People Linked to Jeffrey Epstein Who Have Died

The web of Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal network and its ties to powerful figures continues to unravel, revealing a chilling pattern of suspicious deaths, allegations of intelligence connections, and unanswered questions. From Epstein’s own mysterious death in 2019 to the unsolved murders of Barry and Honey Sherman, the apparent suicide of key witnesses like Virginia Giuffre, and the overdoses of victims like Carolyn Andriano and Leigh Skye Patrick, a trail of tragedy surrounds those linked to the disgraced financier. Allegations of Mossad involvement, elite blackmail operations, and systemic abuse persist, fueled by figures like Robert Maxwell and claims of espionage. 

This post explores the lives, deaths, and connections of deceased individuals caught in Epstein’s orbit, shedding more light on a scandal that refuses to fade.

Jeffrey Epstein, Age 66, Financier and Convicted Sex Offender: Epstein supposedly died by suicide by hanging in his cell at the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York City on August 10, 2019, while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. As the central figure in a sprawling network of sexual abuse and trafficking, Epstein was convicted in 2008 for soliciting prostitution from a minor, though his plea deal sparked controversy for its leniency and apparent coverup to protect the powerful. His 2019 arrest revealed allegations of trafficking dozens of underage girls, with victims like Virginia Giuffre detailing systemic abuse at his properties. 

Speculation about his death being a murder rather than suicide persist, fuelled by lapses in prison protocol, such as guards failing to check on him and malfunctioning cameras. Some, including former intelligence operative Ari Ben-Menashe, have claimed Epstein worked with Mossad, leveraging his connections to powerful figures to gather compromising material for blackmail. His death silenced a key figure in an international scandal, leaving many questions unanswered about the extent of his criminal network and its protectors.

Barry Sherman, Age 75, Canadian Pharmaceutical Billionaire: Barry Sherman and his wife Honey were found dead in their Toronto home on December 15, 2017, initially considered a murder-suicide but later investigated as a targeted double homicide, which remains unsolved. Sherman, founder of Apotex, was linked to Epstein through elite financial and social circles, though no direct evidence confirms a close relationship. His wealth and influence placed him in networks where Epstein operated, raising questions about potential overlap in their business dealings. The mysterious nature of the Shermans’ deaths, with no arrests made years later, has led to speculation of foul play tied to their high-profile connections. 

The lack of resolution in the case continues to fuel theories about targeted killings within elite circles.

 

Honey Sherman, Age 70, Philanthropist and Wife of Barry Sherman: Found dead alongside her husband Barry on December 15, 2017, in their Toronto home, Honey’s death is part of the same unsolved double homicide. As a prominent philanthropist, she moved in the same elite social circles as her husband, which indirectly connected her to Epstein’s network, though no specific ties to his criminal activities are documented. The suspicious circumstances of her death, including the staging of the bodies to initially suggest a murder-suicide, have prompted speculation about motives related to the Shermans’ wealth or connections, but no evidence points to direct Epstein-related criminality. The ongoing mystery of their deaths keeps them in the orbit of conspiracy theories surrounding powerful figures.

Virginia Giuffre, Age 41, Victim and Accuser: Giuffre, a prominent survivor of Epstein’s sexual abuse, died by suicide on April 24, 2025, at her farm in Neergabby, Australia. Her testimony was pivotal in exposing Epstein’s trafficking network, accusing him, Ghislaine Maxwell, Prince Andrew, and Jean-Luc Brunel of abusing her as a minor. Giuffre’s allegations detailed a sophisticated operation where she was coerced into sexual acts with high-profile figures, implicating Epstein’s use of his wealth and connections to exploit vulnerable girls. 

After years of legal battles and public advocacy, her suicide came amid a marriage breakup, reported struggles with the psychological toll of her trauma and relentless scrutiny. Some online discussions have questioned whether her death was truly self-inflicted, citing her role as a key witness, but no direct evidence supports claims of foul play. 

Her death marked a tragic loss for survivors seeking justice.

Daniel Anderl, Age 20, Son of Federal Judge Esther Salas: Daniel Anderl was shot and killed on July 19, 2020, at his family’s home in New Jersey by Roy Den Hollander, a lawyer with a personal vendetta against Judge Salas. Salas was overseeing a case involving Epstein’s financial ties to Deutsche Bank, which examined suspicious transactions potentially linked to his trafficking operations. Den Hollander, a self-proclaimed men’s rights activist with a history of misogynistic writings, killed Anderl and wounded Salas’s husband, targeting her for her judicial role. While no direct evidence ties Epstein pedophile network to the attack, the timing and Salas’s involvement in an Epstein-related case sparked speculation of a deeper connection. 

