The Moscow Murders and More

From the archives: 6-21-23




Touch DNA refers to the trace amounts of DNA that can be transferred through direct contact between an individual's skin cells and an object or surface. It is a valuable forensic tool used in crime scene investigations to help identify potential suspects or link individuals to a particular location.

When individuals touch an object or surface, they leave behind skin cells containing their DNA. Touch DNA analysis involves collecting and analyzing these minute samples to extract the DNA and generate a DNA profile. The DNA profile contains unique genetic markers that can be compared to known DNA samples, such as those from a suspect or a DNA database, to determine a potential match or identify an unknown individual.The process of touch DNA analysis typically involves the following steps:

1. Sample collection: Forensic investigators collect potential touch DNA samples from objects or surfaces at a crime scene using various techniques. This may involve swabbing the surface with a sterile cotton swab or using adhesive tape to lift any visible or invisible biological material.
2. DNA extraction: The collected samples undergo a DNA extraction process to isolate the DNA from other substances present on the surface. This step aims to purify the DNA and remove any potential inhibitors that might interfere with subsequent analysis.
3. DNA amplification: The extracted DNA is subjected to a process called polymerase chain reaction (PCR), which amplifies specific regions of the DNA. PCR allows for the generation of sufficient DNA material for further analysis, even if only a minimal amount of touch DNA was initially present.
4. DNA profiling: The amplified DNA is analyzed using techniques such as short tandem repeat (STR) analysis. STR markers are specific regions within the DNA that exhibit variations in the number of repeated DNA sequences. By comparing the lengths of these STR markers between the crime scene sample and a reference sample, a DNA profile is generated.
5. Database search and interpretation: The DNA profile obtained from the touch DNA sample can be compared to known reference samples from suspects or individuals in a DNA database. If a match is found, it can provide investigative leads or potentially establish a link between the individual and the crime scene.

It's important to note that touch DNA analysis has certain limitations. The amount of DNA left behind through touch is often very small, making it susceptible to contamination and degradation. Factors such as the environmental conditions and the time elapsed since the DNA was deposited can affect the quality and quantity of the touch DNA sample. Additionally, the presence of multiple individuals' DNA on an object or surface can complicate the analysis.

Nevertheless, touch DNA analysis has proven valuable in numerous criminal investigations, aiding in the identification of suspects, establishing links between individuals and crime scenes, and exonerating innocent individuals. It is a powerful tool in forensic science that complements other methods of DNA analysis, such as blood or saliva DNA samples.

"The comparison showed a statistical match—specifically, the STR profile is at least 5.37 octillion times more likely to be seen if Defendant is the source than if an unrelated individual randomly selected from the population is the source," the filing says according to the article.

In this episode we take a look at how strong that evidence is and how Kohberger's team might attempt to challenge it.

(commercial at 7:40)

to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Bryan Kohberger DNA Revelation Made in New Court Documents (newsweek.com)


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

Calls to “move on” from Jeffrey Epstein are not just tone-deaf—they reek of institutional self-preservation. The push to close the book on one of the most expansive, well-connected child sex trafficking operations in modern history ignores the deep rot that enabled it. Epstein operated for decades with the help of governments, banks, intelligence-linked figures, celebrities, and elite gatekeepers. Telling the public to let it go doesn’t signal closure—it signals fear. Fear that people are getting too close to the truth. Fear that the wrong names might finally surface. And fear that the illusion of justice might shatter under the weight of what Epstein’s network really was: not just one predator, but a system designed to protect him.

Worse still, the dismissiveness insults the pain and courage of the over 1,000 women and girls who were exploited by Epstein and his associates. These weren’t isolated incidents—they were industrialized abuses, documented in flight logs, sealed depositions, and sealed bank records. To move on now is to erase them. It’s to say their trauma doesn’t matter, their lives don’t matter, and that the powerful people who allowed it to happen will never be held accountable. Sweeping it under the rug isn’t healing—it’s complicity. The moment we stop demanding justice is the moment we guarantee it happens again.

to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Epstein followers in shambles as their conspiracies are falling apart

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

One of the alternate jurors, who spoke with Fox News Digital, said Diddy’s defense team was effective in undermining the prosecution’s case, particularly during cross-examinations. The juror highlighted standout moments like the questioning of witness Dawn Richard and another identified as “Bana,” noting that the defense “definitely poked holes” in their testimonies—an effort the juror believes helped lead to the acquittal on racketeering charges.

