Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're getting right back to
Speaker 1: the New Mexico interim report on Jeffrey Epstein and his
Speaker 1: behavior in crimes in New Mexico. Sdny's twenty eighteen nineteen
Speaker 1: investigation into Epstein. In twenty eighteen, the FBI, SDNY and
Speaker 1: the New York Police Department opened to child sexual exploitation
Speaker 1: investigation of Epstein and others. This investigation culminated in an
Speaker 1: indictment returned by a federal grand jury in New York City.
Speaker 1: This indictment alleged that from at least two thousand and
Speaker 1: two through at least two thousand and five, Jeffrey Epstein
Speaker 1: enticed and recruited and caused to be enticed in recruited
Speaker 1: dozens of minor girls to visit his mansions in New
Speaker 1: York and his estate in Palm Beach, Florida, to engage
Speaker 1: in sex acts with him, after which he would give
Speaker 1: his victims hundreds of dollars in cash. In order to
Speaker 1: maintain and increase the supply of victims, Epstein also paid
Speaker 1: certain victims to recruit additional underage girls whom he could
Speaker 1: similarly abuse. In this way, Epstein created a vast network
Speaker 1: of underage victims for him to sexually exploit, often on
Speaker 1: a daily basis, in locations including New York and Palm Beach.
Speaker 1: The indictment does not allege conduct by Epstein occurring in
Speaker 1: New Mexico. Epstein was charged with sex trafficking and three
Speaker 1: minor victims in violation of US Code Section fifteen ninety one,
Speaker 1: and conspiracy and violation of US Code eighteen, section three
Speaker 1: seventy one. At this time, the Commission is unaware of
Speaker 1: any information showing that a US attorney for the District
Speaker 1: of New Mexico took any action with regard to Epstein
Speaker 1: prior to US Attorney John Anderson doing so in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 1: By letter dated May fourteenth, twenty nineteen, New Mexico oh
Speaker 1: Deputy Attorney General Clara Moran reached out to US Attorney
Speaker 1: John Anderson. She stated, it's my understanding that federal prosecutors
Speaker 1: are seeking to identify victims who may have been trafficked
Speaker 1: or sexually exploited by Jeffrey Epstein and others at his
Speaker 1: ranch in Stanley, New Mexico. She advised that the Office
Speaker 1: of the Attorney General has been actively engaged in an
Speaker 1: ongoing investigation and review of the matter, which may also
Speaker 1: include a referral of certain criminal matters within the exclusive
Speaker 1: statutory authority of the federal government. She asked to arrange
Speaker 1: a meeting to deconflict on sensitive law enforcement matters and
Speaker 1: discuss possible strategies to streamline investigation and charging. John Anderson
Speaker 1: responded by letter dated May seventeenth, twenty nineteen, stating that
Speaker 1: his office certainly supports your investigation and a review of
Speaker 1: these matters, and we are happy to receive any information
Speaker 1: you may wish to share as a relation to offenses
Speaker 1: over which this office may have exclusive jurisdiction. He advised
Speaker 1: that at this time, however, we are not in a
Speaker 1: position to share any information relating to these matters or
Speaker 1: discuss any possible coordination. On August sixteenth, twenty nineteen, an
Speaker 1: assistant US Attorney for the District of New Mexico reached
Speaker 1: out to the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District
Speaker 1: of New York regarding New Mexico related Epstein matters. A
Speaker 1: follow up email was sent again hoping to schedule a
Speaker 1: follow up call with you concerning Epstein's New Mexico conduct
Speaker 1: and property. Sometime this week. A call was set up
Speaker 1: for September twelfth, twenty nineteen, and the US Attorney's Office
Speaker 1: for the Southern District of New York advised we spoke
Speaker 1: with the New Mexico AG's office back in twenty nineteen.
