Epstein Investigation: Attorney Mary David Explains Challenges Behind Prosecuting Human-Trafficking Networks | Crime House 24/7

Good morning everyone, I'm Vanessa Richardson and this is Crime House 247, your home for

Breaking True Crime News.

Today we're taking a slight turn from our usual format for an extended discussion about

one of the most consequential sex trafficking cases in modern history, the Jeffrey Epstein

investigation, also known as the Epstein Files.

The all-new 2026 Toyota RAV4 is here and it builds on everything drivers know and love

about Toyota, with a redesigned look and modern tech that makes life behind the wheel easier

than ever.

The 26 RAV4 comes standard as a hybrid, providing smooth, efficient performance for both city streets

and longer journeys, while the available all-wheel drive keeps you in command when conditions

are unpredictable.

The new RAV4 is designed around the way people actually use their SUV, from daily errands

to weekend adventures, while the GR Sport model, coming soon, both CNET combined 320 horsepower

in a plug-in hybrid drivetrain with a GR tuned suspension for an even more responsive, exciting

drive.

No matter which RAV4 you choose, you'll enjoy the reliability Toyota is known for, coupled

with the inspiring performance that's unique to Toyota.

Shop more and find details at toyota.com.

The all-new RAV4 from Toyota, let's go places.

Welcome back to Crime House 24-7, we're discussing the Jeffrey Epstein case.

So to help unpack the legal dimensions of cases like this, I'm joined today by Mary David,

an attorney and expert in human trafficking.

Mary, welcome to the show, thank you so much for being with us.

Tell us a little about your background and what stands out to you most about the Epstein

case from a legal perspective.

It is so great to be with you for this conversation.

I was a prosecutor and worked a lot on cases that included sex abuse cases as well as violence

and other things related to sex trafficking.

I also helped to vacate convictions for victims of sex trafficking and I'm part of Harvard

University's Human Trafficking Advisory Council.

I helped to draft some of Maryland's laws against trafficking, which include aspects

of aiding a bedding, sex trafficking, and those definitely come up here in the Epstein

case.

I've also worked extensively with victims and non-profit service providers, so just very

grateful to have this conversation and dive into this because there are so many facets

within the Epstein case that relate to themes that I have seen as a prosecutor and in my

work with victims.

So a brief background on this case for anyone who isn't especially familiar with all of

the details.

Jeffrey Epstein was a wealthy financier whose social circle included celebrities, business

leaders, and powerful figures.

But behind that world of wealth and influence, Epstein also operated a years-long scheme

that included recruiting and sexually exploiting underage girls.

The allegations first really came to the attention of authorities back in 2005, and that's

when Palm Beach police began investigating claims that there was a teenage girl who had

been paid to give Epstein a massage at his Florida mansion.

Detectives as they started working on this case soon uncovered accounts from multiple

young women who said that they had been recruited sometimes by other girls and brought to

Epstein's homes where they were paid for sexual acts.

Investigators alleged that the activity involved minors and had been happening for years.

In 2008, after the investigation, Epstein reached a controversial plea agreement in Florida.

He pleaded guilty to state charges, not federal ones, that were only related to prostitution

involving a minor, and he served about 13 months in a county jail.

And that, of course, drew intense criticism from victims and legal experts who believed

that this case warranted far more serious federal prostitution.

Then, over a decade later, in July of 2019, federal prosecutors now in New York arrested

Epstein, and this time he was charged with sex trafficking and conspiracy involving underage

girls.

The indictment alleged that between 2002 and 2005, Epstein had abused multiple minors

at residences in Manhattan as well as Palm Beach.

But then, before the case could go to trial, Epstein was found dead in his jail cell in

August 2019, while he was being held at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in Manhattan.

The New York City medical examiner ruled his death a suicide.

But, the investigation didn't end there.

In 2020, Epstein's longtime associate, Galene Maxwell, was arrested and later convicted

of sex trafficking and related charges for helping recruit and groom underage victims.

