Epstein Family Blasts FBI Verdict, Presents New Evidence Challenging Official Account
In a stunning development that has reignited skepticism surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s passing, his family has erupted with new evidence and strongly refuted recent statements made by former FBI officials Kash Patel and Dan Bongino. The move comes after Patel and Bongino appeared in a video presenting their verdict that the disgraced financier died by suicide, a conclusion that has faced widespread doubt for years.
We observed Patel and Bongino making these statements, and their appearance was notably uncomfortable, looking to us like they were in a “hostage video” or undergoing a “humiliation ritual”. Despite having spent years raising questions themselves, they now assert that their review of the file confirms the official ruling. Dan Bongino stated he had “seen the whole file” and concluded, “he did it”.
However, Jeffrey Epstein’s younger brother, Mark Epstein, has directly challenged this stance, particularly targeting Kash Patel. Mark told the Daily Mail that Patel “wasn’t there, he never saw the body, he didn’t see the autopsy, he has no idea what the f he’s talking about”.
Mark Epstein counts himself among the many who believe his brother did not take his own life. His reasons are detailed and based on personal investigation:
- He personally acquired and tested a bed sheet similar to the one supposedly used in the correctional center. Using weight comparable to his brother’s body weight, Mark found that “the bed sheet could never have supported his body,” claiming, “I don’t think the sheet could have held his weight, it would have torn”.
- He dismissed the explanation given by then Attorney General Bill Barr as “asinine and ludicrous,” citing issues with security cameras. “Two cameras trained on a cell were not properly working,” he added, labeling it “what a coincidence”.
- Mark challenged Barr’s assertion that no one went in or out of the tier where his brother was housed, pointing out the multiple levels of security needed to reach that tier and the presence of other inmates. He suggested “somebody could have gone into his cell and taken his life,” particularly if cell doors were left locked.
- He noted that the initial cause of passing certificate was listed as “pending for further study” but was rapidly changed to “self-termination” within days. Mark questioned what “further study” could have been completed so quickly when pathologists typically take weeks for such determinations.
- Mark also highlighted discrepancies in autopsy photos, claiming his brother was clean-shaven. He stated that shaving occurred on Fridays at the prison, and Jeffrey was found Saturday morning, arguing he should have had “more stubble”.
- Furthermore, Mark alleged there was no lividity (skin discoloration from blood settling) on his brother’s legs or rear end, only on his upper back. He stated this is inconsistent with the reported scenario, as “the blood would not have traveled to his back”.
Mark Epstein believes his brother “obviously didn’t do what they say he did” and attributes his passing to what he knew and had on people, particularly concerning the 2016 election. Mark recalled his brother telling him that based on what he knew about both candidates, “they’d have to cancel the election”.
This new evidence and strong family stance directly contradict the recent statements from Patel and Bongino, who have faced “mega wrath” for dismissing skepticism. We, and many others, believe that if the file supposedly reviewed by Dan Bongino truly answered all the lingering questions – such as the guards being asleep, the camera being gone, the cell being moved, and the inconsistent medical injuries – then that file should be shared. Steven Crowder, in a reenactment we referenced, appeared to prove that the official account was “impossible to happen the way they said it had happened”.
Previous efforts to bring clarity, such as the release of documents following a promise made by President Trump (who himself had shared skepticism), yielded little new information. Attorney General Pam Bondi’s “phase one” release consisted largely of previously public flight logs and heavily redacted contact lists. These lists, purportedly compiled by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, included names like Mick Jagger, Michael Jackson, Alec Baldwin, Andrew Cuomo, Naomi Campbell, Courtney Love, Harvey and Bob Weinstein, Ted Kennedy, Ralph Fiennes, Alan Dershowitz, John Kerry, Dustin Hoffman, and Ivana and Ivanka Trump, though the president himself was not listed. There were “no bombshells” in this release.
From our perspective, this issue transcends partisan politics. We believe both Democrats and Republicans were involved. The most reasonable explanation, in our view, remains that Jeffrey Epstein was a government asset, potentially for America and allied nations, used for compromise. If individuals like Kash Patel and Dan Bongino can be influenced or silenced, it suggests we may never fully uncover the truth.
Given the new, compelling evidence presented by the family, particularly the physical impossibilities raised by the bed sheet test and the inconsistencies with lividity and shaving, the official narrative appears increasingly questionable. This ongoing lack of transparency and conflicting information leads us to the disappointing conclusion that we may never achieve justice in this case.
