Speaker 1: What's up everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
Speaker 1: Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to pick up
Speaker 1: where we left off with the New Mexico Truth Commission
Speaker 1: and their initial report. The investigation's focus investigative areas. To
Speaker 1: fulfill HR one's mandate, The committee, with assistants from retained
Speaker 1: Council and investigators, has identified substantative investigative areas for inquiry
Speaker 1: into Epstein's activities on Zoro Ranch and in New Mexico.
Speaker 1: These investigative areas include the following One. Sexual abuse and trafficking.
Speaker 1: Who are the survivors and who engaged in or facilitated
Speaker 1: their abuse? This investigative area covers the areas of grooming,
Speaker 1: abuse occurring adds, Zoro Ranch recruitment, and interstate trafficking. Two
Speaker 1: Institutional failures. What did governmental and private entities know about
Speaker 1: Epstein and when and why did they fail behold thement
Speaker 1: two account This area covers whether governmental and private entities
Speaker 1: failed to investigate, prosecute, or take action in response to
Speaker 1: Epstein's loan or suspected wrongdoing. This includes, but is not
Speaker 1: limited to, whether the U. S. Attorney's Office in the
Speaker 1: District of New Mexico failed to investigate Epstein's activities in
Speaker 1: New Mexico, Whether the New Mexico Attorney General failed to
Speaker 1: complete its investigation of Epstein, Whether the New Mexico Attorney
Speaker 1: General's Office now the New Mexico Department of Justice, failed
Speaker 1: to maintain a copy of records generated and collected in
Speaker 1: connection with its investigation of Epstein, Whether New Mexico state
Speaker 1: and local authorities failed to investigate Epstein, whether they failed
Speaker 1: to monitor Epstein as a sex offender, and whether the
Speaker 1: New Mexico State Land Office failed to enforce the terms
Speaker 1: of its land lease with Epstein. Three. Power and Motives
Speaker 1: hew Did Epstein use his wealth and power to motivate
Speaker 1: others to cover for his crimes. This investigative area examines
Speaker 1: Epstein's use of his extensive social network of rich, powerful,
Speaker 1: and influential individuals and organizations to facilitate his wrongdoing and
Speaker 1: to evade detection, investigation, prosecution, and other adverse consequences. This
Speaker 1: area covers whether Epstein implicitly black malparticipants in his sex
Speaker 1: trafficking enterprise, and whether he conveyed the suggestion of his
Speaker 1: involvement in national security and foreign intelligence matters to evade
Speaker 1: investigation and consequences for his activities medical and scientific improprieties.
Speaker 1: Did Epstein advance his wrongful activities through medicine and science,
Speaker 1: and if so how. This area relates to Epstein's documented
Speaker 1: interest in and support of medical and scientific advances, sometimes
Speaker 1: for unethical or improper purposes. This area covers Epstein's interest
Speaker 1: in eugenics and transhumanism, as well as reports that he
Speaker 1: facilitated forced in pregnation and non consensual medical procedure. This
Speaker 1: area also covers Epstein's attempts to manipulate persons engaged in
Speaker 1: scientific research to further his own interests. Financial crimes and
Speaker 1: irregularities in recovery. How did Epstein and others use money
Speaker 1: to facilitate wrongdoing and what remedies are available to afford
Speaker 1: survivors financial recovery. This area covers Epstein's use of money
Speaker 1: to leverage access and to silence victims and others. This
Speaker 1: area also covers any financial crime that Epstein or any
Speaker 1: of his associates committed in New Mexico. Finally, this area
Speaker 1: addresses whether remedies for recovery of damages were available and,
Speaker 1: if so, availed for those who are victimized by Epstein. Ultimately,
Speaker 1: investigation of these areas will seek to reveal one what
Speaker 1: wrongdoing relating to Epstein occurred in New Mexico or elsewhere.
Speaker 1: Two Who participated in war or facilitated this wrongdoing? Three?
Speaker 1: What did entities and persons with power, wealth, or influence
Speaker 1: do or failed to do that facilitated or failed to
Speaker 1: prevent this wrongdoing? And for was this wrongdoing preventable? And
Speaker 1: if not, what action, to include legislation, could have prevented it.
