The Moscow Murders and More

Bryan Kohbergers trial was delayed after recently waived his right to a speedy trial. This comes after his team failed to get the same desired result by asking for a stay in the proceedings due to irregularities with the way the jury was selected. After Judge John Judge denied that request, it was only a matter of time before they waived the right to a speedy trial and looking for a delay.


In this episode, we hear from the Goncalves family who is, as you could imagine, not too happy with the news and who asked their supporters to continue to show them support as they try to navigate the minefield that is their new reality.




(commercial at 9:44)

to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

Idaho victim Kaylee Goncalves' family breaks their silence after quadruple murder suspect Bryan Kohberger waived his right to speedy trial - and ask supporters to 'stick with us' as 'things are going to get rough' | Daily Mail Online

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

DNA (Deoxyribonucleic Acid) is a molecule found in the cells of all living organisms. It carries genetic instructions for the development, functioning, growth, and reproduction of these organisms. DNA is composed of four chemical bases: adenine (A), cytosine (C), guanine (G), and thymine (T), which are arranged in a double helix structure.Here's a summary of what DNA is and how it's used in investigations:1. DNA Structure: DNA is made up of two long chains (strands) of nucleotides twisted into a double helix. Each nucleotide consists of a phosphate group, a sugar molecule (deoxyribose), and one of the four nitrogenous bases (A, C, G, or T). The sequence of these bases along the DNA strand forms the genetic code.2. Genetic Information: DNA contains the genetic information necessary for an organism's traits and characteristics. The specific sequence of bases in DNA encodes the instructions for building proteins, which are essential for various biological functions.3. DNA Replication: Before a cell divides, its DNA is copied through a process called replication, ensuring that each new cell receives an identical set of genetic instructions. This process is crucial for growth, development, and repair in living organisms.4. DNA in Investigations: DNA plays a pivotal role in forensic investigations and various other scientific fields:

• Forensic DNA Analysis: In criminal investigations, DNA from crime scenes (such as blood, hair, or saliva) can be compared to DNA from suspects. This process, known as DNA profiling or DNA fingerprinting, helps identify suspects, establish paternity, and exonerate the innocent.
• Identification: DNA is used for identifying individuals in disaster victim identification, missing persons cases, and in immigration procedures.
• Genealogy: DNA testing is used in genealogy research to trace ancestry and discover family connections.
• Medical Diagnostics: DNA analysis aids in diagnosing genetic disorders, identifying disease risk factors, and personalizing medical treatments.
• Biological Research: DNA is a fundamental tool in biological research, helping scientists understand genetics, evolution, and diseases.

5. Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR): PCR is a technique used to amplify (make copies of) specific DNA segments, even from small or degraded samples. This is crucial in forensic DNA analysis where limited or damaged DNA is often encountered.6. DNA Sequencing: DNA sequencing methods determine the exact order of bases in a DNA strand. This is important for understanding genetic variations, mutations, and the genetic basis of diseases.



Considering how often we refer to DNA and DNA testing, I thought that it was time for us to have a bit of a guide as to what DNA testing is and how it is used by investigators to help them solve crimes.


(commercial at 9:21)

to contact me:

[email protected]


Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

One of the key pieces of evidence that the authorities offered in the PCA was the cell phone records of Bryan Kohberger. Using this data, investigators say that they were able to recreate Bryan Kohberger's movements on the morning in question by using the pings his cellphone made from the towers it connected to. How strong is that evidence though?


In this episode, we hear from Ben Levitan, a telecommunications expert, who says that while the technology is helpful to build a case, it's not the kind of evidence that will convince a jury.