 

Jean-Luc Brunel, Age 75, Modelling Agent and Epstein Accomplice: Brunel, a French modelling agent, died by apparent suicide in his cell at La Santé Prison in Paris on February 19, 2022, while awaiting trial for rape of minors and sexual harassment. Accused by Virginia Giuffre and others of scouting underage girls for Epstein’s trafficking network, Brunel was a key figure in supplying victims under the guise of modelling opportunities through his agency, MC2. His death, like Epstein’s, raised suspicions of foul play due to its timing and the high stakes of his upcoming trial, which could have exposed further details about Epstein’s operations. While no confirmed Mossad connections exist, Brunel’s role in Epstein’s network, which some allege had intelligence ties, keeps such speculation alive. 

His apparent suicide prevented further testimony that might have implicated other powerful figures in the scandal.

Carolyn Andriano, Age 36, Victim and Witness: Andriano died of a drug overdose (methadone, fentanyl, and alprazolam) on May 23, 2023, in a West Palm Beach hotel room, ruled accidental. She testified against Ghislaine Maxwell, describing how Epstein abused her starting at age 14, with Maxwell facilitating the encounters. Her testimony helped secure Maxwell’s 2021 conviction for sex trafficking. 

The overdose, occurring in an area tied to Epstein’s activities, has been called suspicious by some online commentators, who note the pattern of deaths among Epstein’s victims. No evidence links her death to targeted foul play, but her history of trauma and addiction, exacerbated by her abuse, highlights the lasting impact on Epstein’s victims. 

Her death silenced another voice that could have shed light on the network’s inner workings.

Pedro Gaspar, Age 29, Model and Party Promoter: Gaspar died on August 6, 2012, of a suspected drug overdose in a Manhattan apartment owned by Epstein’s brother, Mark. Associated with Jean-Luc Brunel’s MC2 Models, Gaspar was reportedly involved in Epstein’s social scene, which allegedly included procuring girls for his trafficking network. The overdose’s suspicious nature, given his proximity to Epstein and Brunel, has led some to question whether it was accidental or tied to efforts to silence those with knowledge of Epstein’s activities. No direct evidence of a targeted killing exists, but his death in a property linked to Epstein’s family and his role in the modelling world raise lingering doubts about the circumstances surrounding this young mans death.

Bill Richardson, Age 75, Former Governor of New Mexico: Richardson died in September 2023 of natural causes. Virginia Giuffre accused him of being one of the individuals Maxwell directed her to give a massage to, implying sexual activity, though Richardson vehemently denied meeting her and was never charged. As a prominent political figure, his inclusion in Epstein’s contact book and Giuffre’s allegations placed him under scrutiny, but no concrete evidence of criminality or pedophilia emerged. Speculation about Epstein’s network having intelligence ties, including to Mossad, occasionally touches figures like Richardson due to his elite connections, but no specific Mossad link is substantiated. 

His death, reported as natural, closed a chapter on one of Epstein’s more contested associations.

Marvin Minsky, Age 88, MIT Scientist: Minsky, a pioneering computer scientist, died in January 2016 of a cerebral hemorrhage, considered natural causes. Virginia Giuffre claimed Maxwell directed her to engage in sexual activities with him, an allegation, which led to no criminal charges, that surfaced after his death. Minsky’s association with Epstein came through his visits to Epstein’s private pedophile island and funding from Epstein for AI research at MIT, raising questions about the financier’s influence in academic circles. His connection to Epstein underscores how the pedophile financier cultivated ties with intellectual elites, potentially for leverage or blackmail.

Leigh Skye Patrick, Age 29, Victim: Patrick, an Epstein survivor, died in 2017 from a drug overdose in a West Palm Beach hotel room, the first of two Epstein victims to die of overdoses in the area. Her being a victim of Epstein’s abuse made her a key witness in his trafficking network, though specific details about her experiences or testimony are scarce. The overdose, like Carolyn Andriano’s, occurred in a region closely tied to Epstein’s operations, prompting speculation about whether such deaths were truly accidental. The pattern of overdoses among Epstein’s victims raises questions about the long-term impact of their trauma and potential vulnerabilities exploited by others.

Alfredo Rodriguez, Age 60, Former House Manager: Rodriguez, Epstein’s house manager in Palm Beach, died in January 2015 from mesothelioma, a fast acting cancer caused from exposure to asbestos. He was sentenced to 18 months in prison for attempting to sell Epstein’s “black book,” a contact list detailing the financier’s network, which included names of victims and high-profile figures. Rodriguez’s insider knowledge made him a significant figure in early investigations into Epstein’s activities, and his attempt to profit from the book suggests awareness of its value in exposing criminality. 

His death from natural causes occurred before Epstein’s 2019 arrest, but some speculate he faced threats due to his possession of sensitive information. Epstein’s alleged intelligence ties keep such theories in circulation.

Stephen Hawking, Age 76, Scientist: Hawking, a renowned theoretical physicist, died on March 14, 2018, of natural causes related to amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). His name appeared in Epstein’s contact book, suggesting a social or professional connection, possibly through Epstein’s funding of scientific endeavours or events like a 2006 conference Hawking attended on Epstein’s island. No allegations of pedophilia or criminality have been made against him, but his presence in Epstein’s orbit reflects the financier’s efforts to align with intellectual giants, potentially for influence or credibility. 