She is currently serving a 20-year federal prison sentence.

The Epstein case continues to raise really difficult questions about trafficking networks

and how abuse can persist for years before victims are heard.

Thank you so much, Mary.

That was so helpful, because this case can be complicated.

I mean, people are talking about this case everywhere.

We hear it all the time, different aspects of it.

But it often feels like there's still a lot we just don't know.

Can you help explain to our listeners how prosecutors alleged his trafficking operations

actually functioned?

So specifically, what did investigators say the recruitment, grooming, and exploitation

process looked like?

And how was the network around him alleged to operate?

What prosecutors alleged is that young girls were recruited through these peer referrals.

So essentially, one girl who was being paid for these sexual acts, then brought in another

girl and this created a pipeline of victims.

So a girl who had already been abused would then bring in her friends from school or their

neighborhood and these victims were then paid these cash referral fees which were around

$100 per recruit.

So this created a cycle of recruitment and because of the promises of money, this normalized

sexual activity that continued to perpetuate the harm.

Thank you so much, Mary, for that explanation.

When we talk about sex trafficking in the Epstein case, what exactly do federal prosecutors

have to prove under the law?

So what elements must they establish to show that minors were recruited or coerced for

sexual exploitation and how do investigators typically demonstrate that they accused knowingly

participated in that kind of operation?

To secure a conviction for sex trafficking of minors, there actually doesn't have to be

force fraud or the coercion element.

So sex trafficking is defined as giving something of value.

That could be money.

It could be other things, promises of love or a place to stay, but giving something of

value in exchange for a commercial sex act.

With minors, if a minor is engaged in providing sexual acts in exchange for something of value,

they are automatically considered a victim of sex trafficking.

So proving that there was this coercion element that somehow someone was holding something

over their head or providing some sort of pressure is eliminated as a requirement to prove

it.

What needs to be shown is that the person who is being charged was in fact engaging in

that activity with a minor and that they were the ones who were giving something of value

that they were recruiting the minor, that they were harboring the minor.

So for example, in some capacity hosting them in their space, transporting them, if they

engaged in any of that activity, that would constitute the sex trafficking.

One thing that stands out in this case, in the Epstein case, is something you just mentioned

earlier, the alleged recruitment system involving younger girls bringing in other girls.

So from a legal standpoint, how do courts distinguish between someone who was exploited

and someone who may have participated in recruiting others, even if they were minors?

This is a very tricky and complicated question because we never want to diminish someone's

harm or abuse and exploitation, but at the same time, we want to recognize that those

who may have engaged in that activity were also victims themselves.

And this is especially important in the context of minors, where they are operating from

a place of being exploited themselves, that they are normalizing the experience, or it

has been normalized for them.

And that essentially they are not approaching this as being in their free will.

I've seen this come up and I actually know victims and survivors well who, unfortunately,

during the course of their trafficking, they engaged in this.

And in cases where it involves adults, there are often sex trafficking rings where the

person who has become closest to the trafficker, they're referred to as a bottom girl.

And their role, a lot of times, is to maintain the chain of command, ensure that everyone

else there are acting in line with what their trafficker wants.

And it's important to understand that the context for these victims, it's almost like

a cult mentality where they have been so severely abused, oftentimes, applied with drugs

and other things that also have clouded their judgment.

They've been told all kinds of horrible things by their traffickers and are victims of both

emotional abuse as well as physical and sexual abuse and are sometimes even operating from

a place of fear.

That is why it was so important to me as the point person for vacating convictions of survivors

is recognizing that there is this space where if they are engaging in these activities but

essentially don't have their free will or it was as a result of the force and the actions

of a trafficker who had them engaged in that system at the time that they engaged in that

conduct, that it really wasn't a choice.

And here in this context where we're talking about minors, it's important to remember

they're just even in terms of their brain, their development and just how they are processing

all of this, that their victimization is seen and the victimization of those who experience

the harm is also seen.