The juror also shared more personal reflections, expressing that the trial felt exceptionally intense and even cinematic. Though not part of the final deliberations, they said they would have reached the same decision on the racketeering count and emphasized the importance of the trial process. The juror closed by expressing hope that Diddy gets the help he needs—recognizing the defense’s portrayal of him as a flawed individual struggling with addiction and personal issues.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

Sean 'Diddy' Combs juror speaks out on prosecution's RICO case against rapper | Fox News

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

Mark Epstein was openly scathing in response to the DOJ and FBI's declaration that Epstein died by suicide and that no evidence remains to pursue further investigation. He mocked the federal agencies’ conclusions, stating he “laughed” at the characterization of the findings as definitive, calling the explanations “stupid.” He criticized FBI Director Kash Patel in particular, questioning whether Patel even has the medical background—or a basic first-aid qualification—to determine the cause of death and emphasizing that Patel wasn’t present during the autopsy or at the prison at the time of Jeffrey's death.

Mark also highlighted the opinions of two medical examiners present at the autopsy, Drs. Kristin Roman and Michael Baden, both of whom reportedly found the death less consistent with suicide and more indicative of possible foul play. He pointed to inconsistencies like a missing minute in the surveillance video outside Epstein’s cell and multiple camera malfunctions, suggesting these anomalies point toward a coverup rather than closure. By challenging both the expertise of officials and the integrity of the investigative process, Mark Epstein signaled he believes the real story is far from over.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Jeffrey Epstein's brother reveals why he refuses to believe death was suicide despite Pam Bondi claims | Daily Mail Online

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

An anonymous plaintiff, referred to as John Doe, has filed a lawsuit alleging that in September 2020, during a listening session in L.A. for a Biggie project, Diddy supplied ketamine to attendees. According to the complaint, the gathering took place in a warehouse where items belonging to the late Notorious B.I.G. were stored. The plaintiff says he ended up alone with Diddy, who allegedly watched pornography, pulled a Biggie shirt from the rack, masturbated into it, ejaculated on the garment, then tossed it onto the plaintiff—leaving behind semen and reportedly remarking, “RIP Biggie.” The suit also recalls a separate alleged incident from 2005, where Diddy supposedly forced the plaintiff into unwanted sexual contact. The lawsuit cites sexual battery and emotional distress and seeks damages.

Diddy’s legal team has strongly denied all allegations, describing them as false and unsubstantiated, and said they intend to vigorously defend him. This disturbing accusation adds to a growing list of similar claims that have emerged amid his ongoing legal saga—including federal sex trafficking convictions and more than 90 other lawsuits alleging sexual misconduct spanning decades.


to contact me:

[email protected]



source:

Diddy Allegedly Masturbated Into Biggie Smalls' Shirt, Lawsuit Claims | Us Weekly

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

The defendants in the case of Sara Rivers v. Sean Combs and others have submitted a memorandum of law supporting their motion to dismiss the complaint. This legal filing argues that the plaintiff's claims lack sufficient legal basis or fail to meet the necessary standards for the case to proceed. The defendants seek dismissal on grounds likely related to procedural or substantive deficiencies in the plaintiff’s allegations.

In this memorandum, the defendants outline the legal reasoning and precedents that justify the court dismissing the complaint against them. The document aims to persuade the judge that the plaintiff's claims should be rejected without going to trial, emphasizing the defendants’ position that the case does not warrant further litigation.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

https://dwt-my.sharepoint.com/personal/garcd_dwt_com/Documents/DKG/Cases/2025/June/6.23.2025/File/Rivers/Rivers - Memo ISO Motion to Dismiss

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

The defendants in the case of Sara Rivers v. Sean Combs and others have submitted a memorandum of law supporting their motion to dismiss the complaint. This legal filing argues that the plaintiff's claims lack sufficient legal basis or fail to meet the necessary standards for the case to proceed. The defendants seek dismissal on grounds likely related to procedural or substantive deficiencies in the plaintiff’s allegations.