His death, expected due to his long-term illness, has not been tied to foul play.

Michael Jackson, Age 50, Celebrity: Jackson, a global music icon, died on June 25, 2009, from a drug overdose involving propofol and benzodiazepines, administered by his physician, ruled a homicide due to medical negligence. His name in Epstein’s contact book and reported visits to Epstein’s Palm Beach property was likely a social connection, driven by Jackson’s celebrity status and Epstein’s pursuit of influential figures. Accusers in Jackson’s separate allegations of child sexual abuse, including Jordan Chandler in 1993 and Gavin Arvizo in 2003, claimed he molested them during sleepovers at his Neverland Ranch, though these cases were settled out of court for $22 million and acquitted in 2005, respectively. Posthumous claims by Wade Robson and James Safechuck in 2019 alleged prolonged abuse, but were dismissed due to statutes of limitations. 

No evidence directly ties Jackson to Epstein’s pedophilia or trafficking network, and his death is unlikely to be linked to Epstein-related foul play, though his presence in Epstein’s orbit fuels speculation about his elite connections.

Ted Kennedy, Age 77, Former Senator: Kennedy, a long-serving U.S. senator, died on August 25, 2009, from brain cancer. His name in Epstein’s contact book suggests a social or political connection, likely due to Kennedy’s prominence and Epstein’s cultivation of powerful allies. No allegations of pedophilia or direct involvement in Epstein’s criminal activities have been substantiated, though Kennedy’s past controversies, such as the Chappaquiddick incident, have long fuelled scrutiny of his personal conduct. 

His death from a well-documented illness is not considered suspicious, though his elite status made him a target for Epstein’s networking.

Ivana Trump, Age 73, Former Spouse of Donald Trump: Ivana Trump died on July 14, 2022, from accidental blunt impact injuries after a fall at her New York City home. Mentioned in Epstein-related files, likely due to her high-profile social connections in New York and Palm Beach elite circles, she had no direct allegations of involvement in Epstein’s criminal activities. Her ex-husband Donald Trump’s documented ties to Epstein, including flights on his "Lolita Express" airplanes, place her in proximity to his pedophile network. However, no evidence suggests foul play beyond the accidental nature of her death. 

Her presence in Epstein’s orbit likely reflects his access to prominent social and political figures.

David Koch, Age 79, Businessman: Koch, a billionaire industrialist and philanthropist, died on August 23, 2019, from prostate cancer. Although some sources claim they had a close friendship, his name in Epstein’s contact book points to a connection through elite financial and social circles, as Koch’s wealth and influence aligned with Epstein’s network of powerful figures. No allegations of pedophilia or direct criminality tied to Epstein have been made against him, and his death from a long-term illness is not considered suspicious. Epstein’s cultivation of billionaires like Koch suggests strategic networking, possibly for financial or social leverage.

Ethel Kennedy, Age 96, Widow of Robert F. Kennedy: Ethel Kennedy died on October 10, 2024, of natural causes. Mentioned in Epstein-related files, likely due to her prominent social and political connections as a Kennedy family matriarch, she had no direct ties to his criminal activities. Her advanced age and public profile made her a peripheral figure in Epstein’s network, with no allegations of pedophilia or Mossad involvement. 

Her death, expected due to her age, has not been linked to foul play, but her inclusion in Epstein’s files underscores his networks reach into America’s political dynasties.

Robert Maxwell, Age 68, Media Tycoon: Robert Maxwell, father of Ghislaine Maxwell, died on November 5, 1991, after falling from his yacht near the Canary Islands, officially ruled an accidental drowning. His connection to Epstein is through Ghislaine, a key figure in Epstein’s trafficking network. Maxwell, a British media mogul, was widely alleged to have been a Mossad agent, with former Israeli intelligence officer Ari Ben-Menashe claiming he facilitated the sale of bugged PROMIS software to governments and institutions, enabling espionage. His financial empire, riddled with fraud and embezzlement, collapsed posthumously, revealing he had misappropriated pension funds. 

His mysterious death has fuelled theories of Mossad assassination, with suggestions he was killed after attempting to blackmail the agency for financial aid to cover debts. While no direct evidence ties him to Epstein’s pedophilia, his intelligence connections and Ghislaine’s role raise questions about the family’s broader ties to covert operations.

John Tower, Age 65, Former U.S. Senator: John Tower died on April 5, 1991, in a plane crash near Brunswick, Georgia, officially attributed to mechanical failure. His connection to Epstein is indirect, through Robert Maxwell, with whom he was allegedly involved in the PROMIS software scandal. Authors like Gordon Thomas claim Tower facilitated the sale of bugged software, allegedly modified by Mossad for espionage, to U.S. institutions, including nuclear research facilities. The crash that killed him and his daughter has been speculatively linked to Mossad by some, who argue his knowledge of the software’s backdoor capabilities made him a liability, though no definitive evidence supports this. 

