Inside The OIG Interview: MCC Captain's Statement Detailing The Death Of Jeffrey Epstein (Part 12) (4/4/26)

What's up everyone and welcome to another episode of the Epstein Chronicles.

In this episode we're going to pick right back up where we left off with the unnamed

captain from the MCC and his interview with the LIG inspectors.

Question, all right, so 4pm through, he gets cut off by the captain, the control center R&D,

it's bad. Question, okay, just a clarifying question. Can a person do account? Let's just say

they know someone is in a different unit. Can they say, oh, I know the person is out of the unit

and I'm going to count them as part of my unit and just give the count number. Are they allowed to do

that? Do they have to physically have to get eyes on them? Answer, so it's only who the amount

of inmates that are in their unit at that time. Answer, correct. Question, okay, answer, that's it.

Question, all right, let's keep going on this. Thank you for that. That's hugely helpful,

so inmate cellmates are moved for various reasons, including but not limited to an incident in the cell,

visits to court, legal library, medical and recreation. On Friday, August 9th, 2019, Epstein's

cellmate Reyes had court. It would not be uncommon for Reyes to be out of his cell for an extended

period. Epstein had an attorney session that day. Epstein's attorney was processed into the

facility in the morning and Epstein was brought down to the attorney's room and you said that

was pretty much seven days a week with Epstein redacted was not notified that Reyes was released

from the court and again on that note would have been the absolute tenant that would have been

responsible to tell you. Answer, yes, question. If someone heard gets cut off by the captain,

if you would recall, he should have because he knows he knew the expectation. Answer, right.

Question, okay, typically if an inmate is likely to be discharged or transferred following court,

their property was retrieved from their cell, boxed and secured with a property form

by receiving and discharge staff. All items are normally accounted for and are inventoryed.

In order to enter the shoe, all staff not assigned there was identified themselves in

sign a logbook and then be physically escorted by a correctional officer. Alternatively,

the staff can pick up inmate's property at the unit door. A correctional officer assigned to

the shoe would have been aware that Reyes or any inmate belongings were removed. At this time,

the correctional officer should notify a lieutenant who would in turn brief redacted.

Redacted was not notified that Reyes belongings were removed. Redacted advised that if he had known

that Epstein was without a cellmate, he would have likely put Epstein on psychological observation.

But now you're saying you probably would have put him off. He gets cut off by the captain.

I would have not put him on psych ops because I can.

Question. Right. You would have put him in Fox. Answer. I would have probably put him if he was

already. I would have known between those hours of 150 to four. I would say keep him in the attorney

conference because guess what? I've got a staff member right there. And where he was, there's a room

there. So we normally keep them in these first two rooms. So you could see him. So I would just say,

just have somebody stay there. And I would have hired somebody. I would have hired anybody.

I'll pay you over time to sit on this guy until I got him. I would have kept him in the attorney

conference right there until I got him a cellmate. I wouldn't have had him put on psych. You're not

that's not I apologize. I can't do that. Question. All right. So this line where you said you would

have likely put him. That's not correct. Answer. No. I wouldn't have done that. Question. Okay. Answer.

That's because like I said my earlier statement, it would have been after the hours of operation.

Let's say everybody at eight when he went back to the cell in the shoe. And because I was still there,

I would have said no, put him in R and D because I got R and D staff there until 10. I would have

called the AW. I would have called the warden. And unfortunately, we would have the somebody would

have had to come in and we would have had to been there later than vetting a cellmate for him.

Question right. And it says redacted is not aware of any lieutenants knowing that Reyes property

was moved. Answer. We didn't know. Question. Okay. Well, that you know of. Redacted may have.

Answer. He may have. Question. But he didn't tell you. Answer. Of course. He didn't tell me.

Question on Saturday, August 10, 2019. Redacted received a phone call from lieutenant redacted

around 7 a.m. Answer. No, that's not accurate. I received a phone call from lieutenant redacted.

I believed it was between the hours approximately 635 between 635 and 645 650 somewhere in there.

Question and was told that Epstein was found unresponsive in his cell. But it was redacted who

called you answer. Yeah, it was question. Okay. Redacted and quiet about Epstein's cellmate and

was surprised to hear redacted respond that Epstein did not have a cellmate. Answer. That's correct.

