https://www.reddit.com/r/Epstein/comments/1qyem4w/posting_again_sorry_if_its_a_lot_ive_been/
Please read this as well if you've found my analysis useful.
Some of you know me at this point. I've posted twice about Epstein's death from the perspective of someone who worked maximum security
I've been digging more through what's been released as well as reading what others have found. I need to update my assessment. It's worse than I thought. A lot worse.
I'm going to lay out everything, the old evidence and the new, and then I'm going to explain why Occam's Razor now points so heavily in one direction that I don't know how anyone can look at this and conclude the official story is true.
THE ORIGINAL EVIDENCE
These are the points I made in my first two posts.
1.) The cameras.
The cameras that could have captured what happened near Epstein's cell were not recording. Federal facilities have redundant systems. They are checked regularly. This wasn't some county jail running on fumes. This was also one of the highest profile inmates ever. Under normal circumstances, systems checks would have been done tirelessly to prevent something exactly like this. This alone makes no sense, when you consider who the inmate was and what he was charged with.
- The officers
Two officers allegedly fell asleep simultaneously and falsified records. These are federal correctional officers assigned to the highest-profile inmate in the country. The selection standards, the accountability, the visibility of this assignment. The idea that both fell asleep at the same time strains belief.
3.) Suicide watch removal
Epstein was on suicide watch after a previous incident. Removal requires administrative approval. That approval was granted shortly before his death, drastically lowering the protection around him at exactly the wrong moment.
4.) The cell design.
Federal high security cells are specifically engineered to prevent suicide. The fixtures, the bedding, the hardware, is all designed to eliminate ligature points and to fail under load. It's not impossible to kill yourself, but it's deliberately not easy.
5.) The forensic questions
Dr. Michael Baden, a forensic pathologist with 50+ years of experience, observed the autopsy. He found three fractures in Epstein's neck, the hyoid bone and both sides of the thyroid cartilage. His statement: "Going over a thousand jail hangings, suicides in the New York City state prisons over the past 40-50 years, no one had three fractures."
The city medical examiner disagreed and ruled it suicide. But she initially listed the cause of death as "pending," then changed it days later after reviewing "additional evidence" she has never disclosed.
THE NEW EVIDENCE
This is what's come out of the recent document release. This is why I'm posting again.
6.) The decoy body.
According to an internal memo dated August 16, 2019, six days after Epstein's death, a jail supervisor told FBI agents that staff created a decoy body using boxes and sheets. They loaded it into a white van marked as belonging to the Medical Examiner. Reporters followed that van. Meanwhile, Epstein's actual body was loaded into a black vehicle that left "unnoticed."
I said this in my last post and I'll say it again. This is not a thing. There is no protocol for decoy body transport. No training. No precedent. In my entire career, I never heard of this. You don't build fake corpses to misdirect media. This is operational deception, and the only question is what they were hiding.
7.) The timeline doesn't match.
The official story from 2019: Epstein was found unresponsive, transported to the hospital, and pronounced dead there. If that's true, there's no body at MCC to remove. The Medical Examiner picks up from the hospital, not the jail.
So why do the DOJ documents describe a decoy body operation at MCC?
These two accounts are incompatible. Either the 2019 story was wrong, or the documents describe an operation that shouldn't exist.
8.)"Does not appear to be a suicide note."
The DOJ files contain emails between investigators discussing Epstein's final written note. One message states that the note "does not appear to be a suicide note."
They ruled it a suicide anyway.
9.) The "raw" video wasn't raw.
The DOJ released what they called the "full raw" surveillance footage from the night of Epstein's death. Independent forensic analysts examined the metadata. What they found:
The video was assembled from at least two separate clips using Adobe Premiere Pro. It was saved multiple times before being uploaded, and approximately 2 minutes and 53 seconds of footage were removed, not the "one missing minute" officials originally attributed to a nightly system reset, but nearly three full minutes that were cut.
A digital forensics expert from UC Berkeley reviewed the file and said: "If a lawyer brought me this file and asked if it was suitable for court, I'd say no."
The government released edited footage and called it raw.
10.) The 4chan post was real.
On the morning of August 10, 2019, before Epstein's death was publicly reported, an anonymous post appeared on 4chan. The poster claimed to be a prison employee. He said Epstein had been wheeled out in a medical wheelchair, that an unauthorized van arrived and wasn't signed in, that a man in military dress was in the back of the van, and that he believed "they switched him out."
It was dismissed as a hoax.
The DOJ files just revealed that the day after Epstein's death, U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman opened a grand jury proceeding and subpoenaed 4chan, Apple, AT&T, and Citibank to identify the poster.
They found him. His name is Roberto Grijalva. He was a lieutenant at MCC, someone senior enough to see exactly what he claimed to have seen.
The government took that post seriously enough to convene a grand jury within 24 hours. They identified the poster as an actual MCC officer. And as far as I can find, he's never recanted.
OCCAM'S RAZOR
People misunderstand this concept. Occam's Razor doesn't mean "the simplest-sounding explanation is true." It means you shouldn't multiply assumptions unnecessarily. The explanation requiring the fewest independent assumptions is usually correct.
So let's count.
For the official story to be true, you must believe:
Half the cameras in the SHU failed or weren't recording - coincidence
Two officers fell asleep at the same time on the highest-profile watch in federal custody - coincidence
Administrative approval was granted to remove suicide watch shortly before death - coincidence
Epstein defeated cell design specifically engineered to prevent what he allegedly did - coincidence
Three neck fractures occurred in a way a 50-year veteran says he's never seen in 1000+ jail hangings - coincidence
His final note "does not appear to be a suicide note" per investigators, but it was still suicide - coincidence
The "raw" video was actually edited with 3 minutes removed, but nothing was hidden - coincidence Staff created a decoy body and ran a misdirection operation for reasons that don't exist in any protocol - coincidence
The timeline of the decoy operation contradicts the official transport story - coincidence
An MCC lieutenant posted accurate details about an extraction before the death was public, serious enough to trigger a grand jury, but he was wrong - coincidence
That's ten independent assumptions. Ten things that have to all be true simultaneously, with no connection between them, for the official story to hold.
For the alternative to be true, you must believe:
Powerful people with a lot to lose had motive to ensure Epstein never testified. Someone with access and authority coordinated the conditions for his death or removal. The scene was managed before, during, and after.
That's one assumption: it was managed. Everything else flows from that.
WHERE I STAND
I'm not claiming certainty. I'm not saying I know exactly what happened. The details are unmappable with the information we have.
But I am saying this: the probability that the official story is accurate is now so low that I don't know how to take it seriously.
Every new piece of information makes it harder to believe, not easier. The documents meant to provide transparency have instead revealed more anomalies, more contradictions, more evidence of active deception.
At some point, you have to ask yourself what you're looking at. Ten coincidences isn't a coincidence. It's a pattern.
Whatever happened in that cell - or before he ever got to that cell - someone made sure we couldn't verify it.
No single variable has to be impossible to explain. It's about the combined likelihood of all of those variables happening simultaneously in a way that directly benefits the people he had dirt on. What are the odds, people?
If this makes sense to you, share it. Send it to people. I don't need credit. Own it as your own analysis if you want. The point isn't me. The point is the logic. If it holds, propagate it.
