Latest / The Vault: The Epstein Files / Mega Edition: The Warden's Statement Detailing The Death Of Jeffrey Epstein (Part 11-13) (6/14/26)

Transcript

Mega Edition: The Warden's Statement Detailing The Death Of Jeffrey Epstein (Part 11-13) (6/14/26) · The Vault: The Epstein Files

0:00
Speaker 1: What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode of the
0:03
Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're going to pick up
0:06
where we left off with the warden from MCC and
0:09
their interview with the OIG Inspectors. Question, Now, what kind
0:15
of employee is redacted? Answer? Redacted has some issues with her?
0:21
I mean, I don't want to you know, everything that
0:24
is going on is an allegation, so I don't want
0:26
to go speaking on allegations that I have sent up.
0:29
Question was she a problem employee? Then? Answer? I had
0:33
some issues? Yeah. Question any reason why she's believed that
0:37
she might be involved with Epstein and his death? Answer?
0:40
Oh no, I wouldn't put it as far as that.
0:42
I mean, but it's just I wouldn't and I don't know.
0:47
Mister Hayes pipes in again, but he's cut off. That's
0:50
why I went over. Can you rephrase your question? Like
0:53
what are we saying? Question? Yeah, I mean, I'm going
0:57
all the way too. I just ramped it up to
0:59
one hundred miles an hour. I'm just saying all the
1:02
way too. Probably could you was there any reason to
1:06
believe that she could be potentially involved with this? Answer?
1:11
As far as doing them harm? Question keeping his cell
1:14
door open and letting another cell door open for someone else?
1:17
You know? Answer, I wouldn't. I wouldn't see that question.
1:22
No answer. I couldn't see that, no question, no reason
1:26
to believe it would go that far. Just maybe in
1:28
subordination is the highest that she goes? Answer yeah, I would.
1:34
You know she has the allegations up. I know you
1:37
guys were seeing the allegations, so yeah, but I wouldn't
1:40
go that far. Hayes, Well, is she in a position
1:43
to do something like that? The award answers what Hayes
1:47
to leave the door open or something like that? Question
1:51
she does? Lieutenant Rounds answer yeah, question, she's the ops
1:55
lieutenant Hayes, she's in a position to do that. Answer.
2:00
But remember when you're going down range and the range
2:03
door keys, you can't have both. Somebody have to let
2:06
her down there. Question Okay, answer, and those keys those
2:10
keys go down. Question Do you know if she was
2:13
particularly friendly with either Noel or Thomas? Answer? I don't
2:19
know what the relationship was. She was the shift lieutenant,
2:22
so I don't know what the relationship was who she
2:25
had indiscernible For the eighth I just realized we might
2:29
not have the daily log for it. Question. Fortunately I
2:33
brought backups of different things, So I think I got
2:36
the ninth and the tenth is in there. Hayes, I
2:40
keep looking at this pile. I think those f' and
2:42
sons of bitches are working hard. Question. I don't think
2:46
the knight is in there? Just the tenth answer? No, No,
2:50
it's the second set question. No, that's the tenth answer. No,
2:55
the dates are the following date? Sorry, can I see them?
3:00
I just want to confirm with that question, of course. Yeah, yeah, okay,
3:05
that's August ninth. Okay, great answer. That's the previous date
3:10
that we don't have. Question all right, all right, so
3:14
what did you want to see? Answer? I wanted to
3:18
see that nine twenty six one question. Yeah, so that
3:21
is and this is what we're going to show you
3:24
is account numbers. That's what we're getting to. Next answer. Wait,
3:30
which is the one question? So this is from Friday,
3:33
August ninth? Answer? Okay, this is what time? This is?
3:38
Just it says just morning watch. But is it saying
3:42
the tenth? The other investigator pipes in, so it was
3:46
the email was sent out on the tenth morning, right, answer,
3:51
So she was working her shift. Yeah, but this is
3:54
August ninth. Question they sent it out the day after.
3:58
Answer Epstein is back. Question, so this is the one.
4:02
This is the one sent out on Sunday, August eleventh,
4:05
for the day prior starting Saturday August tenth. Answer No,
4:09
I get that. So she started her shift was morning
4:12
watch on Friday. Okay, So she goes to twelve o'clock,
4:15
so she's relieved by Lieutenant redacted. Question so this is
4:19
day of answer uh huh question, and this is we're
4:23
going to get into. So this one is the day
4:26
before August ninth when Reyes left, and we can look
4:29
to see on here as well where it says So
4:32
if we go to this at a thirty eight on
4:34
the lieutenant's log, it says at Reyus is pre removed
4:37
right here Reyes to pre remove at eight thirty eight
4:40
a m. That is August ninth, twenty nineteen. So we're
4:44
going to go all the way down to the one
4:46
thing I guess we want to look at is here
4:48
we got this individual, I am Fernandez, who is on
4:54
dry cell with staff in R and D watch answer right,
4:57
question from the shoe. So if you look at the
4:59
count where the heck is he gets cut off by
5:02
the warden. Okay, So I just want to go back
5:04
to clarify something with Lieutenant redacted. So we are saying
5:09
this is at nine twenty three, she did it right?