Question. So you immediately said, where is the cellmate? Answer. Yes. Question. Okay. Yeah.

Now this is again where I'm getting confused because in the report, they again say redacted worked

at 4 p.m. to 10 p.m. shift on August 9, 2019. And you're saying that's not right?

Answer. No. He would have worked 2 to 10. Question. And did he work on August 9, 2 to 10?

August 9 gets cut off right here. Answer. I thought we said August 9. He didn't work.

He wasn't there. August 9. He wasn't there. Question. All right. So from 4 p.m. to 10 p.m.

Who was there? Redacted. Answer. Yeah. But like this thing like when redacted saying he's

non-custody because you can see these rosters. He gets cut off. So was redacted. The two and the

activities lieutenant was redacted. Correct. Answer. Let me see. Can I school you on something?

Question. Absolutely. Please. Question. Let me just school you on something. These rosters you see

when you printed this roster. You printed this roster here. That says 6221. That's this year.

I can guarantee you that the roster don't look like this. Back on the day the roster was printed,

initially inputted. Question. So someone would have changed it? Answer. Yeah. Somebody went in there

and changed it. Question. But does that mean that this is inaccurate or the other was inaccurate?

Answer. This is inaccurate. I can tell you why because redacted 1. This is how because I was

like redacted non-custody. Why would he make sure that said non-custody? Now redacted. I

tam prompted him off to 11. I tam prompted him to 11. Question. Can you circle that? Answer.

Because he couldn't have been in the institution by himself. Question. So you think that he went

in there and put it in that discernible? Answer. I'm not going to say that. Question. But that's not

what it normally would say. Answer. No. Because the non-custody unit. I think it was when he got out

of non-custody and became a counselor. I believe that wasn't until 2020. Not 2020. I think it was the

last part of 2019 going into 2020 or something like that. He was still on correctional service.

But the thing about this roster, all these pages right here, anytime you make a change,

it tells you the date and the time of the change. So let's go here. Time change. Activities

Lieutenant redacted. That was done on 8.9 redacted. You've got to find who redacted was.

Question. But oh, 9. That was prior to the incident. Answer. The absolute tenant. It was redacted.

So redacted took sick sick leave on that day. Question. So redacted was sick leave.

Changed him on the roster on August 9th at 8.58 AM on Friday, August 9th. Redacted was

relieving an officer on August 9th. But as you see where you see redacted at.

Question. What are we looking for? Answer. Non-custody. It's not there. Answer. Oh, it would have.

So somebody went in at some point. And if he put non-custody was that somebody trying to cover

up like, Hey, I had nothing to do with that. Answer. I wasn't in custody at that time. He put me in

there because, you know, why would I do that? You're a lieutenant. Question. So it's somebody

trying to say like, Hey, he gets cut off by the captain. I don't know. Question. But that's

something that we should address with redacted. Answer. That's something you've got to do from

the time you printed one. Look, when you printed one of these rosters, right? I can guarantee you,

if you go back to the 583 packet and print out the roster for 8.9 and 8.10 of 2019,

it's not going to mirror the same. It's going to be changed. It's not going to be the same.

Question. And do we have the ability to do that? Answer sure. It should be in the 583.

The 583 for the incident that occurred. You understand? For Jeffrey and the incident,

those two copies of that roster should be in there. Question. Okay, good point. We'll go back and

look at that. Answer. But you printed a couple of weeks ago. It's not going to say that, but it should.

So up to, so just to clarify, update nine that morning at 8.58 AM before that time, it was

redacted schedule. Answer. Yeah. That means he called in at 8.58 AM on August 9th to change it

over to redacted. Answer. Yeah. Question. So I wonder why. Okay. All right. So that's an accurate.

All right. And it says that Lieutenant redacted is the one who did the 10 p.m. and 6 a.m.

shift. Answer. Correct. Question. It says redacted did not personally tell redacted that Epstein

required a cellmate at all times. He believed she was aware because he had informed his lieutenants

repeatedly and instructed them to pass this message along and convey the information among themselves.

