Michael Volpe Investigates (private feed for sbmotheroftwo@gmail.com)

Michael Volpe Investigates special report: did Jeffrey Epstein kill himself?

Note: check out Marty’s Substack here and my story on his dubious incarceration. Marty Gottesfeld spent time in the Metropolitan Correctional Center where Jeffrey Epstein was also housed, though at different times.He said there were numerous problems with the conclusions of the 2023 US Department of Justice (USDOJ) Inspector General (IG) report, Pam Bondi’s released surveillance video, and other evidence, all of it suggesting a cover-up of something more sinister in the 2019 death of Jeffrey Epstein. He told me that Epstein was housed in one of the few cells in MCC which did not have a camera. The Inspector General’s (IG) report further noted that most of the cameras which monitor the prison on Epstein’s floor were not functioning on the night he died. Recorded video evidence for August 9 and 10 for the SHU area where Epstein was housed was only available from one prison security camera due to a malfunction of MCC New York’s Digital Video Recorder system that occurred on July 29, 2019. While the prison’s cameras continued to provide live video feeds, recordings were made for only about half the cameras. MCC New York personnel discovered this failure on August 8, 2019, but it was not repaired until after Epstein’s death. As detailed in this report, like many other BOP facilities, MCC New York had a history of security camera problems. The available recorded video footage from the one SHU camera captured a large part of the common area of the SHU and portions of the stairways leading to the different SHU tiers, including Epstein’s cell tier. Thus, anyone entering or attempting to enter Epstein’s SHU tier from the SHU common area would have been picked up by that video camera. Epstein’s cell door, however, was not in the camera’s field of view. The OIG reviewed the video and found that, between approximately 10:40 p.m. on August 9 and about 6:30 a.m. on August 10, no one was seen entering Epstein’s cell tier from the SHU common area. The OIG determined that movements captured on video before and after those times were generally consistent with employee actions as described by witnesses and documented in BOP records.Marty said it would have been standard protocol to lockdown the prison floor if that many cameras were not functioning, yet that didn’t happen the night Epstein died. The video surveillance camera footage which Pam Bondi released shows part of the floor which Epstein was housed, but it does not have a direct sight to his cell. The footage goes for about ten hours and shows nothing untoward happening, however, Wired found problems with this footage- there’s over two minutes missing. Newly uncovered metadata reveals that nearly three minutes of footage were cut from what the US Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation described as “full raw” surveillance video from the only functioning camera near Jeffrey Epstein’s prison cell the night before he was found dead. The video was released last week as part of the Trump administration’s commitment to fully investigate Epstein’s 2019 death but instead has raised new questions about how the footage was edited and assembled.WIRED previously reported that the video had been stitched together in Adobe Premiere Pro from two video files, contradicting the Justice Department’s claim that it was “raw” footage. Now, further analysis shows that one of the source clips was approximately 2 minutes and 53 seconds longer than the segment included in the final video, indicating that footage appears to have been trimmed before release. It’s unclear what, if anything, the minutes cut from the first clip showed.The nearly three-minute discrepancy may be related to the widely reported one-minute gap—between 11:58:58 pm and 12:00:00 am—that attorney general Pam Bondi has attributed to a nightly system reset. The metadata confirms that the first video file, which showed footage from August 9, 2019, continued for several minutes beyond what appears in the final version of the video and was trimmed to the 11:58:58 pm mark, right before the jump to midnight. The cut to the first clip doesn’t necessarily mean that there is additional time unaccounted for—the second clip picks up at midnight, which suggests the two would overlap—nor does it prove that the missing minute was cut from the video.Furthermore, the IG report stated that prison guards failed to do their rounds for hours before Epstein’s death. At approximately 8 p.m. on August 9, SHU inmates were locked in their cells for the night, including Epstein who was without a cellmate. A search of Epstein’s cell following his death revealed Epstein had excess prison blankets, linens, and clothing in his cell, and that some had been ripped to create nooses. Only one SHU cell search was documented on August 9, and it was not of Epstein’s cell. BOP records did not indicate when Epstein’s cell was last searched. The OIG also found that SHU staff did not conduct any 30-minute rounds after about 10:40 p.m. on August 9 and that none of the required SHU inmate counts were conducted after 4 p.m. on August 9. Count slips and round sheets were falsified to show that they had been performed.Marty told me that MCC was notorious for lazy guards who failed to do their rounds. Furthermore, the IG report found that Epstein was left without a roommate