5:11
Question nine twenty six, she did it answer? This was
5:17
on the morning of the tenth Saturday morning. This is
5:19
when she sent it out question correct, like three hours
5:23
after Epstein was found. Answer, and this is Friday's log
5:29
question correct answer, and that the investigator cuts them off,
5:35
but that they the same thing. They all seem to
5:38
be sending it out the day before. Answered the day before,
5:42
and then she sent out the day before logs out
5:45
on a Saturday. Yeah, she combined it. If you look
5:47
through it, it has everything combined. It goes from morning
5:50
watch to day watch, the evening watch into he gets
5:55
cut off by the warden. Right. But I'm just that
5:57
should have been done the day before. Okay. Question I
6:01
don't think you're right, Bud. I think she's just doing
6:03
the ninth the next day does the tenth answer? Yeah,
6:07
that's right. Question, Yeah, No she's not. She does the
6:14
day before answer. She came on shift at ten pm.
6:18
The warden. She started her shift at ten ten PM
6:23
question and worked until six am, but got relieved at
6:27
five point thirty. So yeah, answer. The lieutenants were working
6:32
from ten to ten to six question correct because they
6:37
were told that the traffic issues or something else. Answer
6:42
in short, yeah question. So what we want to and
6:46
I want a kind of reference. Here is Iam Fernandez
6:49
on dry cell with shoe staff and R and D.
6:53
Answer right question and at the end of this this
6:55
show seventy two. So on August ninth, twenty nineteen at
6:59
a seven fifty nine am or August tenth, twenty nineteen
7:03
at twelve am, they're supposed to be seventy two inmates
7:06
according to this log that redacted sent out. Answer yeah, question,
7:11
they're supposed to only be seventy two inmates there, answer
7:15
right question. Now, look at the shift for August tenth.
7:18
When the person started their shift, there was seventy three,
7:22
and the institutional logs show twelve am there were or
7:26
so that looks like so there is let's go for
7:29
za there show is seventy five. At the four PM count,
7:33
the ten PM count their show seventy three, and then
7:36
at the midnight count there it says seventy two. However,
7:39
the count slips. If you recall where are the count slips,
7:42
it says the shoe submitted acount slip for seventy three
7:45
at twelve am. Here you go, so that is not
7:48
the count. So see twelve am they submitted Thomas Noel
7:53
submitted seventy three, although the institutional count says seventy two
7:57
now not redacted. But the next one shows that. The
8:00
next Ops lieutenant shows that seventy three is what's written
8:03
in this. She went back and changed seventy two the
8:06
day before with the nine thirty because it was determined
8:09
he gets cut off by the warden that he was
8:12
on out count, and the warden gets cut off by
8:15
the investigator, and so Fernandez was never removed. So look
8:19
at it shows it on this one shoe correction Fernandez
8:22
dry cell. So at twelve thirty five am, and we
8:25
do have Fernandez right here. Answer looking back question. Okay,
8:30
So this just says this is what happened with him.
8:33
He was found to have contraband that he was providing
8:35
to a visitor in the shoe at approximately like I
8:38
think one pm on August ninth. He was moved from
8:41
the shoe to dry cell and he was never keyed out.
8:45
So the institutional accounts are reflecting seventy three. That is
8:49
what the shoe continued reporting seventy three because that is
8:52
what's that, according to the system, was supposed to be
8:55
in there. But if they had physically counted, they would
8:58
have known that it was two correct answer right question.
9:03
So with this information, and I guess, as warden, would
9:06
that suggest to you that they were not actually conducting
9:08
their accounts? Answer? They weren't counting. And then there is
9:13
no count slip here for the inmate that was in
9:16
the dry cell in R and D question right answer,
9:20
there should have been account slip for him over there.
9:22
So what should have happened was the inmate him he
9:25
should have been out counted in R and D and
9:27
then the R and D you would have seen one.
9:30
So there was a count slip. Whoever sitting and watching
9:33
them should have did account slip on them, and then
9:36
whoever his backup was should have done account slip. Question.
9:41
And this is from my review of everything. This is
9:44
what I found. I don't want to put my words
9:46
into redacted's mouth, but let me know if this makes
9:49
sense to you. It says count discrepancy on the August ninth,
9:53
twenty nineteen, per the Daily Activity Report dated August tenth,
9:57
twenty nineteen, and the Attachment Tenant log from August ninth,
10:01
twenty nineteen. So that's what we're looking at here. The
10:05
day begins with seventy seven inmates assigned to ZA or
10:09
the Shoe. The five AM E one institution count respective
10:14
ZA shoe count slips eyes on count show seventy seven.
10:17
At eight thirty eight AM, inmate Reyis is pre moved
10:20
from ZA for count and taken off the Lieutenant's log.
10:25
The accurate ZA shoe count moves down to seventy six.
10:29
Reyes was removed from the institution and does not and
10:32
should not appear on any counts at this time. At
10:36
three fifteen PM, inmate Fernandez was placed on RA dry
10:40
cell from ZA, which moves the accurate ZA count down
10:44
to seventy five on the Lieutenant's log. The four PM
10:49
E one shows a total of seventy six inmates assigned
10:52
to ZA, with one in Attorney conference, which was Epstein.