Speaker 1: Description of the Committee's investigative procedure, Victim witness contacts. The
Speaker 1: Truth Commission itself and Commission Council are actively soliciting information
Speaker 1: and tips about Epstein's activities in New Mexico from victims, witnesses,
Speaker 1: and the public at large. The Commission has created a
Speaker 1: website at www and Mtruthommission dot com where victims, witnesses,
Speaker 1: and other persons with relevant information may contact the Commission
Speaker 1: anonymously or otherwise and post relevant information or records. The
Speaker 1: Commission through Council will take necessary and a reasonable measure
Speaker 1: to investigate all credible reports of abuse. The Commission will
Speaker 1: seek to avoid interviewing any survivor or victim more than once.
Speaker 1: The Commission through Council is empowered to obtain foreign statements
Speaker 1: or sworn deposition testimony from witnesses if willing to do so.
Speaker 1: Survivors and witnesses, upon appropriate vetting, may be called on
Speaker 1: to provide public testimony at Commission hearings. Both the Commission
Speaker 1: itself and Commission Council may interact with survivors and witnesses.
Speaker 1: All interviews are survivor centered and are conducted in a
Speaker 1: manner that prioritizes the needs, safety and well being of
Speaker 1: the survivor while gathering accurate information relevant to the Committee's purpose.
Speaker 1: This approach ensures that survivors feel supported, respected, and empowered
Speaker 1: to participate in the investigation without fear of judgment or retraumatization.
Speaker 1: To the extent permitted by law, The Commission honors victim
Speaker 1: requests for confidentiality and anonymity collaboration with NMDJ. Following the
Speaker 1: enactment of hr IE, New Mexico Attorney General Rould Torres
Speaker 1: initiated criminal investigation targeting wrongdoers associated with Epstein or Zoro
Speaker 1: Ranch or elsewhere in New Mexico. Commission Council has been
Speaker 1: charged with managing the Commission's collaboration with the new Mexico
Speaker 1: Attorney General regarding any related or relevant investigation, including but
Speaker 1: not limited to, witness interviews, depositions, subpoenas, sharing information and documents,
Speaker 1: and other investigative or litigation matters. The current new Mexico
Speaker 1: Attorney General, Rauld Torres, took office in twenty twenty three
Speaker 1: and opened a criminal investigation into Epstein's activities. Announcing this
Speaker 1: on February nineteenth, twenty twenty six, three days after hunanimous
Speaker 1: approval of the Truth Commission, Torres promised to work in
Speaker 1: close coordination with federal and local law enforcement partners, as
Speaker 1: well as with the Commission recently established by the new
Speaker 1: Mexico Legislature, which has its own independent mandate to investigate
Speaker 1: these matters on behalf of the public. The new Mexico
Speaker 1: Department of Justice has voluntarily provided the Commission some documents
Speaker 1: and information. Moreover, NMDJ has shared information and evidence collected
Speaker 1: at the time of their search of Zoro Ranch. Aside
Speaker 1: from their investigation at Zoro Ranch, NMDJ produced information that
Speaker 1: was publicly available through their IPRA process. The Commission and
Speaker 1: MDJ are currently engaged in negotiation with the aim of
Speaker 1: reaching an agreement to share information with one another, as
Speaker 1: permitted by law and consistent with their independent authorities and purposes.
Speaker 1: The Commission proposes that both the Commission and NMDJ share
Speaker 1: information to the maximum extent possible, recognizing also that there
Speaker 1: may be occasions when sharing specific information creates an unacceptable
Speaker 1: risk to the safety of individuals or the integrity of
Speaker 1: ongoing investigations, enforcement actions, or other legitimate interests. The Commission
Speaker 1: further proposes that the Commission and NMDJ coordinate and collaborate
Speaker 1: when conducting interviews and depositions of victims, witnesses, and other persons.