As a parent, this simultaneously infuriates me and terrifies me.

So not only as a parent, as a human being, what psychological tactics do traffickers

often use to manipulate and control victims?

How do they do it?

This is just so heartbreaking because they're really using tactics that prey on the vulnerabilities

of youth.

There was a trafficker, back when I was a part of the Maryland human trafficking task force

when I was out in Maryland, traffickers would actually go to malls or school playgrounds,

parking lots, and they would tell a girl, you're beautiful and see how she responded.

If she responded with a lot of confidence, blew them off, then they moved on.

But if they seemed unsure of themselves, didn't really know how to take a compliment, looked

in any way insecure, then they pressed on.

And there's actually, it's really awful, Vanessa, there's even a go-to-pimp handbook that

is available on Amazon, where they break down how to actually break someone's spirit, engage

in gaslighting, making victims think that the abuse is their fault.

And now, especially with social media, traffickers will even look up hashtags like I'm ugly,

I'm depressed, I want to unalive myself, and use that as a means of then reaching out

to a minor offering support.

Any trafficking situation that is what we call a lover boy situation, will typically

have elements where at first the trafficker is extremely disarming, they are very kind,

good listeners, and they provide support and emotional stability in a way that a lot

of victims haven't previously experienced.

But then, as they develop this relationship, there will often be some shift, where at

that point, they will develop a relationship and then say, hey, I am so low on money,

I just don't have a place to go, I'm sorry, just this one time, will you do this for me,

this one time, and that could be through only fans, it could be through an encounter

that they set up, they then say, I love you so much, will you please do this for me,

and that one time is never just one time.

And after they do that, they will often then engage in very brutal physical and sexual

behavior to then really shake the victim up, often then apply them with drugs and alcohol

while simultaneously blaming them for what they have experienced.

And many victims, it's a number in the high 90s, have a background of either child sexual

abuse or incest, where they have normalized feelings of guilt and shame around sexual

conduct, and so all they are seeking to do is get back to that place where everything

was good again, but it never really gets there.

No, this is so important for people to know, this is incredibly important.

When we come back, Mary David will continue to unpack everything we know about the Jeffrey

Epstein investigation.

On this show, we spend a lot of time focused on details because details can change how

you understand a case, and then travel details change how you understand a place.

For travel that gets the details right, visit go colette.com slash podcast and use offer

code travel 26 to get $200 off select colette explorations tours.

Get small group explorations tours are designed with that same focus on details.

You're led by experts and locals who know the destination inside and out, and groups stay

small with an average of just 19 travelers, so the experience feels more personal.

You might take part in a century's old tea ceremony in Japan, guided by the meaning

and tradition behind every step, or explore southern Africa on expert led safaris that

spend multiple days on game drives, giving you time to truly understand the landscape

and wildlife.

With colette, you get immersive travel bill on thoughtful planning, local expertise, and

more than a century of experience behind it.

For travel that gets the details right, visit go colette.com slash podcast and use offer

code travel 26 to get $200 off select colette explorations tours.

Testing season is right around the corner, and this is when confidence really matters.

When kids take time to review key concepts and strengthen their skills before assessments,

it can make all the difference.

IXL helps reinforce what they're learning right now, so they walk into every test feeling

prepared, capable and confident.

IXL is an award-winning online learning platform that helps kids truly understand what

they're learning, whether they're building math confidence, strengthening reading and

writing skills, or reviewing science concepts.

Designed for students from pre-K through 12th grade, IXL delivers personalized interactive

practice that adapts to your child's level and pace.

It's an easy, effective way to support learning as the school year heads into its final stretch.

Studies show kids who use IXL score higher on tests, proven in all 50 states.

IXL is used in 96 of the top 100 school districts in the US.

Make an impact on your child's learning.

Get IXL now, and listeners can get an exclusive 20% off IXL membership when they sign up today

at IXLLearning.com slash audio.

Visit IXLLearning.com slash audio to get the most effective learning program out there

at the best price.