10:56
This indicates that Fernandez was not keyed out of the
10:59
Shoe and keyed into RA. The ZA eyes on count
11:03
slip showed seventy five inaccurate. It should have reflected seventy
11:07
four because although there was seventy five inmates assigned to
11:10
the shoe, Epstein was in attorney conference, there were no
11:14
inmates assigned to RA on E one institutional count, and
11:18
there was no count slip for ra eyes on count.
11:21
This is where the problem begins. At six thirty four PM,
11:27
inmate Hemingway is moved to ZA and brings it down
11:29
to seventy four. Six forty seven pm, inmate Redacted is
11:34
move from ZA to EES, bringing it down to seventy three.
11:38
At eight twenty one PM, Felix and William moved to
11:42
ZA to Suicide Watch, bringing the accurate count down to
11:45
seventy one. At a twenty eight PM inmate Garcia Pina
11:50
is moved from K into ZA, bringing the accurate count
11:54
up to seventy two. And then at ten pm, E
11:57
one shows a total of seventy three inmates assigned to
11:59
the ZA but zero inmates assigned to RA. The ZAI
12:04
is on count slip show seventy three. Oh, this is
12:07
another one. I don't think we brought this. One of
12:10
the counts actually shows seventy three plus one. Do we
12:12
have that here? Yeah? Would that this also probably be
12:19
all Chinese to you. Answer, that's how our count slips,
12:23
that's how they look. Question now I did a foreign language? Heyes,
12:27
I don't understand. The fuck are you talking about? All
12:32
these initials and this and that? Question? So, which is
12:36
interesting is all of these are as you notice crossed off?
12:40
Answer right, question so these two are not crossed off?
12:44
This one says nine s plus one. This one says
12:47
seventy three plus one. The question had been when did
12:50
this happen? Answer? Yeah, question when did they put these
12:54
plus ones? Or why weren't they crossed out? Answer? But
12:59
you can't do this is an inaccurate count slip because
13:02
you're supposed to have the accurate count. You can't do this.
13:05
If this is a seventy three plus one, then you
13:07
should have seventy four on there. Question or in this case,
13:12
it should be seventy three minus one, because the accurate
13:15
count is actually seventy two. Answer no, but you wouldn't
13:19
write minus one on there. You would write the actual
13:22
count on there. Question right, Okay, answer either it was
13:28
seventy two or seventy four, but there is no gets
13:31
cut off by Hayes again, who has another stupid comment.
13:34
All right, guys, I'm going to slash some water on
13:36
my face. You guys are getting ready to kill me.
13:39
Picking back up with the conversation, the warden, there is
13:42
no such thing as a plus one question. You're not
13:45
allowed to ghost count correct answer. No, No, there should
13:48
have been an outcount done so, and this should have
13:51
been caught whoever the shift lieutenant was, because they have to,
13:54
you know, on each shift, conduct account and review the
13:57
count slips. Does this tell you anything though, that these
14:01
were crossed off and these weren't answer? Yeah, unless I
14:04
don't know why. He gets cut off again by the investigator.
14:08
Do you think that they were replaced at a later date? Answer?
14:11
I mean it gives that appearance because at first I
14:14
would want to know why you crossed out? Question? They
14:19
crossed out because as things come in, you check it off. Answer,
14:23
So that's what I'd want to know, Like whose habit
14:26
is this? Like okay, what am I looking at? So
14:30
basically I think it's standard practice as a control officer,
14:33
asked the other investigator. Answer by the warden. No, I
14:36
mean I've worked control, and what I would do is
14:39
I would do the check off. I'm doing this I've
14:41
never and that's people's style. Question okay, answer, that might
14:46
be their style. So I just want to know this
14:50
is one I believe he gets cut off by the
14:52
other investigator, So then that's how REDACTA does it. So
14:56
my question is, then why isn't this done like I
15:00
mean this? If he doesn't like this, then that's his
15:04
consistent way of checking it out. But if this is
15:07
all on that shift, now he gets cut off by
15:10
the other investigator. But the point being, you will agree
15:13
that this indicates that from four pm on the counts
15:16
were not conducted. Correct answer, No, they were not conducted.
15:20
Question the shoe counts answer yeah, question okay, then we
15:25
don't really need to go into too much detail on that.
15:27
Is this the first time that you're seeing this? Answer? Yeah,
15:30
I haven't seen that before. Question Okay. All right, we're
15:33
gonna wrap up right here, and in the next episode
15:35
dealing with the topic, we're going to pick up where
15:37
we left off. All the information that goes with this
15:40
episode can be found in the description box. What's up, everyone,
15:44
and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles. In
15:48
this episode, we're diving right back in to the interview
15:51
that the warden from mcc gave to the OIG inspectors question,
15:56
now we're going to move on because the warden agrees
15:59
that there is not really reason to really dig further
16:02
because he agrees this clearly shows that the counts were
16:05
not conducted in the shoe from a certain time. On question,
16:10
do you want to ask about the Fernandez key? The
16:13
investigator responds, what about it? The warden? Who's responsible? Question?
