Épisodes

  • Thalia Graves And Her Diddy Allegations (Part 3)

    Thalia Graves And Her Diddy Allegations (Part 3)
    Jan 28 2026
    Thalia Graves has filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs, accusing him of drugging, raping, and recording the assault in 2001. Graves alleges that while she was dating one of Combs' employees, she was invited to a meeting with Combs and his head of security, Joseph Sherman. During the car ride to Combs' Bad Boy Recording Studios in New York, she was given a drink she believes was laced with a drug. Graves states she lost consciousness and awoke to find herself bound and naked in Combs' office, where she was brutally assaulted by both men. Her lawsuit further claims that Combs and Sherman recorded the assault and later disseminated the footage without her consent, which she only became aware of in 2023. The trauma from this incident, Graves says, has caused her years of severe emotional distress, including PTSD, depression, and anxiety.


    This lawsuit is one of several similar accusations against Combs, and it coincides with his recent federal indictment on charges related to sex trafficking and racketeering.


    In this episode, we take a look at the very disturbing allegations.



    to contact me:

    bobbbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    thalia-graves-sean-combs-rape-suit-1.pdf (deadline.com)
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    10 min
  • Thalia Graves And Her Diddy Allegations (Part 2)

    Thalia Graves And Her Diddy Allegations (Part 2)
    Jan 28 2026
    Thalia Graves has filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs, accusing him of drugging, raping, and recording the assault in 2001. Graves alleges that while she was dating one of Combs' employees, she was invited to a meeting with Combs and his head of security, Joseph Sherman. During the car ride to Combs' Bad Boy Recording Studios in New York, she was given a drink she believes was laced with a drug. Graves states she lost consciousness and awoke to find herself bound and naked in Combs' office, where she was brutally assaulted by both men. Her lawsuit further claims that Combs and Sherman recorded the assault and later disseminated the footage without her consent, which she only became aware of in 2023. The trauma from this incident, Graves says, has caused her years of severe emotional distress, including PTSD, depression, and anxiety.


    This lawsuit is one of several similar accusations against Combs, and it coincides with his recent federal indictment on charges related to sex trafficking and racketeering.


    In this episode, we take a look at the very disturbing allegations.



    to contact me:

    bobbbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    thalia-graves-sean-combs-rape-suit-1.pdf (deadline.com)
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    12 min
  • Thalia Graves And Her Diddy Allegations (Part 1)

    Thalia Graves And Her Diddy Allegations (Part 1)
    Jan 27 2026
    Thalia Graves has filed a lawsuit against Sean "Diddy" Combs, accusing him of drugging, raping, and recording the assault in 2001. Graves alleges that while she was dating one of Combs' employees, she was invited to a meeting with Combs and his head of security, Joseph Sherman. During the car ride to Combs' Bad Boy Recording Studios in New York, she was given a drink she believes was laced with a drug. Graves states she lost consciousness and awoke to find herself bound and naked in Combs' office, where she was brutally assaulted by both men. Her lawsuit further claims that Combs and Sherman recorded the assault and later disseminated the footage without her consent, which she only became aware of in 2023. The trauma from this incident, Graves says, has caused her years of severe emotional distress, including PTSD, depression, and anxiety.


    This lawsuit is one of several similar accusations against Combs, and it coincides with his recent federal indictment on charges related to sex trafficking and racketeering.


    In this episode, we take a look at the very disturbing allegations.



    to contact me:

    bobbbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    thalia-graves-sean-combs-rape-suit-1.pdf (deadline.com)
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    11 min
  • Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s Deposition in Edwards and Cassell v. Alan Dershowitz (Part 3) (1/27/26)

    Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s Deposition in Edwards and Cassell v. Alan Dershowitz (Part 3) (1/27/26)
    Jan 27 2026
    The videotaped deposition of Virginia Roberts Giuffre taken on January 16, 2016, in Fort Lauderdale sits at the center of the bitter legal war between Epstein survivors’ attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell and Alan Dershowitz, who was accused by Giuffre of sexually abusing her when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. In the deposition, Giuffre gives a detailed, sworn narrative of how she was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell, groomed, trafficked to powerful men, and moved across multiple jurisdictions while still underage. She identifies Epstein’s residences, flight patterns, intermediaries, and specific encounters, placing her allegations firmly inside the broader trafficking structure rather than as isolated claims. The testimony was preserved on video precisely because her lawyers anticipated that credibility, consistency, and demeanor would become central issues in the defamation battle that followed. It also captured Giuffre under oath before years of public pressure, media narratives, and evolving legal strategies could reshape the record.