In this memorandum, the defendants outline the legal reasoning and precedents that justify the court dismissing the complaint against them. The document aims to persuade the judge that the plaintiff's claims should be rejected without going to trial, emphasizing the defendants’ position that the case does not warrant further litigation.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:

https://dwt-my.sharepoint.com/personal/garcd_dwt_com/Documents/DKG/Cases/2025/June/6.23.2025/File/Rivers/Rivers - Memo ISO Motion to Dismiss

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

In a filing to Judge Subramanian in United States v. Combs, S3 24 Cr. 542 (AS), the Government requests permission to admit limited additional testimony from expert witness Dr. Dawn Hughes. This request comes in response to what prosecutors describe as "forceful and repeated" arguments made by the defense during their cross-examination of the witness known as Mia. The defense, the Government argues, presented misleading implications about Mia’s behavior and credibility—specifically regarding how victims of abuse are expected to act. Prosecutors contend that this line of questioning has "opened the door" for rebuttal testimony addressing misconceptions about trauma responses.

The Government seeks to have Dr. Hughes offer expert insight drawn from her original notice, focused solely on clarifying how victims of abuse often exhibit behaviors that may seem counterintuitive to jurors unfamiliar with trauma psychology—such as delayed reporting, continued contact with abusers, or minimized disclosure. This testimony, they assert, is necessary to correct the jury’s potential misinterpretation created by the defense's narrative. The request is framed as narrow in scope and designed not to go beyond the boundaries previously set by the Court, but rather to preserve the integrity of the witness's testimony in light of the defense’s strategy.


to contact me:


[email protected]



source:

gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.376.0_1.pdf

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

Chapter 2, Part 1 of the OIG report into Jeffrey Epstein’s death focuses on his initial detention and intake procedures at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York following his arrest on July 6, 2019. The report highlights significant failures in classification, supervision, and mental health assessments, noting that Epstein was initially placed in general population despite being a high-profile inmate facing serious federal charges. After concerns were raised about his safety and the risk of extortion, he was transferred to the Special Housing Unit (SHU), where additional lapses in protocol occurred. The chapter details how MCC officials failed to follow standard procedures for high-risk detainees, including properly documenting Epstein’s mental health evaluations and conducting required welfare checks. Despite being flagged as a suicide risk following a reported attempt on July 23, 2019, Epstein was removed from suicide watch within 24 hours, based on questionable psychiatric evaluations. The lack of clear communication among MCC staff, inadequate staffing, and disregard for established policies created an environment where Epstein’s well-being was poorly monitored, setting the stage for the critical lapses that would lead to his death weeks later.

Chapter 2, Part 2 of the OIG report into Jeffrey Epstein’s death examines the events following his alleged suicide attempt on July 23, 2019, and the failures in response and supervision at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC). After being found semi-conscious with marks on his neck, Epstein was briefly placed on suicide watch, but within 24 hours, he was downgraded to psychological observation without a comprehensive mental health evaluation. The report highlights serious lapses in communication and documentation, with MCC staff failing to properly log observations, missing required mental health follow-ups, and ignoring warnings from other inmates that Epstein was distressed. Instead of being assigned a cellmate for added supervision, as per policy, Epstein was left alone in his cell on multiple occasions, further increasing his vulnerability. The chapter also outlines bureaucratic mismanagement, including delays in updating records, failure to relay crucial mental health concerns, and staffing shortages that contributed to the overall breakdown in Epstein’s supervision in the weeks leading up to his death.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:


2 3 - 0 8 5 (justice.gov)

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

The first chapter of the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) report into Jeffrey Epstein’s death provides a detailed overview of Epstein’s incarceration at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) in New York and the circumstances leading up to his apparent suicide on August 10, 2019. The chapter outlines how Epstein, a high-profile detainee facing federal sex trafficking charges, was placed in the Special Housing Unit (SHU) due to concerns over his safety and flight risk. It details how, despite his notoriety and previous suicide attempt on July 23, 2019, MCC staff repeatedly failed to follow standard protocols, including not conducting required inmate checks and leaving him unsupervised for extended periods. The report highlights serious lapses in staffing, oversight, and communication, noting that Epstein should have remained on suicide watch but was downgraded to psychological observation without clear justification. Additionally, there were inconsistencies in records and video surveillance gaps, raising significant questions about the facility's handling of his confinement.


to contact me:

[email protected]


source:  


2 3 - 0 8 5 (justice.gov)

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