16:18
So Fernandez? Oh, can you just sorry? Would you mind
16:21
signing initially and just dating if Fernandez was actually removed
16:25
from the shoe and placed onto our You know RA
16:29
dry cell and R and D dry cell RNA, R
16:32
and D are interchangeible, correct, because RA for RA, I
16:37
believe is what it shows in the count slip. But
16:40
it stands for R and D right. Answer, I believe. Yeah.
16:44
Question so, if he's actually moved there around the three
16:47
pm on August ninth of twenty nineteen, who would have
16:50
been responsible for keying him in and out of the
16:53
shoe and placing him into the ra so that the
16:55
count would be accurately reflected? Answer? You would have notified
17:01
control center that we're moving one over to R and D.
17:05
Question and by that notification. Do they also say can
17:09
you please keep him out and into or is this
17:11
just automatically done by control? Answer? Well, the notification is
17:16
made to control that inmates such and such is being
17:19
placed on dry cell and R and D, and then
17:22
you key the inmate to that area. Question sure, answer,
17:26
So I'll give you a quick background. It looks like
17:30
redacted witnessed this, and he wrote up the shot, and
17:35
he called the lieutenant, and he requested the lieutenant, And
17:38
it looks like he requested the lieutenant, but he never
17:40
notified control that an inmate was being moved right. Question Well, no, no, no, no, no,
17:47
I wouldn't. I wouldn't. He gets cut off again, but
17:51
by the word in this time. But then while the
17:53
counts are going on, there's somebody in R and D.
17:56
So whoever is sitting in R and D should have
17:58
known that I need to do a count slip because
18:00
I have an inmate down there. Hayes interjects, is this
18:03
where somebody disappears that we're looking for warden? Right? Question again,
18:10
I told you this was more of an administrative thing,
18:13
just to say, what does the warden you know? And
18:15
the boss of this place, what's his take on these
18:17
matters because, as you have gathered, a lot of things
18:20
went wrong this day, so we need to figure out
18:22
why these things went wrong. Let me just make sure
18:26
before we move on that I got everything all right.
18:28
So first, before we get into the rounds, when a
18:31
lieutenant conducts a round in the shoe, are there required
18:34
to conduct a round of the inmates going up and
18:36
down the different tiers or does the round consist of
18:39
just checking in with the officers to make sure everything's okay? Answer? Well,
18:45
to check the officers to make sure that they're all right,
18:47
and you check the documentation, so you check, you know,
18:50
you edit. You would have to review the post orders
18:52
also to state what their duties are. I mean all
18:55
of us had different you know, I was a lieutenant,
18:58
so it was different things did. But I always checked
19:01
the two ninety twos to make sure, you know, the
19:03
officers checked off, you know, if the person ate or
19:06
not any medical I would check to see if medical
19:09
came up, so it would not be a factor. And
19:11
depend on what shift you went on. You know, the
19:13
day shift, the inmates are up, so you're going to
19:16
you know, you can go around evening shift. You can
19:18
see what's going on the midnight shift. They're sleeping, but
19:22
you're definitely checking a thirty minute log to see if
19:24
the inmates are doing their thirty minute checks. And you know,
19:27
just documentation question now as the Wharton, did you expect
19:32
your lieutenants though to go down range when they were
19:35
doing the lieutenant visits in the shoe their rounds? And
19:39
this is specifically when they're like signing off on the
19:42
different like on as you can see, this is what
19:44
I'm going to be showing you. These are the round
19:46
sheets you sent to misredacted or mister adacted where it
19:50
shows the different lieutenants signed off on and what they
19:53
and they did their around. So what does that he
19:58
gets cut off by the war But what does what
20:01
the lieutenants are checking for his accuracy of the officers rounds? Question? Okay,
20:06
this is he gets cut off by the warden again.
20:09
So what they're checking is, okay, we're the thirty minute
20:12
in frequent checks done. Now if there isn't easy that
20:16
they are not being done, you know, so you know,
20:19
then it needs to be annotated and said, Okay, this
20:22
is what the issue is. But if they're signing it,
20:24
they're kind of acknowledging that you know that the time
20:27
that the round will be put down that they were done. Question, Now,
20:32
what would be this is the round it looks like
20:35
for eight eight. Can you think of a reason why
20:37
these wouldn't be done but they would be signed off
20:40
on right here? Answer? Let me see. So if a
20:43
lieutenant made the rounds and saw this thing was empty
20:46
like this, then it's a problem question because you have
20:50
this eight eight and then there is zero rounds showing
20:53
that they were conducted, but this lieutenant signed it. Answer
20:57
that's a problem. Question that same thing. We go this
21:01
whole thing, so the whole shift looks like that. Then
21:04
they didn't even sign until here on eight eight? Answer?
21:07
Wait did you print these off the logbook? Question? This
21:11
is what you sent to mister redacted? Answer right question
21:14
on Saturday, August tenth, at six twenty one pm. Answer, now,
21:20
the only other thing I can think of, And when
21:22
I had gathered something I might have said, because the
21:24
checks are done at like no, these are thirty minute checks,
21:28
so they you know these are this is I was
21:32
thinking of the log the log did it electronic? He
21:36
gets cut off by the investigator. We have the electronic version?