Welcome back to Crime House 24-7, we're discussing the Jeffrey Epstein case.

So Jeffrey Epstein died in 2019 before his federal case could go to trial, so legally speaking.

What happens when a defendant dies before a criminal case is resolved?

How does that affect the government's ability to pursue the allegations, including possible

cases against others?

And what does it mean for survivors who are hoping to see accountability in court?

This is such a difficult situation to put victims and survivors in typically, well, when

a criminal defendant dies by a legal concept called abatement, the prosecutor will essentially

dismiss the indictment, and they can't proceed because in that setting, the conduct that

is in question, that is a liability, that is a guilt question that is personal, and it

really only rests with the defendant.

This actually became incredibly important even earlier when it goes back to, in the case

of Epstein, that horrendous non-prostcutorial agreement that was reached where the federal

prosecutors actually allowed him to plead guilty to these state charges, halftime in a

county jail, which is very different than prison, and she was on work release where for

12 hours a day, he was allowed to leave the jail, and hold meetings, he had a driver,

he had security, and all of that was done without contacting the victims.

And that was found to be a huge violation of the victims' rights legislation, but even

though the judge ruled that that really never should have happened, because Epstein

was dead, there was no way to really undo that.

And so that's where prosecutors then can still pursue co-conspirator, facilitator, and related

crimes by other individuals.

And so, unfortunately, the criminal charges in that indictment end when the defendant

is no longer alive, but there are still ways to get access to justice for victims, although

not fully in the same capacity.

Absolutely.

That does not sound like accountability and justice and closure for those victims.

Now, Galein Maxwell was convicted in 2021 for helping recruit and groom underage girls

for Jeffrey Epstein.

Does that conviction help establish a clear legal record of what prosecutors say the

trafficking operation looked like, and to what extent did Maxwell's trial fill in gaps

that might otherwise have been addressed if Epstein himself had faced trial if he was

still alive?

Galein Maxwell's conviction was very important because it still allowed victims to be able

to see someone who was directly involved in the operations receive a sentence for the

harm that she perpetuated for these victims.

It also allowed for a process to happen where they could then share their statements as

part of any sentencing and really be able to have that day in court and just finally

feel like they were heard and seen and that the courts and the criminal prosecution system

did stand with them.

So it was important in that regard and it also helped to establish certain timelines

and relationships that may not have otherwise to surface just through the course of the investigation.

It also opened the door in some avenues for things like compensation to come about.

What was actually also controversial with the sentencing and how the state, the Epstein

estate has handled all of this is they created a victims compensation fund and when they did

that, basically it was a way that streamlined justice for victims where now instead of going

through the courts, they could just provide some sort of verification that they were one

of the victims and then they could receive money directly from the estate.

The good thing is that in that way, victims again did receive some sort of acknowledgement

and also it avoided putting them through the horrible process of what trial does to a victim.

So that was great, it was a quicker way for them to get some justice but the downside

of that is that there is a lot of investigation and discovery that didn't happen and so there

are unanswered questions but again, it's that balance of honoring what is best for this

victim and what is best in terms of public interest and victims as a whole.

This trafficking victims often face enormous barriers to coming forward, I mean, that's

got to be incredibly difficult in cases like the Epstein investigation, such a public stage,

what are some of the biggest challenges survivors encounter within the legal system once they

decide to report abuse, what hurdles can exist in terms of evidence, time limits for bringing

the charges and the process of testifying or reliving those experiences in court.

The process of trial is so brutal on victims and survivors of exploitation.

You saw this with Virginia Jufrey, for example, in terms of the ways that she was attacked

in the media, how she just suffered so much scrutiny when she was in fact a victim and

part of what makes it such a nasty process is that the easiest way for the defendant's

counsel to attack the victim is to say that this was consensual and that the victim was

actually not a victim at all.

The way that they go about showing that is often through a very difficult questioning that

is happening in public and it really undoes a lot of the therapy that victims have often

gone through in order to just get them in a place where they can move on with their life

and can come forward.