No allegations of pedophilia or direct Epstein-related criminality exist, but Tower’s death, occurring months before Maxwell’s, adds to speculation about intelligence-related eliminations within elite networks.

Reality Check Radio’s Unhinged Petition

Reality Check Radio’s petition to prosecute former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern, alongside Chris Hipkins, Ashley Bloomfield, and a cadre of public health experts, is a bewildering display of political theatre. 

Launched on the cusp of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into New Zealand’s Covid-19 response, this campaign is less a call for justice and more an exercise in targeted misinformation. It’s a stunt so utterly divorced from reason that it demands a meticulous dismantling, not merely for its audacity, but for its dangerous attempt to rewrite a legacy of effective leadership. 

Far from a legitimate grievance, this petition reveals the lingering obsession of a vocal fringe, unable to reconcile Ardern’s global acclaim with their narrative of victimhood.

Yesterday, The Standard posted:

 

Reality Check Radio needs a reality check

It is strange that Jacinda Ardern should continue to live rent free in so many right winger’s heads.

This thought came to me when I discovered a petition run by Reality Check Radio demanding that Jacinda Ardern, Chris Hipkins, Ashley Blomfield and a host of others be summonsed to appear at stage two of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Covid 19.

The advert is really cute and gives the impression that they can be charged and tried by the inquiry.

This is clear from the picture used depicting Ardern, Hipkins and Blomfield standing in a Court dock.

The petition’s premise is as theatrical as it is baseless: it suggests Ardern and her colleagues should face trial for their roles in New Zealand’s Covid-19 response, complete with imagery of them in a courtroom dock and language branding them as “offenders.” This isn't just a misunderstanding of the Royal Commission’s purpose (it's an inquiry, not a court) but a deliberate attempt to inflame public resentment. The Commission’s terms of reference, expanded for its second phase, focus on evaluating vaccine mandates, safety, lockdowns, and tracing technologies. It’s a review of policy efficacy, not a criminal tribunal. To suggest otherwise is to peddle a lie.

The right-wing’s unhinged obsession with Ardern fuels this petition’s lunacy, with commentators like Chris Lynch and Cameron Slater still frothing at the mouth, painting her as some sort of tyrannical overlord. Lynch, in his based rants, has called Ardern’s memoir tour a calculated rebranding, accusing her of “control, exclusion, and distrust,” as if she single-handedly plunged New Zealand into chaos. Slater, the idiot blogger who's slander caused his own demise, has long spewed vitriol, labelling her a “pretty communist” and peddling conspiracies that would make a flat-earther blush.

Their rhetoric, along with the well-funded Reality Check Radio propaganda, often echoed by the likes of misogynists like Mike Hosking, who once scoffed at Ardern’s leadership as “style over substance”, reveals a collective right-wing derangement syndrome that requires serious disinfecting. These right-wing pundits, clutching at straws to demonise a leader who steered New Zealand through crises with global acclaim, look like petulant children throwing tantrums over a game they’ve already lost. Why do they still view Ardern as a political threat? Perhaps it’s her enduring global stature, evidenced by a 2023 Harvard fellowship and ongoing UN engagements, that unnerves them, a reminder that her influence persists despite their relentless attempts to tear her down.

Reality Check Radio’s claims hinge on a narrative that New Zealand’s Covid response was a catastrophic overreach. They point to vaccine mandates as draconian, ignoring that the first inquiry found mandates were broadly effective, though applied too widely and for too long. The numbers don't lie: New Zealand’s vaccination rate reached 95% for first doses by December 2021, with 4 million fully vaccinated. This helped to keep the Covid death rate down to just 0.07 per 1,000 people by mid-2022, compared to 2.7 per 1,000 in places like the United States. The mandates, while contentious, saved an estimated 20,000 lives. To paint this as criminal is to spit in the face of those who survived because of it.


In 2023, the Guardian reported:

New Zealand’s globally praised Covid response saved about 20,000 lives, new research shows.

Government’s strategy, which included closing the border, meant death rate was 80% lower than in the US, according to the New Zealand Medical Journal

The report, published in the New Zealand Medical Journal, looks at the impact of the nation’s strategy, which included an almost complete international border closure for two years and strict lockdowns for days or weeks at a time.

The petition also vilifies lockdowns, claiming they were unnecessary. Yet, New Zealand’s initial elimination strategy kept cases to 1,166 by September 2020 (a per capita rate of just 0.23 cases per 1,000 people) while the UK saw over 400,000 cases, or 5.97 per 1,000. The second Auckland lockdown, critiqued for its duration, still reduced transmission rates by 80%, per Ministry of Health data. These measures bought time for vaccine rollouts and uptake, sparing hospitals from the collapse seen in other countries. To call this criminal negligence is to ignore the global context: countries without lockdowns, like Sweden, saw mortality rates of 1.45 deaths per 1,000 by mid-2022, five times higher than New Zealand’s 0.29 per 1,000. Far from reckless, these policies were a calculated shield against catastrophe.