21:40
Answer yeah, this is he gets cut off again by
21:43
the investigator. Which one? So this is just wrong? Answer? Yeah,
21:48
it's wrong. Question should have this lieutenant sign that? Answer? No,
21:52
he should have signed it. They should have put something
21:55
listed as some discrepancy why the checks weren't done? Question?
21:59
And on these where as it looks like this lieutenant signing,
22:02
it looks like probably because these are done. Do you
22:04
think that this is the reason why the individual hadn't
22:07
signed these because these weren't correct? Answer? Probably. I can't
22:11
speculate on that question because it says reviewed by morning
22:15
Watch lieutenant where they do that, Well, that lieutenant does
22:19
start signing it here where they now were filled out?
22:23
Answer right, question for the same date. Answer, So this
22:26
looks like, hey, I don't know who it was, but
22:29
this looks like indiscernible worked it. Let me see how
22:32
those thirty minutes. That's the same one. I don't know
22:34
who it was? Question. Okay, so that was indiscernible, certainly,
22:40
go look but whomever it was during those shift And
22:42
then we get into it looks like still here's eight
22:46
nine where it signed off until two pm. Answer that's
22:51
a problem. Question after that, no sign off? Same thing
22:55
and that's just when I think redacted left his shift
22:58
or somewhere around that time. So mister Hayes jumps in
23:03
once again. The point of this, if I may ask,
23:05
is we got a miscount right? Question? Where not we
23:10
moved on from the counts. We're in the rounds. Hayes, Okay,
23:13
now counts. The significance of the count is at some
23:16
point Reyes disappears. Question No, the significance of the count
23:20
is that if inmates or if the staff members aren't
23:23
conducting counts, and counts are to the accountability of the
23:26
inmates to make sure everybody is there rounds or basically
23:30
to make sure everybody's alive and breathing. Is that correct, sir? Answer? Yeah,
23:34
you're right. Counts or accountability, and then the thirty minute
23:37
checks are basically safety checks. Question. So the point of
23:42
the questioning is it looks like that we just finished
23:45
was counts and we have shown that the staff members
23:48
were not conducting their counts. Mister Hayes, right, because that
23:52
is why you have seventy two when it should be
23:55
seventy three. Question. Now we're doing the rounds to find
23:58
out if the staff members were doing the rounds Hayes,
24:01
got it. Question, And again we have in this case
24:04
a very high profile inmate that was deceased, became deceased
24:07
at some point. And yeah, if they were not conducting
24:13
rounds at all, if they were conducting rounds, would that
24:15
be And that is the question to you, like we'll
24:19
ask you now since I'm making that explanation, if they
24:21
were conducting the rounds, would that be away at least
24:25
to try and help ensure that inmates such as Epstein
24:27
were alive. And well, I know it's not going to
24:30
prevent it in every case, but is that part of
24:32
the reason to make sure that if they are conducting
24:35
around you're checking to see if they're alive and they're breathing. Answer,
24:39
it's true, But I mean and because I mean an inmate,
24:42
can you know you can do your thirty minute rounds
24:45
and if they want to harm themselves, they're going to
24:47
do it. Question right, And that goes into play with
24:52
gets cut off by Hayes. They just look like they
24:54
do rounds by looking in the cell. Word and right, Hayes.
24:58
So if they want to do harm, you just wait
25:00
until they passed yourself. Answer by the warden, right, and
25:04
then you kind of figure out the timing of the route.
25:06
But the fact remains, if you're not showing on the
25:09
form that you did your rounds, then that's a problem. Question. So,
25:14
when you're looking at these rounds that are sent to
25:17
mister redacted, are you finding problems because they're not completed correctly?
25:22
You know what we just look through In fact, you
25:24
know these are August tenth indiscernible, they're not signed off,
25:28
there's blocks that are not filled out. Answer yeah, looking
25:31
at them now. Question right, Well, does it show you
25:34
that at least this paperwork doesn't appear to be filled
25:36
out correctly. Answer yes, question and that is for the
25:40
eighth as well. Answer right. Question. So that was mister
25:46
Hayes again jumps in, and that is something It was
25:49
your job to pass that on to redacted the warden.
25:53
No he requested he gets cut off by the investigator. No, no, no,
25:57
this is just to show that the rounds or the
25:59
rounds that the warden sent to the regional director or
26:02
these rounds. So it's just a matter of hey, do
26:05
you know if these rounds were It has nothing to
26:07
do with his you know, if he did right or not.
26:10
It's about what the staff members are doing right, Hayes right.
26:15
Question and who was responsible to make sure that the
26:17
round sheets are done correctly? Answer? While the staff working
26:21
up there are responsible, and then the supervisor is supposed
26:24
to ensure that they're doing it. Question and what is
26:28
this this was also attached? What is this right here?