That's a real struggle for prosecutors is that you of course want justice and you want

that for the victims but that process often really debilitates victims and survivors in

the process and my heart really broke for some of the victims who testified in the

Ditty case, for example, you saw as well where victims are, you know, there was one victim

in that case who literally couldn't even look anywhere except down at the ground during

this questioning and the defense counsel really just went into her and the biggest thing

they could do was say she had some sort of a Facebook post that, you know, acknowledged

Ditty's birthday and, you know, and just as an example anecdotally as it relates, you

know, they said, so you kept, you know, you kept celebrating the day that you were raped,

I mean, and just continually push that forward and so that kind of a process, I mean, it's

really damaging.

The other really difficult problem is when it comes to statutory limitations, that can

be very difficult because in the criminal justice system, it is pretty strict as far as

when the conduct occurred, you have from that moment until, you know, whatever that statute

of limitations is and in some cases like in New York, because of the many serious offenses

related to this coming out, they did actually have a window where from a certain time period

even if the statute of limitations had passed, you could still bring the charges forward

and it comes from a reason of understanding that the defendant is the one who is on trial.

So you want to give them the time and space to be able to bring a defense that is not so

outdated that they can't access witnesses that they can't access evidence and things like

that and that can help for for victims as well, but it can be a real challenge fortunately

in civil cases, there is a discovery rule that does actually allow this window to be

greater and again, that's a different kind of a remedy here where you're really looking

more at monetary damages typically and perhaps some sort of injunction on future behavior,

but at least with that, it's the same principle where in malpractice cases, it's when you discovered

or could discover that there was a harm.

So for example, in the Epstein case, if there were victims and survivors who recognized themselves

or came across something of photograph, anything that then brought back memories and you see

this often in civil claims related to sex trafficking, sex abuse cases, if they had a memory

or something was suppressed and then only came forward later, they do still have a greater

window for which to access some form of liability.

That's good.

I mean, little silver linings.

I mean, that's such a difficult thing.

This is incredible.

Still ahead, Mary David continues our conversation on Jeffrey Epstein.

This episode is brought to you by Progressive Insurance.

Whether you love true crime or comedy, celebrity interviews or news, you call the shots on

what's in your podcast queue.

And guess what?

Now you can call them on your auto insurance too, with the name your price tool from Progressive.

It works just the way it sounds.

You tell Progressive how much you want to pay for car insurance and they'll show you

coverage options that fit your budget.

Get your quote today at Progressive.com to join the over 28 million drivers who trust

Progressive.

Progressive casualty insurance company and affiliates, price and coverage match limited

by state law.

The Bleacher Report app is your destination for sports.

Right now, the NBA is heating up, March Manus is here and MLB is almost back.

Every day there's a new headline, a new highlight, a new moment you've got to see for yourself.

That's why I stay locked in with the Bleacher Report app.

For me, it's about staying connected to my sports.

I can follow the teams I care about, get real-time scores, breaking news and highlights all in

one place.

Hello, the Bleacher Report app today, so you never miss a moment.

High listeners, it's Vanessa Richardson.

I wanted to take a brief moment to tell you about another show from Crime House that I

know you'll love.

America's most infamous crimes, hosted by Katie Ring.

Each week, Katie takes on a notorious crime, whether unfolding now or etched into American

history, revealing not just what happened, but how it forever changed our society.

Real killers who terrorized cities, unsolved mysteries that keep detectives up at night,

and investigations that changed the way we think about justice.

Each case unfolds across multiple episodes, released every Tuesday through Thursday.

From the first sign that something was wrong, to the moment the truth came out, or didn't.

These are the stories behind the headlines.

Listen to and follow America's most infamous crimes, Tuesday through Thursday, on Apple

Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Welcome back to Crime House 24-7, we're discussing the Jeffrey Epstein case.

Mary, we've recently learned that both former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary

of State Hillary Clinton gave depositions as part of a congressional investigation tied

to Jeffrey Epstein.