Reality Check Radio’s inclusion of experts like Siouxsie Wiles and Michael Baker as “offenders” is particularly insidious. These scientists provided evidence-based guidance that led to New Zealand’s enviable outcomes, among the lowest excess mortality rates globally at 0.4% compared to 5-10% in many other Western nations. Their crime, it seems, was informing policy that worked too well for the conspiracy-minded morons to stomach.

This petition is not just a misguided cry for accountability; it’s a cynical ploy to erode trust in institutions and inflame division. By framing Ardern and her team as villains, Reality Check Radio taps into a vein of resentment, amplified by misinformation that saw violent threats against Ardern triple in her second term. It’s a shameful attempt to rewrite a history where New Zealand’s successful response was lauded globally, with a 2021 OECD report ranking it among the most effective. 

The real offence lies in this petition’s reckless assault on reason, a desperate bid to keep Ardern in the crosshairs of a right-wing vendetta. Reality Check Radio must retract their nonsense before it further poisons public discourse.

Unresolved Questions About Epstein's Paedophile Network

Jeffrey Epstein’s criminal enterprise represents one of the most sophisticated pedophile and blackmail operations in modern history, facilitated by an extensive surveillance network that recorded illicit activities across his Manhattan townhouse, Palm Beach mansion, Little St. James island, New Mexico’s Zorro Ranch, and the New Albany estate.

Despite numerous investigations and document releases, critical aspects of this extensive operation remain unexamined, including the technical infrastructure that enabled it, the individuals who implemented these systems, and the apparent institutional failures that have allowed key evidence to disappear or remain hidden.

Recent developments have added new complexity to the case. The United States DOJ is apparently still reviewing materials from the FBI investigation into Jeffrey Epstein as Attorney General Pam Bondi supposedly wants to release more files. However, Bondi’s public statements have created confusion rather than clarity.


On Wednesday, Stuff reported:

Mystery surrounds the Jeffrey Epstein files after Bondi claims 'tens of thousands' of videos

It was a surprising statement from Attorney General Pam Bondi as the Trump administration promises to release more files from its sex trafficking investigation of Jeffrey Epstein: The FBI, she said, was reviewing “tens of thousands of videos” of the wealthy financier “with children or child porn.”

The comment, made to reporters at the White House days after a similar remark to a stranger with a hidden camera, raised the stakes for President Donald Trump's administration to prove it has in its possession previously unseen compelling evidence. That task is all the more pressing after an earlier document dump that Bondi hyped angered elements of Trump’s base by failing to deliver new bombshells and as administration officials who had promised to unlock supposed secrets of the so-called government “deep state" struggle to fulfill that pledge.

Yet weeks after Bondi’s remarks, it remains unclear what she was referring to.

...

The filing suggests a discovery of recordings after the criminal cases had concluded, but if that's what Bondi was referencing, the Justice Department has not said.

The department declined repeated requests from the AP to speak with officials overseeing the Epstein review. Spokespeople did not answer a list of questions about Bondi’s comments, including when and where the recordings were procured, what they depict and whether they were newly discovered as authorities dug through their evidence collection or were known for some time to have been in the government's possession.

“Outside sources who make assertions about materials included in the DOJ’s review cannot speak to what materials are included in the DOJ’s review,” spokesperson Chad Gilmartin said in a statement.

What the Stuff article fails to mention is that Bondi, in April 2025, was secretly recorded claiming the FBI was reviewing “tens of thousands of videos” of Epstein “with children or child porn,” statements that were later contradicted by FBI Director Kash Patel. Patel then appeared on the Joe Rogan show, claiming that the delay was because of the amount of evidence they were having to look through. 

Patel's appearance was likely due to Bondi’s February 2025 release of “declassified” Epstein files, 200 pages of public flight logs and a heavily redacted contact book, which received substantial backlash from observers, with most of the material having already been released and used in the trial of Epstein associate and abuser, Ghislaine Maxwell. 

The limited nature of these releases, combined with contradictory statements about video evidence, has fuelled speculation about continued cover-ups. This analysis examines some of the systemic failures that continue to obstruct justice for the victims of Jeffrey Epstein and his pedophile accomplices.

Representatives Robert Garcia and Stephen F. Lynch have demanded answers from Attorney General Pamela Bondi and FBI Director Kash Patel about whether the Epstein files are being withheld because they personally implicate President Trump. Senator Marsha Blackburn has requested the FBI Director release complete, unredacted Epstein records. These congressional actions highlight the political dimensions of the case and the continuing pressure for transparency, while also revealing the extent to which partisan considerations may be influencing investigative decisions.

Allegations of Jeffrey Epstein’s connections to Mossad, Israel’s intelligence agency, have emerged from multiple sources, suggesting his blackmail operation may have served geopolitical interests. Former Israeli intelligence operative Ari Ben-Menashe alleged in 2020 that Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell acted as Mossad assets, using their access to influential figures to collect compromising material for strategic leverage. 