on the night he died, against the recommendations of the prison psychologist. On August 8, the U.S. Marshals Service sent two emails notifying numerous MCC New York staff that Epstein’s cellmate was being transferred to another facility on August 9. However, no action was taken to ensure Epstein was assigned another cellmate. Also on August 8, Epstein met with his attorneys at the prison, as he had on prior occasions, and signed a new Last Will and Testament. MCC New York officials did not learn about the new Will until after Epstein’s death. The following day, August 9, Epstein’s cellmate was transferred to another facility and he was not assigned a new cellmate. Additionally, on that date, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit unsealed approximately 2,000 pages of documents in civil litigation involving Ghislaine Maxwell, who was later convicted in December 2021 of conspiring with Epstein to sexually abuse minors over the course of a decade. The documents contain substantial derogatory information about Epstein and there is extensive media coverage of information in the unsealed documents.…The OIG’s investigation and review identified numerous and serious failures by MCC New York staff, including multiple violations of MCC New York and BOP policies and procedures. The OIG found that MCC New York staff failed on August 9 to carry out the Psychology Department’s directive that Epstein be assigned a cellmate.Marty also told me that most of the prisoners he interacted with in the prison system predicted Epstein would be killed and that it would be covered up. On that central question, Marty and I disagreed. The errors are inexcusable; however, they are circumstantial evidence, not that strong in my opinion, pointing to Epstein being murdered. The autopsy report, I argued, had the strongest evidence that this was a suicide. On August 11, 2019, the Office of the Chief Medical Examiner performed an autopsy and determined the cause of death was hanging and the manner of death was suicide. Blood toxicology tests did not reveal any medications or illegal substances in Epstein’s system. The Medical Examiner who performed the autopsy told the OIG that Epstein’s injuries were consistent with suicide by hanging and that there was no evidence of defensive wounds that would be expected if his death had been a homicide. Epstein did not have marks on his hands, broken fingernails or debris under them, contusions to his knuckles that would have evidenced a fight, or, other than an abrasion on his arm likely due to convulsing from hanging, bruising on his body.The autopsy found no evidence of homicide, specifically no defensive wounds. Marty argued other autopsies drew different conclusions. There was a prior incident which suggested Epstein tried to kill himself before. On July 23, at 1:27 a.m., correctional officers (CO) responded to Epstein’s SHU cell where they found Epstein with an orange cloth around his neck. Epstein’s cellmate told officers Epstein tried to hang himself. Medical staff examined Epstein, observed friction marks and superficial reddening around his neck and on his knee, and placed him on suicide watch. BOP policy requires that inmates identified as suicide risks be placed on suicide watch until no longer at imminent risk. The BOP uses a less restrictive monitoring form, psychological observation, for inmates who are stabilizing but not yet ready to return to a housing unit. Epstein was removed from suicide watch on July 24 but remained under psychological observation until July 30. Epstein first told MCC New York staff he thought his cellmate had tried to kill him, but later said he did not know what occurred and did not want to talk about how he had sustained his injuries. Epstein also later asked if he could be housed with the same cellmate. Another inmate housed on the same SHU tier told the OIG that he heard Epstein’s cellmate call for assistance, and that Epstein’s cellmate told him that Epstein tried to hang himself from the bunkbed ladder. Disciplinary charges against Epstein for alleged self-mutilation were not sustained due to insufficient evidence. Following the July 23 incident, the Psychology Department determined Epstein needed to be housed with an appropriate cellmate, and on July 30 it sent an email to over 70 MCC New York employees informing them of this requirement. The Warden at the time told the OIG that he selected a new cellmate for Epstein in consultation with BOP executive leadership. That inmate remained Epstein’s cellmate until August 9.Marty argued this incident is as indicative of murder as of suicide and the cell mate has not spoken on the record, only had his words interpreted by others. Finally, Marty argued that Epstein does not fit the profile of someone likely to commit suicide. He had the money to hire a topflight legal team, and he had information on others which he could use to make a deal.Someone with decades of business experience, Epstein would have been very familiar with game theory. He likely would have understood the prisoner’s dilemma, Marty argued. Marty said the profile of a prisoner likely to commit suicide is one with no financial resources who has been ratted out by his friends. That is true, but none of us were in Epstein’s head. I believe this is still circumstantial, and the autopsy is very compelling evidence of suicide. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelvolpe.substack.com/subscribe