Lawmakers say they're trying to understand Epstein's network and how previous investigations

into him were handled, so for listeners who may not be familiar with the process, what

exactly is a deposition, and how is sworn testimony like this used in an investigation?

A deposition is a formal legal process where a witness gives sworn testimony outside the

courtroom.

It's important because it then becomes part of the official evidentiary record, and it

can be accessed and utilized in the courts.

Depositions can be taken for different reasons.

It can happen as part of congressional investigations.

It can happen if there is someone whose testimony needs to be preserved, but perhaps they are

approaching the end of life, or there is a reason where they would not be able to testify

later.

It still provides an avenue to capture that testimony.

The witness is placed under oath, attorneys, or investigators ask questions, and there

is a court reporter who records every word.

They're really essential to gather information, evaluate credibility, and it can also help

to clarify timelines and relationships, which you see as how they're being used in these

congressional hearings, and witnesses are under oath to testify truthfully and they could

be subject to perjury charges if they do not do so.

So when investigators are trying to understand the scope of Jeffrey Epstein's network, you

mentioned people who knew him, how valuable can testimony from people who had social or

professional contact with him be, even if those individuals aren't accused of wrongdoing?

What kind of insight can their testimony provide about how Epstein operated and who may have

been around him?

The testimony of people who were in Epstein social circles can help to establish a timeline

and relationships if there were certain people that they saw or places where activity took

place.

It can be used to corroborate other witness testimony and also help to uncover details

that can lead to a questioning or lead to a lead that then really moves the investigation

forward.

So that can confirm if someone was present at a location, it can be valuable in verifying

travel schedules or identifying staff and assistants who were involved in and part

of the sex trafficking operation.

It's a giant puzzle that you're just trying to get all the pieces and get the picture,

the clear picture.

When you step back and look at the Epstein case as a whole, what do you think it revealed

about the challenges of prosecuting specifically sex trafficking networks?

This case really highlights how victims have been marginalized and minimized in the process.

I still cannot get over that non-prosecutorial agreement that was arranged, which was controversial

not only because of the freedoms that were afforded to Epstein, but also because it also

provided a space that eliminated liability for co-conspirators and there isn't even information

on who these co-conspirators were.

So that makes it that much more nebulous and also difficult going back to try and understand

what the details are.

When we talk about any sort of list, my mind always goes to what was this immunity agreement

and who was part of that?

We have seen through the congressional investigation, the congressional hearings just how many people

and the release of these files have shown just the magnitude and the scope of who was

involved here.

But I think what that also highlights is that, remember, this happened a long time ago.

I mean, those charges against Epstein were back in the early 2000s and so the fact that

this really didn't get blown up until many years later only as a result of the good

reporting and media exposure just highlights how things like this really get skirted under

the rug.

I think shows the way that media has a direct influence on prosecutions, on how things

come forward because I still remember as a prosecutor getting advice from another prosecutor

who said during Vardier where you question which jurors should be on the panel and they

said, ask them if they've seen pretty woman and whether they liked it.

And I was like, what a bizarre thing to, why would I ask that?

But that showed, in a sense, just what people's norms were and norms, unfortunately, are

a big part of how juries see or don't see victimization because victims, we want them

to be these very innocent and jellic-looking people when these are the toughest of the

tough, they had to be so in order to survive, they have criminal records, they have been

abusing narcotics oftentimes and that just, that doesn't take away from the victimization.

And the highlight here being that this could happen to so many children and so many people

looked the other way, shows just how far we also have to go in changing public perception

and also in changing the law.

I mean, there was a time where minors were actually charged and prosecuted for engaging in

prostitution.

I mean, no child is a prostitute, they are a victim and I know a victim who literally

would take those sentences because jail was safer than going anywhere else.

And that just shows how much work needs to be done to support victims and survivors

and gaps that desperately need to be filled.

Mary, that was incredible, thank you so much.

