face questioning under oath, arguing that his testimony could shed light on Epstein's trafficking network and the powerful figures who enabled it. The FBI reportedly reached out multiple times through formal channels, but Andrew's legal team stalled, citing procedural concerns and jurisdictional issues. His refusal to cooperate became an international embarrassment for Buckingham Palace, further damaging the royal family's reputation and strengthening the perception that Andrew was being shielded from accountability. What began as calls for cooperation soon evolved into a symbol of royal impunity — the moment when the world saw how far the palace would go to protect one of its own.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the early 2000s, while serving in an official capacity as the UK's Trade Envoy, Prince Andrew travelled to Thailand for what was publicly described as a diplomatic mission. According to historian Andrew Lownie, the visit included a stay in a five-star Bangkok hotel rather than at the British embassy, and during what was designated “private time” in the official itinerary he is alleged to have had up to 40 sex workers brought to his hotel suite over a four-day span.The allegations further claim that taxpayer funds were used to cover that trip, and that diplomatic and royal staff helped facilitate the hotel booking and stay. If true, this incident raises serious ethical questions about the use of public office for personal indulgence, the accountability of royals on trade missions, and the lack of transparency in the files covering Andrew's envoy years (2001-2011).During the early 2000s, Prince Andrew is reported to have visited Jeffrey Epstein's New Mexico ranch — identified as Zorro Ranch, near Santa Fe — which has become notorious in civil suits and media scrutiny for alleged sex-trafficking and under-age abuse claims. The allegations in court documents and depositions assert that Epstein used the ranch for illicit activity, including recruiting minors for so-called “massages” and transporting guests to the property via private landing strip. Among the names listed in these documents is Prince Andrew, though the papers do not allege direct sexual activity by him at the ranch; rather, the presence of his name in guest logs or mentions in deposition material raises serious reputational concerns.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Virginia Giuffre's lawyers have accused Prince Andrew of engaging in “extreme and outrageous conduct,” alleging that he not only sexually abused her when she was a teenager trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein but also sought to discredit her in the years that followed. According to the Daily Mail's report, the claims stem from newly filed court documents in which Giuffre's legal team asserts that Andrew and others associated with Epstein engaged in a deliberate campaign to smear her reputation and undermine her credibility as a victim. The filing reportedly portrays Andrew's denials and legal maneuvers as part of a wider effort to protect himself and the powerful figures within Epstein's network, drawing renewed attention to his prior settlement with Giuffre in 2022 — a deal said to have cost him millions and which did not include any admission of guilt.The accusations come amid continuing scrutiny of Prince Andrew's conduct and his lingering ties to Epstein's world, long after his attempt to rehabilitate his public image following his forced withdrawal from royal duties. Giuffre's attorneys have framed the allegations as emblematic of a broader pattern of intimidation and gaslighting endured by Epstein's victims, arguing that powerful men like Andrew weaponized their influence to suppress accountability. For Andrew, the renewed legal focus could reignite public and political pressure on Buckingham Palace, which has spent years distancing the monarchy from the scandal. While his team has not issued a detailed response to the latest claims, the development underscores how the Epstein saga continues to shadow the disgraced prince — legally, morally, and reputationally.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

When asked about Prince Andrew's exile from royal life and the Epstein scandal that forced King Charles to strip his brother of his military titles and patronages, Donald Trump struck a tone of sympathy — not for the victims, but for the Windsors. Speaking aboard Air Force One, Trump said, “I feel very badly. It's a terrible thing that's happened to the family. That's been a tragic situation. It's too bad. I mean, I feel badly for the family.” In classic Trump fashion, the comments came off as tone-deaf, framing the ordeal as a misfortune that befell the royals rather than a reckoning for Andrew's own actions or associations. He offered no mention of Virginia Giuffre, the survivors, or the broader scandal surrounding Epstein's network — only sorrow for the House of Windsor's discomfort.The remarks were quickly criticized as another example of Trump's tendency to sympathize with power over accountability. Rather than condemning Andrew's behavior or the pattern of privilege that shielded him for years, Trump painted the royals as victims of circumstance — as if Andrew had simply stumbled into bad luck rather than disgrace of his own making. His comments echoed the same populist-elite paradox that defines his persona: railing against “the establishment” while showing deference to its crowned members when they fall. For many observers, the takeaway was clear — once again, Trump's empathy seemed to extend only upward, toward the powerful, not toward the people whose lives were destroyed by Epstein and the system that protected him.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Trump says he feels 'badly' for royal family over Andrew-Epstein scandal