Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Faces Another Public Humiliation (7/29/26)

Survivors Detail Abuse at Interlochen and Encounters With Jeffrey Epstein (7/29/26)

An independent investigation commissioned by the Interlochen Center for the Arts documented approximately 70 firsthand accounts of alleged sexual misconduct by adults affiliated with the prestigious Michigan arts school and summer camp. Investigators conducted about 180 interviews and identified 47 accused individuals, including faculty members, teachers, residence staff, donors, trustees and visitors. The reported conduct stretched from the 1950s through the 2010s and ranged from grooming, sexual comments and inappropriate touching to allegations of rape, oral sex and long-term sexual relationships between adults and students. Former students described lasting consequences, including PTSD, damaged relationships, extensive therapy and abandoning musical or artistic careers because Interlochen had become inseparable from the abuse they said they experienced. The investigation began after a former student reported alleged misconduct by longtime faculty member Byron Hanson, leading Interlochen to invite other alumni to come forward. Seven alumni gave firsthand accounts involving Hanson from the 1960s and 1970s, while numerous other employees and associates were accused of misconduct across later decades. The report also expanded scrutiny of Jeffrey Epstein’s access to the campus: two alumni reported sexual contact by Epstein after meeting him through Interlochen, where he was a donor and maintained a lodge. Interlochen said none of the 47 accused individuals remains employed there, referred the names to prosecutors and law enforcement, and announced additional safety, accountability and survivor-support measures while acknowledging that the institution must confront the harm described by its former students. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: 70 Interlochen students allege past grooming, sex assaults by 47 adults [https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2026/07/28/students-allege-grooming-sex-assaults-by-interlochen-staff-since-60s/91085021007/?gnt-cfr=1&gca-cat=p&gca-uir=true&gca-epti=z115342p116350l003050c116350e1195xxv115342d--47--b--47--&gca-ft=254&gca-ds=sophi]

Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor Faces Another Public Humiliation (7/29/26)

The City of London Corporation is developing a new internal procedure that could allow it to revoke Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s Freedom of the City of London. Officials concluded that no existing legal mechanism permitted them to simply remove the status, which Andrew obtained through patrimony in 2012 because his father, Prince Philip, was a Freeman. The Corporation had previously asked Andrew to surrender the distinction voluntarily, but he refused, prompting members to pursue a formal process for taking it away. The effort represents another blow for Andrew after King Charles stripped him of his royal titles, dukedom and major honours in 2025 amid continuing scrutiny of his association with Jeffrey Epstein. The legal difficulty is that the Freedom is considered a property right rather than merely a ceremonial honour, giving it protections under British law and the European Convention on Human Rights. Once the new procedure is approved, the Court of Common Council would still need to hold a separate vote specifically determining whether Andrew’s Freedom should be revoked. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com source: Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor suffers fresh blow as legal officials creating mechanism to remove honour from him [https://www.gbnews.com/royal/andrew-mountbatten-windsor-suffers-blow-strip-honour]

Mega Edition: Even After Jeffrey Epstein's Arrest His Time And Money Were Still In Demand (7/29/26)

After Jeffrey Epstein was arrested, his financial network and influence didn’t collapse—in fact, many of his money channels remained active and parts of his wealth stayed in demand. Banks and service providers continued handling large sums connected to him even when his reputation had become toxic. Reports surfaced showing that litigation and investigations revealed he had hundreds of millions in assets, multiple bank accounts, and a network of offshore vehicles that were still being managed or utilised. Some wealthy clients and institutions apparently accepted exposure to his funds because the prestige, access, or investment potential outweighed the reputational risk. Epstein’s business and social apparatus, though under scrutiny, proved resilient—his name still carried weight in some elite financial circles despite everything stacked against him. Meanwhile, Ghislaine Maxwell—his long-time associate—allegedly kept clandestine lines of contact with him, even while he was under arrest or legal threat. Email records and internal correspondence published later suggested that Maxwell and Epstein exchanged messages about strategy, legal exposure, finances, and social-network management, indicating she remained involved behind the scenes. Although she publicly distanced herself from his criminal activities, the evidence points to her operating quietly—handling logistics, maintaining joint accounts, and performing coordination work that kept his sphere intact. Her role appears to have shifted from visible socialite to shadow operator, preserving their connection and helping sustain elements of his empire when open ties would have drawn too much attention.

Mega Edition: What Did Other Inmates At MCC Have To Say About Jeffrey Epstein? (7/29/26)

After Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in his cell at the Federal Bureau of Prisons facility in Manhattan on August 10, 2019, several inmates and former inmates voiced serious doubts about the official narrative of suicide. One inmate who had previously been housed in the exact cell claimed that the architectural layout made a hanging suicide physically improbable—he cited lack of ceiling fixtures, low bunks, and other structural barriers. Others pointed to the absence of a cellmate, malfunctioning cameras, and alleged lapses in guard monitoring as factors that undermined the “alone in the cell” story. These inmate observations fuel persistent skepticism and speculation around Epstein’s death. Their accounts intertwine with documented failures by prison staff—such as broken cameras and falsified check logs—and with broader concerns that the system allowed, or even facilitated, a scenario where a high-profile detainee died under murky circumstances. Together, these statements from inside the prison ecosystem continue to drive debate over whether the official determination of suicide reflects the full reality of what happened that night. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com

Mega Edition: The 11th Circuit Ruling Against Courtney Wild And The Dissent By Judge Hull (7/29/26)

In the majority ruling, the Eleventh Circuit denied Wild’s petition for a writ of mandamus, holding that the Crime Victims’ Rights Act of 2004 (“CVRA”) does not permit a crime-victim to initiate a freestanding civil lawsuit seeking judicial enforcement of her CVRA rights when no criminal prosecution has been formally commenced against the defendant. The court reasoned that the statute’s wording in § 3771(b)(1) ties a court’s obligation to “ensure” victims’ rights to “any court proceeding involving an offense against a crime victim,” and thus the rights trigger only once a “preexisting proceeding” exists. Because in this matter the federal government never filed charges or otherwise commenced criminal proceedings against Jeffrey Epstein in the relevant jurisdiction and context, the court held the CVRA simply was not triggered and Wild could not enforce her rights via stand-alone litigation. In his dissent, Judge Hull strongly disagreed, arguing that the plain language of §§ 3771(a)(5) and (a)(8) grants victims a “reasonable right to confer with the attorney for the Government” and a “right to be treated with fairness,” and that § 3771(d)(3) explicitly authorizes a motion for relief “if no prosecution is underway”—which, in his view, means the CVRA does create a judicial enforcement mechanism even pre-charge. Hull asserted the majority’s interpretation imposes a judicially created requirement—i.e., that an indictment or formal prosecution must be pending—when no such prerequisite appears in the statute’s text. He warned that the decision unduly favors wealthy defendants and government actors who avoid formal charges, leaving victims of pre-charge misconduct with no remedy. He would have held that Wild’s rights attached pre-charge, were violated, and that she is entitled to seek judicial enforcement. to contact me: bobbycapucci@protonmail.com