Speaker 1: At this time, the Commission and NMDJ have been unavailable
Speaker 1: or unable to reach an agreement. The Truth Commissions initial
Speaker 1: investigative efforts April twenty twenty six through July of twenty
Speaker 1: twenty six. The Commission's initial efforts focused on organization of
Speaker 1: staff resources, development of investigative procedure, acquisition of necessary technology,
Speaker 1: task delegation, and collection and review of documentary evidence. Retained
Speaker 1: council includes six attorneys and seven paralegals, all of whom
Speaker 1: are dedicated on at least part time basis to the
Speaker 1: investigation the Epstein Files Transparency Act. To date, investor stigation
Speaker 1: has included review of records release pursuant to the Epstein
Speaker 1: Files Transparency Act, records obtained pursuant to subpoenas issued under
Speaker 1: authority of hr I, witness interviews conducted by Commission Council
Speaker 1: and others. The collection and review of documentary evidence and
Speaker 1: information otherwise publicly available. The largest body of documentary evidence
Speaker 1: is the evidence released under the EFTA. In its release
Speaker 1: documents under the EFTA, DOJ explained as follows. These files
Speaker 1: were collected from five primary sources, including Florida in New
Speaker 1: York cases against Epstein, the New York case against Maxwell,
Speaker 1: the New York case investigating Epstein's death, the Florida case
Speaker 1: investigating a former butler of Epstein, multiple FBI investigations, and
Speaker 1: the Office of Inspector General investigation into Epstein's death. The
Speaker 1: Department aired on the side of over collecting material and
Speaker 1: any material not produced fall we within one of the
Speaker 1: following categories. Duplicate documents between SDNY and SDFL investigation withheld
Speaker 1: under privilege, deliberative process privilege, or attorney client privilege. Withheld
Speaker 1: based upon exceptions under the Act, items that are not
Speaker 1: part of the case file for Epstein or Maxwell and
Speaker 1: were completely unrelated to these cases. More than five hundred
Speaker 1: attorneys and reviewers from the Department contributed to this effort.
Speaker 1: In addition, the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern
Speaker 1: District of New York employed an additional review protocol to
Speaker 1: ensure compliance with a court order requiring United States Attorney J.
Speaker 1: Clayton to certify that no victim identifying information would be
Speaker 1: produced unredacted as part of the public production. Through the process,
Speaker 1: the Department provided clear instructions to reviewers that their adactions
Speaker 1: were to be limited to the protection of victims and
Speaker 1: their families. Some pornographic images, whether commercial or not, were redacted,
Speaker 1: given the Department treated all women in those images as victims.
Speaker 1: Notable individuals and politicians were not redacted in any of
Speaker 1: the release files. This production may include fake or falsely
Speaker 1: submitted images documentary videos, as everything that was sent to
Speaker 1: the FBI by the public was included in the production
Speaker 1: that is responsive to the Act. EFTA records constitute the
Speaker 1: bulk of the available public record regarding Epstein's activity to date.
Speaker 1: DOJ has identified approximately six million pages and released three
Speaker 1: and a half million pages under the EFTA. These records
Speaker 1: are not provided in chronological order or organized in a
Speaker 1: way that makes them easily searchable. Rather, the records are
Speaker 1: broken down into twelve data sets, which contain a voluminous
Speaker 1: mixture of email chains, flight logs, bank statements, FBI interview summaries,
Speaker 1: and over two thousand videos and one hundred and eighty
Speaker 1: thousand images. Moreover, the records are heavily redacted. Redactions are
Speaker 1: inconsistent and a pure arbitrary. For example, witness names will
Speaker 1: be redacted on one page but not redacted on another,
Speaker 1: or a name will be redacted alongside information that makes
Speaker 1: the name readily identifiable. Copies of the same document will
Speaker 1: be redacted Differently, Email information, addresses and telephone numbers are
Speaker 1: adacted for no apparent purpose. The identity of public officials
Speaker 1: are heavily redacted for no apparent reason. Some documents are
Speaker 1: redacted in their entirety. Overall, using the AFTA records to
Speaker 1: establish a verifiable and complete chronology of relevant facts is
Speaker 1: extremely tedious and time consuming. Verifying any given fact amounts
Speaker 1: to searching for a needle in a haystack. All right, folks,
Speaker 1: we're going to wrap up right here, and in the
Speaker 1: next episode, we're going to pick up where we left off.
Speaker 1: All the information that goes with this episode can be
Speaker 1: found in the description box.