Search a title or topic

Over 20 million podcasts, powered by 

Player FM logo
Artwork

Content provided by Bobby Capucci. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Bobby Capucci or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

Mega Edition: JP Morgan and The 290 Million Dollar Epstein Payout And The Objection To It (10/9/25)

32:01
 
Share
 

Manage episode 512738462 series 2987886
Content provided by Bobby Capucci. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Bobby Capucci or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
In June 2023, JPMorgan Chase agreed to pay $290 million to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by victims of Jeffrey Epstein, who accused the bank of enabling and profiting from his sex trafficking network. The lawsuit alleged that JPMorgan knowingly ignored numerous red flags — including large cash withdrawals, suspicious payments, and Epstein’s prior criminal conviction — in order to retain his lucrative business. Victims claimed the bank’s failure to act made it complicit in sustaining Epstein’s operation. The settlement, which did not include an admission of wrongdoing, was approved by U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff, marking one of the largest payouts ever by a financial institution tied to a human trafficking case.
However, the deal faced backlash from 17 state attorneys general, including those from New Mexico, California, and the District of Columbia, who objected to the language of the settlement. They argued that its release terms were overly broad and could prevent state governments from pursuing future legal claims related to Epstein or other trafficking cases involving JPMorgan. The attorneys general warned that the agreement could unintentionally shield the bank from government enforcement actions under state or federal anti-trafficking laws. Despite their objections, Judge Rakoff ultimately approved the settlement, ruling that the release language did not infringe on the sovereign enforcement rights of states and that the agreement was fair, reasonable, and in the best interest of the victims.
to contact me:
[email protected]
  continue reading

1102 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 512738462 series 2987886
Content provided by Bobby Capucci. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Bobby Capucci or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://podcastplayer.com/legal.
In June 2023, JPMorgan Chase agreed to pay $290 million to settle a class-action lawsuit brought by victims of Jeffrey Epstein, who accused the bank of enabling and profiting from his sex trafficking network. The lawsuit alleged that JPMorgan knowingly ignored numerous red flags — including large cash withdrawals, suspicious payments, and Epstein’s prior criminal conviction — in order to retain his lucrative business. Victims claimed the bank’s failure to act made it complicit in sustaining Epstein’s operation. The settlement, which did not include an admission of wrongdoing, was approved by U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff, marking one of the largest payouts ever by a financial institution tied to a human trafficking case.
However, the deal faced backlash from 17 state attorneys general, including those from New Mexico, California, and the District of Columbia, who objected to the language of the settlement. They argued that its release terms were overly broad and could prevent state governments from pursuing future legal claims related to Epstein or other trafficking cases involving JPMorgan. The attorneys general warned that the agreement could unintentionally shield the bank from government enforcement actions under state or federal anti-trafficking laws. Despite their objections, Judge Rakoff ultimately approved the settlement, ruling that the release language did not infringe on the sovereign enforcement rights of states and that the agreement was fair, reasonable, and in the best interest of the victims.
to contact me:
[email protected]
  continue reading

1102 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Copyright 2025 | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | | Copyright
Listen to this show while you explore
Play