26:31
What are we looking at? Truscope blogs? Answer? Yeah, this
26:36
looks like truscope. This looks like the log and so
26:39
like if they're doing what areas they search? Question? And
26:43
these are searches? Answer? Yeah, these look like searches. Question okay, answer,
26:49
let me see that search. Did the areas visiting strip
26:52
room recreation? Yeah? These are the search areas. Question does
26:56
it show anywhere in there that there were cells that
26:58
were searched or that they were all like common areas? Answer? No,
27:03
they searched it. It looks like what is this nine
27:05
souths shoe complete at all? These look like everything that's
27:10
been done in there fire and safety checks? This is
27:12
it looks like the log? Question Okay, so this goes
27:17
with you? Answer? Uh huh. Question so all of this
27:20
this is something else that we ask for the BOP
27:23
to print out for us, and this one specifically the
27:25
one we ask for when you send us the cell
27:28
searches that were conducted on eight nine, twenty nineteen. We
27:32
got back one by mister Redaktid. It says it was
27:34
conducted at twelve thirty six pm on eight nine, twenty nineteen.
27:39
Is that a problem that only one cell search was
27:41
conducted in the shoe according to at least according to Truscope.
27:45
Answer because I believe the post orders state it was
27:48
supposed to be. And don't quote me on it. You
27:51
have to look at the post orders, but they state,
27:53
I think five a shift a minimum of five. Question.
27:58
It's five, I believe for the night watch. The day watch,
28:01
I believe is more, and the morning watch is just indiscernible.
28:05
Hayes searches answer by the warden. No, No, each shift
28:10
is a minimum of five. Question. I don't think that
28:15
includes the morning watch though, because there's common areas. Hayes,
28:19
you're supposed to do five cell shifts, five cell searches
28:22
per shift. Answer yeah, Hayes, all right, And in this
28:26
case there is only indication that they did one answer
28:31
one right question one the whole day. Answer one, the
28:35
whole day, not per shift, the whole day. Hayes. Okay,
28:39
now whose job is it? He gets cut off by
28:41
the warden. No, Hayes picks back up to say, we
28:45
aren't doing those I was going to use the F word.
28:48
Why aren't you doing all those shifts? Question? Well, this
28:51
is this is my question to the warden. Is that
28:54
a problem that they were only logged into truth scope? Answer?
28:58
Uh huh, it's a problem. Question Does that indicate that
29:01
the cells were not being searched to you or that
29:03
they were just logging them in? Answer? And again, whoever
29:07
was working that day, you're going to have to ask them.
29:09
I mean, looking at the paper, I mean it shows
29:12
you didn't you didn't conduct your searches. Question okay, answer,
29:17
I mean, now there might have been a reason where
29:19
the person said, okay, the computers were down or whatever,
29:22
but it's highly unlikely. So yeah, Hayes, you throw over mattresses,
29:28
the whole thing. Warden. No, you pull them out, you
29:31
look at you look check stuff in the lockers, you
29:33
check under their stuff, you know, and typically do it
29:36
like on certain days when the guys are going out
29:38
to take a shower, you might go out and do that. Question.
29:42
So with your suggestion that the computers could be down
29:45
and things like that. As you can see from the
29:47
email attachment that you said, there were certainly plenty of
29:49
searches that were entered in there, but there is only
29:53
one cell search. Answer right, question and so I would
29:56
assume would that indicate that the computers are actually up?
29:59
And answer? Yeah, this one. This is the same day. Yeah,
30:06
this should be A ten, eight nine, and eight ten.
30:11
It shows the dates here, I just can't see them. Warden. Yeah,
30:16
change base. Yeah, this is search one. This is the
30:18
log question Okay, so problematic in your opinion? Answer yes, yes,
30:24
it is. All right, folks. We're gonna wrap up right here,
30:27
and in the next episode dealing with the topic, we're
30:29
gonna pick up where we left off. All the information
30:31
that goes with this episode can be found in the
30:34
description box. What's up, everyone, and welcome to another episode
30:38
of the Epstein Chronicles. In this episode, we're gonna dive
30:42
right back in to the interview given by the warden
30:45
at MCC to the OIG investigators. Question all right, so
30:50
not only searching them, but it's equally as important to
30:53
actually log it as well, so that we know whether
30:56
things are being searched. Answer, yeah, you should log it.
31:00
Question all right. Now, this comes to the kind of
31:03
question on this When Epstein was found, are you aware
31:06
that he was in a cell that didn't coincide with
31:09
what his inmate history quarters and what the BOP database said?
31:14
Where should he have been he was in the wrong cell? Answer?
31:17
I did hear afterwards that there was some kind of
31:19
issue with centry and the way they keyed it into
31:22
the cells. Question all right, and what did you hear? Question?
31:26
I think just that the cell the way the inmates
31:29
were being keyed in was off. It didn't match his cell.
31:34
Question right, So, yeah, his assigned cell within the BOP
31:38
database was not where he was located in person, at
31:42
least when he was found on August tenth, twenty nineteen.
31:46
Answer right. The lawyer Hayes has another comment. Now, is
31:51
that something that he stops mid sentence then picks back up.
31:55
I should shut up, right the investigator? No, No, I'm good.
32:00
Go ahead, Hayes. Now, is that something that goes up
32:03
on you? Is that your responsibility to see where the
32:05
guys are being called? Answer? No, but I mean he
32:09
gets cut off by the investigator. Yeah, most of my
32:12
questions to him, isn't that it's his responsibility? It's where
32:17
those responsibility and whose responsibility was it? Hayes Okay, got it. Question.