Court documents from Virginia Giuffre reference Epstein’s ties to international networks, potentially including foreign intelligence, while former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s documented visits to Epstein’s properties raise questions about their relationship. The Tel Aviv branch of Jean-Luc Brunel’s MC2 modelling agency, linked to Epstein’s victim recruitment network, further confirms an Israeli connection. Although no definitive evidence has been made public, the FBI’s failure to investigate these international ties, combined with missing surveillance data, leaves critical questions unanswered about whether Epstein’s operations intersected with Mossad’s objectives.

Another largely unexplored aspect of Epstein’s criminal enterprise was his comprehensive surveillance network, which was professionally installed. A surviving victim, Maria Farmer, in her first television interview, alleged that Epstein had extensive surveillance inside his home, including tiny pinhole cameras, and that Epstein showed her cameras throughout his house. Now deceased victim, Virginia Giuffre’s memoir describes a room equipped with monitors displaying real-time footage from throughout the properties, suggesting a centralised monitoring system. 

The 2006 Palm Beach police raid uncovered multiple hidden recording devices, while court documents reference compact discs labeled with “young" victims names discovered in Epstein’s safe, indicating systematic cataloging of recorded material. Conservative radio host Buck Sexton correctly noted that “Epstein was running a blackmail operation based on surreptitious video, as evidenced from the extensive surveillance set ups in his various mansions”.

The scale and sophistication of Epstein’s surveillance network required professional-grade information technology infrastructure. Such systems demanded secure data transmission, encrypted storage, and remote access capabilities, features consistent with enterprise solutions like those offered by Citrix Systems, technology mentioned in Jeffrey Epstein’s released files. Products such as Citrix Virtual Apps and Desktops, Workspace, or NetScaler provide the encryption and remote access functionalities necessary for managing sensitive surveillance data across multiple properties while maintaining operational security. 

The technical complexity of managing surveillance systems in New York, Palm Beach, and Little St. James simultaneously would have required specialised expertise in network architecture, data storage systems, and security protocols, expertise that Jeffrey Epstein was reported to not have himself. This level of sophistication suggests the involvement of experienced IT professionals with access to enterprise-grade technology platforms.

Central to understanding Epstein’s technical infrastructure is Tim Newcombe, aka Tim Newcome, listed on page 95 of Epstein’s contact book with two Columbus, Ohio telephone numbers identifying him, despite an extensive attempt to scrub the internet of any leads. Jeffrey Epstein’s house manager Alfredo Rodriguez identified Newcombe as a “Citrix Systems programmer” likely responsible for IT and surveillance systems across Epstein’s numerous properties. Newcombe’s professional associations include Newcome Corp./NES and Digital Interiors, Ohio-based firms specialising in fibre optics and home security systems. Additionally, Newcombe appears to have connections to Ambassador Software Works, a company funded by Rev1 Ventures, an investment fund with ties to Leslie Wexner’s extensive Ohio State University network.

This connection is particularly significant given Wexner’s central role in Epstein’s operations and the billionaire’s influence within Columbus’s technology and the US business ecosystem.

Wexner’s relationship with Epstein from the mid-1980s through 2007 provided the foundation for much of Epstein’s wealth and operational capacity. As Wexner’s financial manager with power of attorney, Epstein controlled significant assets including the New Albany estate where Maria Farmer alleged abuse occurred in 1996. Newcombe’s Columbus base suggests Epstein leveraged local technical expertise to maintain IT systems at Wexner-connected properties, potentially utilising Citrix tools to secure surveillance feeds and manage encrypted data. 

The geographic concentration of technical resources in Columbus, combined with Wexner’s institutional connections, created an environment where sophisticated surveillance systems could be implemented and maintained with minimal external oversight. This local network effect may have facilitated the blackmailing and pedophilia operation’s longevity through technical sophistication. It may also explain why evidence is still only now being decrypted.

Despite the apparent significance of Newcombe’s role, several critical questions remain unanswered: What specific technical services did Newcombe provide to Epstein’s properties? How extensively was Citrix technology utilised in the surveillance infrastructure? Why has Newcombe’s involvement not been subject to a formal investigation? 

The absence of investigation into these technical enablers represents a significant gap in understanding the full scope of Epstein’s pedophile and blackmailing operation.

FBI agents and FOIA analysts have been holed up in the bureau’s sprawling Central Records Complex in Virginia as they process thousands of documents of Jeffrey Epstein files, yet critical evidence appears to have been compromised or lost. Surveillance video taken outside of the Manhattan jail cell of accused child-sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein during his apparent first suicide attempt was permanently deleted, raising questions about the bureau’s evidence preservation protocols. The video cameras being turned off when Epstein apparently did commit suicide is also questionable. 

The FBI’s 2019 raid on Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse reportedly uncovered extensive photographic and video evidence, but the current status and contents of these materials remains unclear. Why were authorities so unprofessional in gathering evidence or securing crime scenes? Journalist Michael Wolff and others have noted the apparent disappearance of substantial evidence collections, suggesting either systematic destruction or deliberate concealment.