Speaker 1: In essence, they agreed to seize any investigation into sex
Speaker 1: trafficking and share whatever they have gathered to date regarding
Speaker 1: sex trafficking activity with our office. We agreed that they
Speaker 1: were free to proceed with whatever other investigation on related
Speaker 1: to sex trafficking they may have concerning Epstein, and told
Speaker 1: them that at the conclusion of our case, we'd passed
Speaker 1: along any information we may have gathered about state crimes
Speaker 1: that were committed in their jurisdiction. We have not communicated
Speaker 1: with anyone from the New Mexico AG's office since that
Speaker 1: conversation in twenty nineteen. On October eleventh, twenty nineteen, USAO
Speaker 1: and m sent STNY and email stating, when we last spoke,
Speaker 1: you expressed a willingness to review New Mexico specific questions
Speaker 1: that we would like to be included in future interviews
Speaker 1: of Epstein victims. While I'm certain that you already cover
Speaker 1: the pertinent questions. We did not want to turn down
Speaker 1: the invitation to submit a set of proposed questions, which
Speaker 1: I have attached. As we mentioned on the phone, we
Speaker 1: are here to assist with any investigation into New Mexico
Speaker 1: related matters, including the submission of any application for a
Speaker 1: search warrant. Attorney General Hector Baldaris wrote John Anderson on
Speaker 1: October fifteenth, twenty nineteen. He pointed out that his office
Speaker 1: has been actively investigating and assisting other state and federal
Speaker 1: agencies with their investigation related to criminality perpetrated in New
Speaker 1: Mexico by Jeffrey Epstein. He advised that they had been
Speaker 1: in communication with Assistant United States Attorney for Southern District
Speaker 1: of New York and have provided them with material supportive
Speaker 1: of their federal investigation and allegations of misconduct by Epstein's
Speaker 1: possible conspirators. He also requested that the US Attorney's office
Speaker 1: explore initiating the process to seize Epstein's New Mexico land
Speaker 1: holdings for the eventual benefit of survivors of these acts
Speaker 1: and the people of the state of New Mexico. On
Speaker 1: November nineteenth, twenty nineteen, the USAO n M again reached
Speaker 1: out to the SDNY, seeking to set up a call
Speaker 1: to discuss the reporting concerning Jane Doe fifteen, who had
Speaker 1: reported that she had been sexually assaulted by Epstein on
Speaker 1: Zoro Ranch. That designation in sdnwy's own numbering and does
Speaker 1: not correspond to the commissions Jane Doe one through five.
Speaker 1: On July fifteenth, twenty twenty, the USAO n M again
Speaker 1: reached out to the SDNY. We were pleased to see
Speaker 1: that conduct in New Mexico formed the basis of one
Speaker 1: of your overt acts. I know that you all are
Speaker 1: very busy, but if you have a moment for a
Speaker 1: brief call to discuss the impact, if any, on the
Speaker 1: new indictment on seizure forfeiture of Epstein's New Mexico property,
Speaker 1: I would appreciate it. As you are aware this is
Speaker 1: an issue, my US attorney, John Anderson has asked me
Speaker 1: to track the District of New Mexico sought to arrange
Speaker 1: follow up calls again on July twentieth, twenty twenty, May fourth,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty one, and May fifth, twenty twenty one. It's
Speaker 1: not fully clear from the available documentaryation what exactly was
Speaker 1: discussed during any calls. The usao NM explicitly offered to
Speaker 1: assist SDNY with the search warrant application for Zoro Ranch.
Speaker 1: No application was submitted, No search occurred until March tenth,
Speaker 1: twenty twenty six, nearly seven years later, and not by
Speaker 1: federal but rather by state authorities. The Commission has been
Speaker 1: unable to locate any documentation showing why SDNY did not
Speaker 1: seek a search warrant at Zoro Ranch. Usao NM deferred
Speaker 1: investigation of Epstein's SDNY. The Commission's investigation of usao m's
Speaker 1: failure to investigate and prosecute Epstein and his co conspirators
Speaker 1: for child sex trafficking has been significantly undermined by the
Speaker 1: refusal of the U S Attorney's Office and other DOJ
Speaker 1: components to fully comply with the commissioned subpoenas. By letter
Speaker 1: dated June thirtieth, twenty twenty six, First Assistant US Attorney
Speaker 1: Ryan Ellison partially responded to the commission subpoena and requests
Speaker 1: for records under United States two Eve versus Reagan three
Speaker 1: forty US four sixty two nineteen fifty one, producing thirty
Speaker 1: one records and providing links to eighteen documents made available
Speaker 1: under the EFTA. The redacted records provided did not fully
Speaker 1: answer the Commission subpoena. The records included on November eighteenth,
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen Albuquerque Journal article and August twenty first, twenty
Speaker 1: nineteen press release issued by Bill Richardson in October fifteenth,
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen letter from New Mexico Attorney General Hector Baldaris
Speaker 1: to US Attorney John Anderson. On May fourteenth, twenty nineteen
Speaker 1: letter from New Mexico Deputy Attorney General Clara Moran to
Speaker 1: US Attorney John Anderson. May seventeenth, twenty nineteen letter from
Speaker 1: John Anderson to Clara Moran, a redacted email chain dated
Speaker 1: August twenty first, twenty nineteen, or adapted email chain between
Speaker 1: the New Mexico Attorney General's Office and the US Attorney's Office,
Speaker 1: and a number of corporate filings made by Cyprus Incorporated
Speaker 1: in the US Virgin Islands. In his letter response to
Speaker 1: the Commission subpoena and to a request, First Assistant US
Speaker 1: Attorney Ryan Ellison explained, we have confirmed that the USAO
Speaker 1: DNM did not lead or handle the investigation and therefore
Speaker 1: neither collected nor retained any investigative material. Instead, the USAO
Speaker 1: DNM was directed to refer the matter to USAO SDNY
Speaker 1: for investigation. Our file is therefore limited, consisting mostly of
Speaker 1: transmittal material and material collected from the public domain. The
Speaker 1: USAO NM failed to fully respond to the commissioned subpoena
Speaker 1: without additional documented understanding as to the office decision making.