Is that correct? Answer. Yes. Question. Redacted did not hold a formal all lieutenants meeting regarding

Epstein or send an all staff email with the warden's directive. However, you did send emails with

regard to the way that they were supposed to act and their duties and responsibilities. Answer.

Correct. Question. And you'll send me that answer. Yeah. Question. Okay. He verbally instructed his

lieutenants on an informal and individual basis as many as possible with whom he had the opportunity.

On Saturday morning, August 10th 2019 redacted was relieved early by redacted. Now as far as redacted

goes, her claiming she didn't if she's claiming she didn't know and if you didn't specifically tell her

who should have told her or how should she have known? Answer. How she would have known is

is that when she did rounds, she would have saw those cards. She would have known that these inmates

are high visibility and the guidance was already out. So it was disseminating throughout the unit.

So the staff was aware. So of course, probably in, you know, with her we didn't have a good

relationship, but regardless of the fact is that I made the lieutenants aware of my expectations.

So even though I might not have told her because she worked the morning watch shift and by six,

she would be gone. I wouldn't see her. Question. Now was that abnormal for her to leave before six

before her shift is done? Answer. They was working 10 to six. So by the time I walked in the door,

she would be gone. Question. But what I'm saying is if she's leaving before six,

he gets cut off. Now before six, that would be a problem. Question. So even like 10 minutes before

is that a problem? Answer. Not really. Not really. Because if you're a relieving person gets there

because knowing the lieutenants, some lieutenants come an hour early. Some lieutenants come 10,

15 minutes early. It's just whatever happens. Sometimes the lieutenant was late to work because

they have an incident or they have an administrative duty that they have to finish after their shift,

which is fine, but they are compensated for that. Question. Right. Okay. In the shoe,

30 minute rounds need to be completed consistently at non-uniform intervals within a 40 minute

time frame. The purpose of these rounds is to ensure that good order is being maintained.

There is no suspicious activity and all the inmates are accounted for and responsive.

30 minute rounds are documenting in true scope, which serves as an electronic logbook.

After a round is physically done, the correctional officer can log into true scope and press a

button certifying that the round was completed. Unfortunately, sometimes officers do not complete

30 minute round or exceed the 40 minute threshold. True scope also documents from that location,

terminal, the rounds are logged. Answer. That's right. Question. Redacted is aware of at least two

terminals located in the shoe. The only way to determine if a 30 minute round was physically

completed is to check the video surveillance footage. Answer. That is correct. Question. There are

two correctional officers assigned to the shoe on Morning Watch at midnight, shoe one and shoe two.

shoe two is responsible for completing rounds. They're both technically responsible, correct?

Answer. Right. Question. And so is the shoe two, usually the officer in charge?

Answer. Right. So basically, what would have happened is they're supposed to, you know,

because one has the key. So I do around, I come back, then you do around. Same thing when you do

a count. Question. Now is it the same thing with counts and rounds? Answer. No, no, I'm sorry,

with the count. Question. So with the round, if rounds aren't being conducted, does that also

mean that everybody in the unit is to blame? Answer. Yes. Question. Okay. Answer. Right. Because

because in essence, after hours, lieutenant should go up there and observe the count.

Question. No, but what I'm saying is like if a round is signed off on by one person,

but everybody in the unit, nobody in the unit did it. And not just the person who signed the round,

but also everyone else is also responsible for that falsified round. Answer. Right. Question.

And it's the same thing for counts. Answer. Yeah. It don't matter if you're on the roster and

you're assigned to that unit and a falsified document goes up and you said like me and you count.

I know we didn't count, but I signed that and you sign it. Then we both.

He gets cut off by the investigator. What I'm saying is if you sign it, I don't sign it,

but we're both responsible. Answer. Right. No, you're going to be responsible because you didn't

sign it. But if I said I didn't sign it, then I'm going to tell you why I said we didn't do the

count. I'm going to put a memo in. I'm going to let the lieutenant know that's going to be a big

situation. Question. I guess what I'm saying is like, all right. So in these count slips,

specifically, there's two signatures, but there's four people working. So are the other two people

that aren't working? If they didn't report it, they're also responsible. Answer. Yes. All right,

folks, we're going to wrap up right here. And in the next episode dealing with the topic,

we're going to pick up where we left off. All the information that goes with this episode can be

found in the description box.