The failure of US law enforcement is equal to that of New Zealand's apparent lack of concern for an international pedophile ring. Epstein’s international "model" recruitment network extended beyond Jean-Luc Brunel’s MC2 agency, located in New York City, Miami, and Tel Aviv, to include an unnamed New Zealand "mother" modelling agency linked to Brunel’s recruitment operations. This connection suggests a systematic approach to international trafficking that utilised legitimate business fronts to identify and recruit victims. 

The New Zealand connection remains uninvestigated, potentially shielding additional accomplices. Adding to the New Zealand connections, Karen and Brice Gorden, New Zealanders who managed operations at Epstein’s Zorro Ranch, represent another unexplored dimension of his international pedophile network that may still be operating to this very day.

Epstein’s financial dealings are another unresolved area that's crying out for further investigation. The convicted pedophile used complex networks of banks, investment funds, and financial institutions to hide and embezzle his wealth. Bank of America, for instance, processed $170 million for billionaire Leon Black in connection with Epstein-related transactions, while investments in Liquid Funding Ltd. and Bear Stearns hedge funds remain opaque, much like Donald Trumps earlier financial fraud that he's still to face any consequences for. 

These financial networks enabled the operation’s scale and sophistication while providing mechanisms for money laundering and asset concealment. The institutional failure to fully investigate these financial enablers represents another significant gap in accountability efforts.

Last year, the Guardian reported:

Donald Trump ordered to pay over $350m in New York financial fraud case

Donald Trump, his eldest sons and associates have been ordered to pay over $350m plus pre-judgment interest by a New York judge who found them guilty of intentionally committing financial fraud over the course of a decade.

Federal agencies’ focus on consumer-grade platforms and social media monitoring overlooks the sophisticated enterprise technologies that likely enabled Epstein’s operations, both in money laundering and blackmail through recording child sex abuse. The FBI’s Operation Innocent Images and similar initiatives target generic platforms while ignoring enterprise-grade solutions like Citrix systems that could have secured blackmail operations and facilitated encrypted communications. 

This technological blind spot in federal investigations reflects broader institutional limitations in understanding and investigating sophisticated criminal enterprises that utilise legitimate business technologies for illicit purposes.

The systematic loss or destruction of surveillance evidence suggests either incompetence or deliberate concealment within federal agencies, further eroding the public's trust in these institutions. The technical complexity of Epstein’s surveillance systems required specialised expertise to properly investigate and preserve evidence, yet there is little indication that federal agencies brought appropriate technical resources to bear on the case, or investigated all potential leads.

This will be a sort of #EpsteinBlackBook cheat sheet. I've tried to id the correct people, although some are more difficult than others because of the lack of details provided.

Will put an * next to the ones circled in the book.https://t.co/L6ZCffGcM2https://t.co/ANcZlE2mgJ

— Agenthades (@Agenthades1) July 20, 2019

As well as numerous pedophiles in positions of power, the Epstein case reveals fundamental weaknesses in federal agencies’ capacity to investigate technologically sophisticated criminal enterprises. Future investigations must include comprehensive examination of enterprise-grade systems used to facilitate criminal operations, investigation of IT professionals and technology contractors who enabled criminal infrastructure to be installed and maintained, robust procedures for preserving and analysing digital evidence in complex cases, and enhanced cooperation with international partners to investigate transnational criminal networks.

Twelve Epstein accusers have sued the FBI for allegedly failing to protect them, with the complaint filed in federal court alleging the FBI “turned its back on survivor victims”. This legal action highlights the need for institutional accountability and reform within federal agencies responsible for investigating complex criminal enterprises. The systematic failures in the Epstein case, from evidence preservation to witness protection, require comprehensive review and reform of federal investigative procedures.

The Epstein surveillance network represents a case study in how sophisticated criminal enterprises can exploit legitimate technologies and institutional weaknesses, as well as compromising corruptible powerful people, to operate with relative impunity. The unresolved questions surrounding technical infrastructure, the role of IT professionals like Tim Newcombe, and the systematic failures in evidence preservation highlight the need for more comprehensive and technically sophisticated approaches.

Until authorities confront these systemic weaknesses and pursue the unresolved leads in the Epstein case, the full scope of the operation will remain obscured, and justice for victims will remain incomplete. The shadows that continue to shroud critical aspects of the Epstein blackmailing and pedophile operation are not merely the result of the case’s complexity, they reflect fundamental failures in how institutions investigate, preserve evidence, and pursue accountability in cases involving sophisticated technologies. Only by addressing these systemic failures can we hope to prevent similar operations in the future and deliver justice to those who've been victimised by them.

The Dangerous Lie That Homelessness is a Choice

The callous rhetoric emerging from this Government's housing ministers reveals a profound disconnect from the harsh realities facing thousands of New Zealanders. When politicians like Mark Mitchell and Rotorua Mayor Tania Tapsell suggest that homelessness is somehow a matter of personal choice, they perpetuate a dangerous myth that absolves the state of its fundamental responsibility to provide adequate housing for all citizens.