    What made this deposition legally explosive was its direct role in the defamation and civil litigation between Dershowitz and the Edwards–Cassell team, after Giuffre publicly accused Dershowitz and he responded with an aggressive campaign claiming she had fabricated the allegations and falsely implicated him. The video became a critical piece of evidence in determining whether Giuffre’s statements were knowingly false or grounded in a consistent trafficking account supported by contemporaneous detail. Dershowitz’s lawyers later argued that contradictions, memory gaps, and timeline disputes undermined her credibility, while Giuffre’s side pointed to the overall coherence of her narrative and the corroborating travel and contact records emerging in parallel cases. Long before the unsealing battles and public reckonings, this deposition quietly locked in one of the earliest comprehensive sworn accounts of Epstein’s trafficking network—and the legal fault line that would later fracture the reputations of some of the most powerful lawyers and institutions tied to the case.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    1257-12.pdf
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    13 min
  • Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s Deposition in Edwards and Cassell v. Alan Dershowitz (Part 2) (1/27/26)

    Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s Deposition in Edwards and Cassell v. Alan Dershowitz (Part 2) (1/27/26)
    Jan 27 2026
    The videotaped deposition of Virginia Roberts Giuffre taken on January 16, 2016, in Fort Lauderdale sits at the center of the bitter legal war between Epstein survivors’ attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell and Alan Dershowitz, who was accused by Giuffre of sexually abusing her when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. In the deposition, Giuffre gives a detailed, sworn narrative of how she was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell, groomed, trafficked to powerful men, and moved across multiple jurisdictions while still underage. She identifies Epstein’s residences, flight patterns, intermediaries, and specific encounters, placing her allegations firmly inside the broader trafficking structure rather than as isolated claims. The testimony was preserved on video precisely because her lawyers anticipated that credibility, consistency, and demeanor would become central issues in the defamation battle that followed. It also captured Giuffre under oath before years of public pressure, media narratives, and evolving legal strategies could reshape the record.

    What made this deposition legally explosive was its direct role in the defamation and civil litigation between Dershowitz and the Edwards–Cassell team, after Giuffre publicly accused Dershowitz and he responded with an aggressive campaign claiming she had fabricated the allegations and falsely implicated him. The video became a critical piece of evidence in determining whether Giuffre’s statements were knowingly false or grounded in a consistent trafficking account supported by contemporaneous detail. Dershowitz’s lawyers later argued that contradictions, memory gaps, and timeline disputes undermined her credibility, while Giuffre’s side pointed to the overall coherence of her narrative and the corroborating travel and contact records emerging in parallel cases. Long before the unsealing battles and public reckonings, this deposition quietly locked in one of the earliest comprehensive sworn accounts of Epstein’s trafficking network—and the legal fault line that would later fracture the reputations of some of the most powerful lawyers and institutions tied to the case.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    1257-12.pdf
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    12 min
  • Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s Deposition in Edwards and Cassell v. Alan Dershowitz (Part 1) (1/27/26)

    Virginia Roberts Giuffre’s Deposition in Edwards and Cassell v. Alan Dershowitz (Part 1) (1/27/26)
    Jan 27 2026
    The videotaped deposition of Virginia Roberts Giuffre taken on January 16, 2016, in Fort Lauderdale sits at the center of the bitter legal war between Epstein survivors’ attorneys Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell and Alan Dershowitz, who was accused by Giuffre of sexually abusing her when she was a minor trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein. In the deposition, Giuffre gives a detailed, sworn narrative of how she was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell, groomed, trafficked to powerful men, and moved across multiple jurisdictions while still underage. She identifies Epstein’s residences, flight patterns, intermediaries, and specific encounters, placing her allegations firmly inside the broader trafficking structure rather than as isolated claims. The testimony was preserved on video precisely because her lawyers anticipated that credibility, consistency, and demeanor would become central issues in the defamation battle that followed. It also captured Giuffre under oath before years of public pressure, media narratives, and evolving legal strategies could reshape the record.