Before we wrap up, are there any final thoughts that you have for us today?

This is, we've covered so many things, but I'm always wanting to talk to you.

So any final thoughts before we wrap up?

One thing that I would love to share relates to how great liability can extend even

if victims are not able to get more justice in the criminal justice system.

One way that this has been balanced that we've seen in the Epstein case is through institutional

liability.

So going after some of the complicit entities that helped to further this sexual exploitation,

there was a settlement with JP Morgan Chase and Deutsche Bank, both of which agreed to

multi-million dollar settlements because they should have looked into these large sums

of money that were being sent to young women and that these should have been caught by their

normal internal audit systems, but those compliance mechanisms were overridden or overlooked

because of the fact that Epstein was this wealthy financier who was bringing in additional

business to the bank.

These settlements are incredibly important to highlight because it's also a way of ensuring

that other aspects, other players in the whole scheme here are aware and change how they

operate because unfortunately for a lot of these institutions, the only thing they're

going to be looking at is money and money makes change.

The other thing that really struck me with this was in regards to how we are seeing so

many things unfold in terms of litigation against meta and Snapchat as it relates to harms

that are being perpetuated against children and furthering sex trafficking.

And typically, a lot of these companies have been shielded by Section 230, which is this

prohibition on going after apps and social media networks because they have this communications

agreement where they essentially cannot be responsible.

So it is said for things that happen on their platform, they are just a platform, they're

not how the communication is essentially between the people that are involved, but that has

been challenged and will continue to be an issue because again, these platforms are

using algorithms that are specifically connecting certain people and aren't looking out for

the safety of miners, especially when accounts are being reported and those accounts are still

continuing to remain active despite parental pressure, despite miners sending in screenshots.

I mean, it should be a much more transparent process, but I do hope that where is changed

from social media platforms, and I'm glad that at least Congress is stepping up with some

legislation.

Oh, I agree completely again as a parent, there's only so much we can do, no matter how

connected we are with our kids, there needs to be some kind of protection and accountability

and justice, you know, for those victims.

Mary, thank you so much again for joining us on Crime House 247.

The Epstein case raises enormous questions about accountability, the mechanics of sex

trafficking networks, and the legal challenges of bringing justice for survivors.

Your expertise helped break down a very complex and often misunderstood area of the law.

You are a star.

Thank you so much, we appreciate you, walking us through how these cases are investigated

and prosecuted and helping our audience better understand what to look for as the broader

legal fallout from this case continues as it will.

I'm so grateful to join you, thank you for creating space for these important conversations

because again, media has such a powerful role to play in accountability, in securing

justice, and in ensuring that victims are heard.

Thank you, Mary.

Craving the coffee flavor you love, but without the caffeine, Kachava's got you covered

with their newest coffee flavor.

This all-in-one nutrition shake delivers bold, authentic flavor, crafted from premium

decaffeinated Brazilian beans.

Quality nutrition shouldn't be complicated.

Just two scoops of Kachava's all-in-one nutrition shake, and you've got 25 grams of protein,

6 grams of fiber, greens, and so much more.

Whether you're craving that coffee taste to kickstart your morning ritual, or as a nutrient-packed

reward to round out your afternoon, Kachava keeps you fueled and satisfied wherever your

day takes you.

Plus, it actually tastes delicious.

No fillers?

No nonsense.

Just the good stuff, your body craves.

And for the times you feel like switching it up, you've got seven flavors to choose from,

all with the highest quality ingredients.

Treat yourself to the flavor and nutrition your body craves.

Go to Kachava.com and use code fitness.

New customers get 15% off their first order.

That's KAC, H-A-V-A.com code fitness.

Thanks for listening to today's episode.

But sure what to listen to next?

Check out America's Most Infamous Crimes hosted by Katie Ring.

From serial killers to unsolved mysteries and game-changing investigations, each week Katie

takes on a notorious criminal case in American history.

Listen to and follow America's Most Infamous Crimes now, wherever you listen to podcasts.