(commercial at 6:41)

to contact me:


[email protected]



source:

Expert: Cell records can’t pinpoint someone’s exact location | Idaho Statesman

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The Clintons’ long-standing relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is no longer a matter of speculation—it’s a documented reality that continues to erode their legacy. From Bill Clinton’s numerous flights on Epstein’s jet to Ghislaine Maxwell attending Chelsea Clinton’s wedding after Epstein’s conviction, the connections are deep, consistent, and damning. Despite repeated denials and strategic silence, the evidence—flight logs, testimonies, donations, and insider access—tells a story of willful proximity. The Clintons didn’t just cross paths with Epstein; they shared a social and political ecosystem that legitimized and insulated him even after his sex trafficking conviction. Their continued silence, especially in the face of mounting public scrutiny and survivor testimony, has become a glaring indictment, signaling not innocence but institutional complicity and moral cowardice.

As renewed investigations and unsealed documents pull Epstein’s enablers into the light, the Clintons stand as a symbol of the broader culture of elite impunity. Their refusal to publicly reckon with their role—however indirect—in enabling a predator reflects a toxic prioritization of self-preservation over truth. The age of calculated denials and media protection is crumbling under the weight of survivor-led demands for justice. When the reckoning comes, the Clintons won’t be remembered for what they said—they’ll be remembered for what they refused to say, and for the silence that protected a monster. The Epstein scandal isn’t just about who committed the crimes—it’s about who helped bury them.



to contact me:

[email protected]

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

The Clintons’ long-standing relationship with Jeffrey Epstein is no longer a matter of speculation—it’s a documented reality that continues to erode their legacy. From Bill Clinton’s numerous flights on Epstein’s jet to Ghislaine Maxwell attending Chelsea Clinton’s wedding after Epstein’s conviction, the connections are deep, consistent, and damning. Despite repeated denials and strategic silence, the evidence—flight logs, testimonies, donations, and insider access—tells a story of willful proximity. The Clintons didn’t just cross paths with Epstein; they shared a social and political ecosystem that legitimized and insulated him even after his sex trafficking conviction. Their continued silence, especially in the face of mounting public scrutiny and survivor testimony, has become a glaring indictment, signaling not innocence but institutional complicity and moral cowardice.

As renewed investigations and unsealed documents pull Epstein’s enablers into the light, the Clintons stand as a symbol of the broader culture of elite impunity. Their refusal to publicly reckon with their role—however indirect—in enabling a predator reflects a toxic prioritization of self-preservation over truth. The age of calculated denials and media protection is crumbling under the weight of survivor-led demands for justice. When the reckoning comes, the Clintons won’t be remembered for what they said—they’ll be remembered for what they refused to say, and for the silence that protected a monster. The Epstein scandal isn’t just about who committed the crimes—it’s about who helped bury them.



to contact me:

[email protected]

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In response to the July 31, 2025, orders issued by Judges Richard M. Berman and Paul A. Engelmayer, the U.S. Government has submitted a formal letter addressing the Court's request for clarification regarding grand jury materials related to the cases United States v. Jeffrey Epstein (19 Cr. 490) and United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (20 Cr. 330). These materials, previously sealed, are now being reviewed for possible unsealing as part of broader legal efforts to reexamine the handling of both prosecutions. The Government's letter aims to outline the scope, content, and legal justifications for the requested disclosures, as well as any ongoing privacy or investigative concerns that may influence the Court's decision.

to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.539612.800.0.pdf

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

During her meetings with the DOJ, Ghislaine Maxwell allegedly told prosecutors that she never witnessed Donald Trump engaging in any illegal conduct while in the company of Jeffrey Epstein. This claim reportedly came during an interview attended by Trump’s attorney, Todd Blanche, as part of ongoing investigations into Epstein’s network and the individuals within his orbit. Maxwell is said to have offered this exculpatory remark voluntarily, asserting that despite being around both men during numerous social functions and private gatherings, she saw nothing that would implicate Trump in any criminal behavior.