The Unknown Episode 51

Richard Luthmann and I were back, talking current events in the first thirty-two minutes. Current EventsThe topics included the Trump and Putin summit later today in Alaska. I thought it was a bad idea because it rewards Putin for doing nothing of consequence. Richard brought up the summit in Reykjavik between then US President Ronald Reagan and Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev, but that summit came after Gorbachev implemented his perestroika and glasnost reforms. Richard said Trump must hold firm that the war in Ukraine must end. I said that Putin will likely be ready for such a simple strategy. We also updated on Richard’s case, and the set of missing fingerprints which may have triggered this whole fiasco where he’s wanted for violating a protective order in New York City. In 2020, while serving time in federal prison, Richard Luthmann accepted a plea deal in a New York criminal case. As part of the deal, prosecutors added an extra charge using a Supplemental Criminal Information, or SCI—a legal shortcut to file additional charges without a grand jury indictment.But Luthmann says the entire process was fatally flawed.“Where is the NYPD fingerprint card for my 2020 SCI?” he demands.He says it doesn’t exist—because he was never arrested or fingerprinted for the charge. And under New York law, that means the court never had jurisdiction.In New York, fingerprinting isn’t just bureaucratic. It’s a legal requirement: No prints, no arraignment. No arraignment, no jurisdiction. Without it, Luthmann says the court had no right to accept his plea—making the conviction void.Luthmann was in Allenwood Federal Correctional Institution in White Deer, Pennsylvania, at the time.No arrest. No booking. No prints. Therefore, no case, he argues.We also debated the wisdom of federalizing policing in DC. Richard thought it was necessary to reduce crime, while I thought it encroached on local power and violated the tenth amendment. What the HalesIn the What the Hales segment starting thirty-two minutes in, we talked about Jeremy Hales latest gambit, trying to violate my first amendment rights. He sent in a dirty cop from Peninsula Ohio PD named Officer Dennis Pongracz to issue an empty threat. Check out the voicemail and our subsequent conversation below. Pongracz falsely claimed that I would be violating “telephonic harassment” statutes in Ohio if I continued to contact Hales. The first amendment makes clear that Congress, “shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” The 14th amendment then extended the same duty to all other legislative bodies. As such, Officer Pongracz hates the first amendment and is a dirty cop. The email which triggered Hales is below. After Pongracz’s empty threat, I sent a follow up email to Hales, Peninsula PD Chief Nagy, the mayor and town council in Peninsula, and the Summit County DA’s Office.None of them responded, but this is not over. Officer Pongracz claimed to me that, “a report has been filed.” I have executed a public records request for that report, and the administrative assistant for Peninsula, Faith Dorton, passed the request to Peninsula PD Chief Jay Nagy assuring me, “this request to be received and responded to in a timely manner.” As if Hales BS wasn’t bad enough with this incident, he also claimed to have filed a Bar complaint against Lisa from Two Lee’s in a Pod, claiming she was practicing law without a license. A Bar complaint is only against members of the Bar, which she is not. Furthermore, the alleged infraction is that she mailed a filing which Ray Bonebrake wrote. Susan Bassi’s selective transparence crusadeIn the last segment starting fifty-nine minutes in, we talked about a study from Australia finding that police hurt domestic violence situations when they are called to investigate. This is a global problem, and our understanding of domestic violence is very poor. Then, Richard talked about his recent interaction with Susan Bassi, a former divorce litigant who now crusades for transparency. I like Susan and have interviewed her several times. In this case, she acted like a child. Julie Holburn, who still has a corrupt child custody case in Orange County, was trying the get public records from the Costa Mesa Police Department. One of their officers previously told her that they had been directed not to take her complaint of a protective order violation. Julie was asking for records, which Costa Mesa refused to provide. Richard stepped in, asking for the same records while putting several people including Susan and I on the email. Supervisor Hinrichs,We are journalists who cover family court, corruption, and justice matters nationwide.Reference is made to your email below. As a matter of public interest, we request these records:21-01352721-01915620210863392022093299Susan was triggered by this email and needed to respond. Please take me off this thread. I am not associated with and do not work with Julie Holburn. I have no idea who this is to or what it is about. It is not related to any of our reporting and it is not how we do records requests.Besides asking for records from the appropriate party, there’s no other way to do records requests. Susan doesn’t like Julie and won’t do her story. That’s one thing but actively trying to hurt her case is a bridge too far- one Richard wasn’t going to overlook. Luthmann says Bassi’s personal history with Holburn has caused her to “abandon her claimed principles.”“You are not welcome to send trolls on social media to attack and harass me… That is where you crossed the line,” Bassi snapped in an earlier email to Holburn, after Holburn publicly called out Bassi’s inaction.Bassi even threatened Luthmann with legal action: “Do not contact me again or I will seek the appropriate remedy,” she wrote, citing what she called the “harassing and defamatory nature” of their communications.The war of words had begun, with Bassi accusing Holburn of smearing her, and Luthmann charging Bassi with abandoning a victim to protect herself.He said more articles are coming. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelvolpe.substack.com/subscribe