Speaker 1: It's unknown at this time why USAO M failed to
Speaker 1: bring charges against Epstein stemming from his conduct in New Mexico.
Speaker 1: New Mexico Attorney General Authorities and Investigation. The New Mexico
Speaker 1: Attorney General serves as the state's chief legal and law
Speaker 1: enforcement officer. Their primary power includes providing legal counsel to
Speaker 1: state agencies, representing the state in civil and appellate cases,
Speaker 1: enforcing consumer protection and antitrust laws, and prosecuting complex white collar,
Speaker 1: public corruption and medicaid fraud crimes. While local district attorneys
Speaker 1: handle most local crime, the Attorney General has concurrent jurisdiction
Speaker 1: over specific matters, including human trafficking, securities fraud, and governmental
Speaker 1: conduct violation. They can also step in to prosecute if
Speaker 1: a district attorney fails to act or is referred to
Speaker 1: a case by the governor. Investigation of sex trafficking and
Speaker 1: other crimes on Zoro Ranch would have been within the
Speaker 1: ambit of the attorney general's authority. New Mexico Attorney General
Speaker 1: Investigation of Epstein two thousand and seven through twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1: There have been three successive New Mexico Attorney Generals, Gary King,
Speaker 1: Hector Baldaris, and Ronald Torres since Epstein was convicted in
Speaker 1: Florida for a felony solicitation of a minor. Gary King,
Speaker 1: former Governor Bruce King's son, was Attorney General of New
Speaker 1: Mexico from January first, two thousand and seven to January first,
Speaker 1: twenty fifteen. According to media reports, King accepted thirty five thousand,
Speaker 1: six hundred dollars in campaign donations from Epstein during his
Speaker 1: twenty fourteen goubernatorial bid, which he said he later returned.
Speaker 1: King also reached out to Epstein's staff to arrange a
Speaker 1: round trip flight from Santa Fe to Washington, d C.
Speaker 1: King admits to having met with Epstein at his request
Speaker 1: for lunch. The Commission to date has discovered no evidence
Speaker 1: that King took any action as Attorney general to an
Speaker 1: investigate or prosecute Epstein. Balderis initiated an investigation of Epstein,
Speaker 1: although it's not clear when the investigation was opened. One
Speaker 1: account suggests the investigation was opened in May of twenty nineteen.
Speaker 1: In any event, by July, Baldaras had the third further
Speaker 1: investigation of Epstein and sex trafficking at Zoro Ranch at
Speaker 1: the request of SDNY. The Commission has discovered no evidence
Speaker 1: that Balderas reopened the investigation at any point between July
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen and January first, twenty twenty three, when he
Speaker 1: left office. According to the NMDJ, all investigative material were
Speaker 1: forwarded to the SDNY. SDNY has refused to provide any
Speaker 1: response to the commission subpoena. Moreover, the New Mexico Attorney
Speaker 1: General's office did not retain a copy of the material
Speaker 1: it's submitted to SDNY, or such material has been misplaced.
Speaker 1: As noted below, it appears the Jorney general investigation involved
Speaker 1: conduct occurring prior to two thousand and eight. May fourteenth,
Speaker 1: twenty nineteen, the Truth Commission's earliest documented mention of an
Speaker 1: investigation by the New Mexico Attorney General. Deputy Attorney General
Speaker 1: Clara Moran's letter to John Anderson stated the Office of
Speaker 1: the Attorney General has been actively engaged in an ongoing
Speaker 1: investigation and a review of this matter, which may also
Speaker 1: involve a referral of certain criminal matters within the exclusive
Speaker 1: statutory authority of the federal government. All Right, folks, we're
Speaker 1: going to wrap up right here, and in the next
Speaker 1: episode dealing with the topic, we're going to pick up
Speaker 1: where we left off. All the information that goes with
Speaker 1: this episode can be found in the description box.