This statement, predictably, is being used by Trump’s defenders as a shield against mounting scrutiny over his long-standing relationship with Epstein. However, the context surrounding the conversation raises eyebrows—namely, that a convicted trafficker with every incentive to curry favor or protect certain names is suddenly volunteering legal cover for a former president. The setting, the timing, and the players involved suggest this may be less about truth and more about narrative control, especially with Maxwell’s credibility already in tatters following her conviction for trafficking minors within Epstein’s criminal enterprise.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Ghislaine Maxwell told DOJ Trump never did anything concerning around her: Sources - ABC News

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In November 2020, lawyers representing a Jeffrey Epstein victim filed a legal motion demanding that the U.S. Department of Justice release previously concealed information related to Epstein’s secret 2007 non-prosecution agreement. The motion centered around a troubling gap in documentation—specifically, missing emails from then-U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta’s office during the period when the controversial plea deal was negotiated. Victims’ attorneys argued that these missing records could reveal undisclosed communications, potential misconduct, or improper coordination between Epstein’s defense team and federal prosecutors.

The legal team emphasized that the absence of this material undermined public trust and cast doubt on the government’s narrative surrounding Epstein’s prosecution. “I think it calls into doubt everything that we've been told about the case,” said one of the attorneys, urging the DOJ to come clean about the full extent of its dealings with Epstein. The motion underscored the growing belief among survivors and their advocates that the original agreement—which allowed Epstein to avoid federal charges and protected unnamed co-conspirators—was not just flawed, but potentially the product of behind-the-scenes corruption or manipulation that still has not been fully disclosed.


to contact me:


[email protected]



source:

Lawyers for Epstein victim seek 'previously concealed information' from Justice Department - ABC News

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

James Michael Austrich—identified in deposition documents as a former boyfriend of Virginia Roberts (now Virginia Giuffre)—testified about their relationship in the late 1990s. He offered insights into Roberts' employment at Mar-a-Lago and detailed her interactions with Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein during that time period. Austrich corroborated key aspects of Giuffre’s testimony, including how she came into contact with Maxwell and was subsequently introduced to Epstein. His hearing provides supporting context for Giuffre’s allegations about recruitment, travel, and grooming, reinforcing the broader narrative of Epstein’s network beyond Giuffre’s own account

Austrich’s deposition also addressed logistical details—dates, movements, and living situations—that helped frame the timeline of Giuffre’s experiences. While he did not testify about sexual abuse directly, his recollections bolster Giuffre’s broader claims that Maxwell facilitated Roberts' entry into Epstein’s orbit. By corroborating aspects of Giuffre’s presence at Epstein-linked locations and confirming Maxwell’s involvement in arranging those introductions, Austrich’s testimony added credibility to the factual foundation of the case—and further undermined Maxwell’s defamatory denials.


to contact me:

[email protected]

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

In response to Maxwell’s Rule 56.1 “Statement of Contested Facts,” Virginia Giuffre meticulously contested nearly every assertion Maxwell put forth. She denied Maxwell’s characterization of her allegations as “obvious lies,” and pointed to FBI interviews and deposition transcripts confirming her account that Maxwell actively recruited and trafficked her to Jeffrey Epstein. Giuffre flagged multiple misrepresentations in Maxwell’s filing—ranging from the drafting and distribution of press statements, to claims about the scope and detail of her public disclosures. Giuffre maintains her statements are grounded in evidence, recorded testimony, and contemporaneous documentation—not exaggeration or fabrication, as Maxwell suggested.


Giuffre further challenged Maxwell’s framing of her motives, rejecting allegations that she sought media attention or monetary gain. Instead, Giuffre emphasized her pursuit of justice under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, her goal to expose governmental failings, and her intention to assist other survivors. She disputed Maxwell’s assertion that Giuffre had “sought out media organizations,” clarifying that she was approached, not the other way around. In every contested point, Giuffre created genuine disputes of material fact—underscoring that the truthfulness of her allegations versus Maxwell’s denials could not be resolved without witness testimony or trial. This response was crucial in precluding Maxwell from obtaining summary judgment and keeping the defamation case alive.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Epstein-Docs.pdf (documentcloud.org)

Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.