32:23
So who should have made sure that Epstein's sell in
32:26
the BOP database matched where he was physically located, because
32:30
obviously people get a hold of the information that he
32:33
wasn't in his assigned cell. You know, that is just
32:36
more reason for people not trusting the government. So we're
32:39
just trying to figure out he gets cut off by
32:43
the warden. Well, and this is not a problem limited
32:45
to one person. It's a problem, and I think it's
32:48
a bureau wide problem as far as specific king in cells.
32:52
I don't think that this was done in a malicious
32:55
He gets cut off by the investigator. So what happened
32:57
here our investigator shows is that when he came back
33:01
from suicide or psychological observation, he was placed into the
33:05
cell that it shows on July thirtieth on this form. However,
33:10
because is it SEPAP his SEAPAP machine, the cord didn't
33:14
reach the plug, so they had to move them to
33:16
a different cell. Answer or right question. So from July
33:20
thirtieth to August tenth, he was in the incorrectly assigned cell.
33:25
No one ever caught that no one ever, you know,
33:28
and my thought being is, well, if they're doing their
33:30
cell searches, he gets cut off by the warden. Oh,
33:34
I thought you meant that the cell didn't match up
33:36
with He gets cut off now by the investigator. No. No,
33:40
they logged them into the cell that he was placed
33:42
in coming out of psychological observation answer right question on
33:46
the thirtieth. Then they physically moved them to a different cell.
33:50
Answer right question on the thirtieth because the seapat machine
33:54
wasn't the cord didn't reach Hayes. What is the sea
33:57
pat machine? Question? It's the snore. It's to help you
34:02
breathe when you're sleeping Hayes, and he needed a cpat
34:05
machine question, Yes, sir, don't call me sir please, I'm old.
34:10
All right, you're reminded me question. And so no one
34:14
ever went back into the system from all the way
34:17
from the thirtieth up to August tenth and made that correction.
34:20
Answer right question. Who is responsible for that answer? So,
34:25
whoever made the cell change should have contacted control center? Question?
34:30
And is the control center that actually made the change,
34:33
not the individuals in shoe or the shoe lieutenant answer No,
34:39
the he gets cut off by the investigator, because my
34:42
understanding is that it would have been Shoe lieutenant or
34:46
the OIC answer bed changes question to verify their cell
34:50
mate where were wherever? The BOP databases said that they
34:54
are answer, so you have to you would have to
34:58
call control center to make that change. Question? Okay, So
35:02
who should have called the control center? Answer? Whoever made
35:06
the change in centry because I and then don't quote
35:09
me if I'm wrong, because I don't believe shoe staff
35:12
have control over king where an inmate is in question? Yeah? No,
35:17
I thought the OIC might or that the Shoe lieutenant
35:20
would answer no, because in that case, beds would really
35:25
be messed up. Question right right? Answer? So the control
35:30
center is a centralized area, so a call should have
35:33
been made down to control saying, hey, this is where
35:36
he's being keyed to, and this is what he gets
35:39
cut off by the investigator and who should have made
35:43
that call? The warden responds, whoever made the change? Whoever
35:47
switched them? Question? And my understanding is that the OIC
35:51
and the Shoe lieutenant were supposed to review cellmates to
35:55
make sure that inmates were in their assigned cells at
35:59
least on a periodoutical basis, is that correct? Answer? Yeah,
36:03
you do a what we call a bedbook check to
36:06
make sure because you're bored. You know, when you're in
36:09
the unit, you have to board up there and you
36:12
just match where everybody's at. Question and how often should
36:16
that happen? Answer? There's no set policy, but as a
36:19
good practice, you know, you kind of want to check
36:21
what your open cells are, where you know where individuals are,
36:26
and should it also be checked if they were doing
36:28
cell searches? Would that be caught if they were doing searches?
36:35
Answer by the warden, Well, if you're doing a cell search,
36:38
all you were doing and going to do is put
36:42
down the cell number and the individual in it, you
36:45
wouldn't necessarily be able to find out if it's the
36:48
correct room question. Okay answer and the correct bed and
36:52
sentry question. All right, So in this instance then, and
36:58
I'll shut up so I can actually that you answer,
37:01
who is that that should have notified control center to
37:05
make this change. It sounds like you said whoever physically
37:08
moved them at the time. Answer, So what happens is
37:11
whoever physically moved them should have said, Okay, this is
37:14
where you know you are this is where we are
37:16
moving them, and then you let typically the OIC no,
37:20
and then they will call down to control center. Question
37:24
and if that didn't he gets cut off by Hayes.
37:28
Can I speak to my client for a second? Answer? Yeah,
37:32
So he takes his client to the other room and
37:34
then they come back. Question all right, so we stop
37:37
with we were talking about who was responsible for making
37:40
sure mister Epstein was logged in to the correct cell
37:43
within the BOP system? Were there other cells that were wrong?