The Unknown Episode 50

Richard Luthmann and I were back talking about gerrymandering in Texas, Tesla’s evolution into a cutting-edge technology company, and more details on the attempted false arrest by New York District Attorney (DA) Mike McMahon in the current events segment. In the What the Hales segment starting twenty-nine minutes in, we discussed how Jeremy Hales humiliated himself and served the wrong Richard Luthmann, along with his psychopathic bloodlust in celebrating the death of a lawyer involved in one of his lawsuits. Then, fifty-seven minutes in we updated on the Idaho Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force. Richard and I have tracked multiple states tackling family court reform. It started in Arizona, which formed the ad hoc joint legislative committee on family court orders. We interviewed the co-chairs- Republican State Senator Mark Finchem and Republican State Representative Rachel Keshel. The reform movement proceeded to Idaho, which formed the Idaho Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force. That task force held its first hearing on July 7, 2025. After, we interviewed the co-chair Republican State Senator Tammy Nichols. (North Dakota has also formed a task force but has not held any hearings yet.)During the interview with State Senator Nichols, the three of us noted that there was no local coverage of the initial task force hearing. The task force held a second hearing on July 31, 2025. The second hearing received plenty of local coverage, including this piece. A new Idaho legislative task force is wading into the complicated and emotional territory of child custody laws with the possibility of making changes.The Child Custody and Domestic Relations Task Force has met twice since the Legislature adjourned for the year, and co-Chairs Sen. Tammy Nichols, R-Middleton, and Rep. Heather Scott, R-Blanchard, said the group came about because of complaints from constituents.“Our purpose here is to study how child custody and family laws are being interpreted and applied by Idaho courts,” Nichols said at the first meeting on July 7.Nichols said the group of lawmakers will look into recommending changes to the state’s laws to “provide courts and citizens with more clarity.”Scott told the Idaho Capital Sun in a text message that many legislators had been hearing reports of parents losing full custody of their children to co-parents with serious criminal records and some who had been “stuck in the system for several years spending lots of money” to fight for their children “with no end in sight.”While that article provided in-depth coverage of the hearings, another local article focused on one lawyer who downplayed the systemic problems in family courts. Family attorney Kacey Wall was among those who testified on Thursday. Wall said that she spoke to provide a different perspective to the meeting: a lawyer's perspective.Wall said that at both meetings organized by the task force, they only heard of negative outcomes from trials."My concern was with the legislators only hearing these extreme examples of the ways that people feel that they got a negative outcome from the trial," Wall said.Wall is no stranger to me; she is the guardian ad litem (GAL) on Heidi Moreland’s case. I interviewed Heidi in July. Heidi said that Wall, who did not respond to several emails for comment, spent less than three hours with