    What made this deposition legally explosive was its direct role in the defamation and civil litigation between Dershowitz and the Edwards–Cassell team, after Giuffre publicly accused Dershowitz and he responded with an aggressive campaign claiming she had fabricated the allegations and falsely implicated him. The video became a critical piece of evidence in determining whether Giuffre’s statements were knowingly false or grounded in a consistent trafficking account supported by contemporaneous detail. Dershowitz’s lawyers later argued that contradictions, memory gaps, and timeline disputes undermined her credibility, while Giuffre’s side pointed to the overall coherence of her narrative and the corroborating travel and contact records emerging in parallel cases. Long before the unsealing battles and public reckonings, this deposition quietly locked in one of the earliest comprehensive sworn accounts of Epstein’s trafficking network—and the legal fault line that would later fracture the reputations of some of the most powerful lawyers and institutions tied to the case.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    1257-12.pdf
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    15 min
  • Epstein’s Last Paranoia: The FOIA Request That Exposed His Fear of Federal Surveillance (1/27/26)

    Epstein’s Last Paranoia: The FOIA Request That Exposed His Fear of Federal Surveillance (1/27/26)
    Jan 27 2026
    In 2014, Jeffrey Epstein — through his estate’s representatives — submitted a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to U.S. Customs and Border Protection seeking records that would reveal whether and how he had been subject to any monitoring, surveillance, questioning, or investigation by the agency years after his 2008 guilty plea to solicitation of prostitution involving a minor. The request asked for documents that could illuminate how, why, or when Epstein was flagged as a subject of interest by border officials, a detail long obscured from public view. This unusual FOIA filing, uncovered by investigative reporter Jason Leopold, shows Epstein actively trying to understand the scope of government scrutiny against him long before the recent push to release a much broader cache of files tied to his case.

    The story comes amid ongoing controversy surrounding the federal government’s handling of material related to Epstein’s criminal conduct and alleged networks. Under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed by Congress in November 2025, the Department of Justice was required to release all investigative records within 30 days, but as of early 2026 had only shared a tiny fraction of the millions of documents potentially responsive to that mandate. Epstein’s FOIA request adds another layer to the public’s scrutiny of what information federal agencies collected and retained about him, and how much remains hidden or heavily redacted decades after key events in the case.


    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    Jeffrey Epstein Filed a FOIA Request - Bloomberg
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    12 min
  • The Justice Department Won’t Release the Epstein Files — So What Now? (1/27/26)

    The Justice Department Won’t Release the Epstein Files — So What Now? (1/27/26)
    Jan 27 2026
    Despite the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA) requiring the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release all unclassified investigative files on Jeffrey Epstein by the legal deadline of 19 December 2025, only a tiny portion has been made public, triggering frustration among victims’ advocates and lawmakers. Legal experts told the Guardian that efforts to compel full disclosure have been stymied; an attempt to appoint an independent monitor (a special master) to oversee the release failed, and the DOJ has shown little willingness to comply voluntarily. Attorneys representing survivors argued that transparency is essential for healing, accountability, and justice, and urged continued legal pressure through litigation, congressional oversight, Freedom of Information Act enforcement and sustained public scrutiny to force compliance.


    Experts also highlighted structural weaknesses in the current law — particularly that it lacks clear enforcement mechanisms or judicial oversight — which have allowed the DOJ to delay and limit disclosures with few consequences. Congressional leaders like Representatives Ro Khanna and Thomas Massie, who co-sponsored the EFTA, said they will pursue every available legal avenue to ensure the files are released, including potential lawsuits or legislative fixes. Observers warned that without stronger enforcement tools, truth and closure for Epstein’s survivors may remain elusive, as the agency charged with upholding the law is perceived to be flouting it.



    to contact me:

    bobbycapucci@protonmail.com



    source:

    What else can be done to force Trump’s DoJ to release all the Epstein files? Legal experts weigh in | Jeffrey Epstein | The Guardian
    Afficher plus Afficher moins
    15 min