37:49
Do you know that? Redacted? Answer not? We don't know
37:54
if this We know only because we check this question. Okay,
37:58
So I mean everything else could have been right and
38:01
that could have been gets cut off by the other investigator. No,
38:04
well we found out this is the reason was because
38:07
again he was placed into that cell and then moved
38:10
because of the CPAT machine. Answer. No, I was, you know,
38:14
wondering if it was a systematic problem or an individual problem.
38:19
Question correct answer. That's why I was just curious. Question. Yeah,
38:24
and that's something that we should probably. He gets cut
38:28
off by Hayes again. Well, and my question is does
38:30
that have any effect on count? I mean, they still
38:33
should be able to look in the cells if there
38:36
was an indiscernible question. Well, the problem comes in again,
38:41
I think, is the credibility of Hey, now we have
38:44
Epstein who was found in a cell and it's not
38:46
as assigned cell. So that just you know, the media
38:50
says all of these things just went wrong. Hayes. Yeah,
38:55
question one being wait, he is not even in the
38:59
right sell Well, how did that happen? And who was responsible?
39:03
Hayes Okay. Now, so my question is doesn't make any difference.
39:07
I mean, if they're supposed to do count, the count
39:09
is you look in the cell and whether there's a
39:13
guy in there, Well, whatever number he's in or he's
39:16
not in, he's still in his cell. Question. No, correct, Hayes.
39:21
You know. Question. But because we're doing this deep dive review,
39:25
it's showing these differences and again this is one of
39:29
those things and not like indiscernible. Yeah, we just have
39:33
to we have to address the fact that mister Epstein
39:37
wasn't in the cell that he was assigned to. Hayes Okay,
39:40
I mean it's not just that someone indiscernible that he said,
39:44
oh he doesn't have a roommate, and you know, by
39:46
the way, he also counted the wrong number of prisoners.
39:49
That's a lot of mistakes. Question right, and we haven't
39:53
even gotten involved, as I'm sure you know. But so
39:58
after the person who moved him didn't contact and have
40:01
this changed, how would have then? How would we then?
40:05
How would we have anyone found out that he was
40:07
in the wrong cell. What processes are in place to
40:10
ensure that they were matches with the actual database? Answer well,
40:16
I guess if they were doing he gets cut off
40:19
by the investigator. You said bedbook counts. Answer yeah, usually
40:23
you could do you do your bed book counts to
40:26
ensure you know that every inmate is in the cell
40:29
that they're supposed to be. When you were updating your
40:31
accountability board, you would look and see and okay, you
40:35
got him here, where's he at? And then match it up,
40:37
you know with century question and who would be doing
40:41
those things? Answer the staff working up there and chew
40:45
question is the lieutenant, the shoe lieutenant at all involved
40:49
as far as you know in making sure that this
40:51
is all accurate? Answer? Well, he was spearheading it to
40:55
make sure everything was right. Yeah, he was the supervisor
41:00
going in and saying okay, did this happen? Have we
41:03
done this, and have we done that question? Okay? Hayes
41:09
interrupts again. Okay, just to make it clear, somebody dropped
41:12
the ball as to whether or not he should have
41:14
had a roommate, and somebody dropped the ball as to
41:18
whether he was in the right cell. Okay, and then
41:21
somebody would have dropped the ball as to either drop
41:24
the ball or they maliciously didn't find out that he
41:27
wasn't on the count. They had said, we did the count,
41:31
but they didn't notice that or didn't that he wasn't breathing.
41:34
You know what I mean. Okay, that starts to be
41:38
a problem. Back to the questioning. So redacted just pointed
41:43
out to me on the after action review, they did
41:46
review this, and it says that according to their review
41:49
or adapted the review, significant discrepancies exist within century regarding
41:53
cell quarter assignments. Although it's well documented inmate Epstein was
41:58
housed with two other inmates during assignment in the Shoe,
42:01
Century does not reflect this information accurately. Inmate Epstein was
42:06
found within cell to twenty, that century never reflects him
42:10
being housed within that cell at any time. But to
42:13
answer your question, the first sentence says, that there is
42:16
significant discrepancies. The way that I read that is overall,
42:21
whether they're referring to specifically Epstein that I am not
42:25
able to determine based upon that sentence, But it does
42:28
sound like overall that they had some discrepancies. So Lieutenant
42:32
redacted would have supervised it, but it's really the staff
42:35
that would be responsible for doing these bed book counts
42:39
and making sure the assignments are the inmates are in
42:43
their assigned quarters. Answer, yeah, he did it right there.
42:48
And then whoever is moving in inmate from cell to
42:51
sell you make the notification question? And is it surprising
42:57
to you that almost two weeks later that wasn't caught?
43:01
Answer at two weeks later? From where? Question? From when
43:04
he was placed into the cell on July thirtieth, twenty nineteen,
43:08
he's found August tenth, twenty nineteen. The entire time it
43:12
was never caught that he was not in the right cell?
43:16
Answer yeah, question, is that a significant amount of time
43:19
that went by without catching that? Answer? Without catching it?
43:23
It is all right, folks, We're gonna wrap up right
43:26
here and in the next episode dealing with the topic,
43:29
we're gonna pick up where we left off. All The
43:32
information that goes with this episode can be found in
43:36
the description box.