her children in the year plus she has been on the case. Wall’s appearance may be part of intense pushback to Heidi, who also appeared on another local broadcast. Heidi also testified at the initial hearing on July 7. Along with Wall’s appearance, Heidi received a frivolous cease and desist letter. The only crime that Heidi mentioned in her interview with me was reckless driving, when she stated that her ex-husband, William Moreland, would try and get into accidents with his kids in the car. She further stated that none of the abuse was physical, instead citing fat shaming, screaming, belittling, and the aforementioned reckless driving as examples of the abuse. The letter is vague, and its remedy is absurd. It makes leaps from vague allusions of possible defamatory statements to legal terms like defamation per se. It is written by someone without much of an understanding of defamation law, or maybe, that’s the writer’s perception of the recipient. I reached out to the attorney, a criminal defense attorney, and he did not respond. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelvolpe.substack.com/subscribe

Jeremy Hales goes over the edge

How’s your day going? I just received a call from a dirty cop named Dennis Pongracz, who claimed that if I continued to contact Jeremy Hales, I’d be charged with telecommunications harassment. I haven’t called him in months. I have sent several emails. Here is the details of the so-called crime they are threatening to charge me with. Officer Pongrancz and I had a pleasant conversation about the weather, the first amendment, and why he’s a dirty cop. That’s below. “If you contact Jeremy Hales again, you will be charged,” he said, and that’s all he said. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelvolpe.substack.com/subscribe

Jeremy Hales embarrasses himself and boasts about serving the wrong person

Unfortunately for Jeremy Hales close only counts in atom bombs, torpedoes, and missiles.Close is not good enough when it comes to proper service. Yesterday, he boasted to again serving Richard Luthmann, only if he had served him properly to first time he wouldn’t have tried to serve him again. “Paint chips has been served for the second time in Jacksonville,” Hales said with excitement. In reality, there are few processes less exciting than service, but Hales needs to milk content from his unsophisticated audience. By conjuring up drama, Hales may have taken it too far.That’s because he served the wrong Richard Luthmann, serving Richard Luthmann Sr. not Jr. I joined both Richard Luthmann’s to discuss the matter further. Now, Hales faces a dilemma. Does he risk committing a crime by filing a false affidavit or does he risk humiliation by asking the court for an extension? Luthmann was first sued in the beginning of April 2025. The ninety-day window is up. If Hales files a fraudulent affidavit claiming Richard was properly served, he could face criminal penalties. Richard warned him of that last night, in an email. Hales could also ask for an extension, like he’s done with other defendants. If he does that, he’ll admit to lying twice to his audience about serving Rich. He’s in a no-win situation, and that’s because rather than treating service like the boring and sober process it is, he tried to turn it into a side show. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit michaelvolpe.substack.com/subscribe