Yesterday, Stuff reported:

 

Mayor says police minister ‘well informed’ in saying 'sleeping rough is a lifestyle choice here'

The mayor of Rotorua says the police minister was “well informed” with comments about rough sleeping as a “lifestyle choice” there.

There was a group of about 12 to 15 homeless people in Rotorua who were choosing to sleep on footpaths in the city centre, Mayor Tania Tapsell said.

Police Minister Mark Mitchell, at an event on Thursday to launch a “beat team” to patrol the city centre on foot, said many rough sleepers chose to be on the street.

Asked on Thursday how the new team of five constables and a sergeant would help with the issue, Mitchell said the officers knew most of the people, and their circumstances.

“A lot of rough sleepers have got somewhere they can go and sleep, but that's a lifestyle choice they choose to come out onto the street,” Mitchell said.

“There's a whole lot of reasons for that. Might be mental health reasons, or they just feel a sense of community when they come together.”

“I can't comment for every rough sleeper, but from my own experience, rough sleepers have got somewhere to go,” Mitchell said.

Tapsell said the minister’s comments were “well informed”, and based on what they’d been hearing on the ground in Rotorua.

Council staff had for three months been trying to support those people into housing, but they’d told her, local organisations, and media, that they were choosing to, or preferred to, sleep on the streets.

“Some also do have accommodation to go to,” Tapsell said.

This narrative isn't merely tone-deaf, it's actively harmful. The assertion that people "choose" to sleep rough ignores the complex web of circumstances that force individuals and families into homelessness: job losses, family breakdown, mental health crises, and most critically, the systematic dismantling of social safety nets that once provided a pathway to stable housing.

The Government's approach to emergency housing provides a stark illustration of their ideological blindness. Rather than addressing the root causes of homelessness, officials have focused obsessively on reducing numbers through administrative sleight of hand. The target has been achieved early with the 3141 households in emergency housing in December 2023 reduced to just 591 a year later. This dramatic reduction sounds impressive until one examines the methodology: The rate of applications being declined has also almost tripled from 3% a month in the 2023 calendar year to 10% for August 2024.

The strategy is brutally simple: make it harder to access emergency housing, and the statistics improve. They've more than halved in the last year: in July 2024 there were 3,330 people in emergency housing, down from 7,554 in July 2023. 

Emergency housing applications have plummeted from an average of 8,660 applications per month last year to under 4,000 per month now, a clear indication that people are being actively discouraged from seeking help. 

The Ministry of Social Development is now declining more than 90 emergency housing applications monthly because people have apparently "caused or contributed to their immediate need," a subjective criterion that places blame on vulnerable individuals, including women trying to escape domestic violence, rather than addressing systemic failures and a lack of investment. 

But where have these people gone? The answer is grimly predictable: into cars, onto the streets, and into increasingly precarious arrangements that render them invisible to official statistics.

In Rotorua, the Government's flagship intervention has been equally callous. Rotorua is a focus for the government, who is cutting the number of motels contracted to provide emergency housing from 13 down to seven. They also plan to reduce this further to just four motels by mid-2025. This isn't housing policy; it's social cleansing dressed up as administrative efficiency.

The human cost of this approach became starkly apparent during "Operation Trolley," when police targeted homeless individuals using shopping trolleys to transport their possessions. Waiariki MP Rawiri Waititi's response to this operation captured the fundamental issue: homelessness represents governmental failure, not personal deficiency.

Meanwhile, the Government's housing construction programme has stagnated. According to Stats NZ, new dwelling consents nationwide in 2024 were down 9.8% on 2023. This decline comes precisely when New Zealand faces its most severe housing crisis in decades. The nation's housing stock has failed to keep pace with population growth, and the Government's response has been to reduce both public housing targets and support for private construction.

The economic environment has compounded these policy failures. Rising interest rates and construction costs have driven private developers from the market, while the Government has simultaneously reduced its own building commitments. This dual contraction has created a perfect storm of reduced supply precisely when demand remains acute.

The social implications extend far beyond individual hardship. When governments normalise homelessness through rhetoric about "choice," they erode the fundamental social contract that underpins democratic society. The suggestion that people voluntarily embrace destitution is not merely factually incorrect, it is morally reprehensible.

New Zealand once prided itself on being a nation where hard work and fair play guaranteed basic security. That promise has been systematically undermined by policies that prioritise fiscal austerity over human dignity. The current Government's approach represents ideological extremism dressed up as economic necessity.

The path forward requires acknowledging that housing is a human right, not a commodity to be rationed according to market whims. This means substantial investment in public housing, regulation of speculation that drives prices beyond the reach of ordinary families.

Until politicians abandon the cruel fiction that homelessness represents personal choice rather than policy failure, New Zealand will continue its descent from egalitarian society to stratified oligarchy. The question isn't whether we can afford to house all New Zealanders...it is whether we can afford not to.

Bob Vylan Censored While Gaza Genocide Ignored

The recent blacklisting of British punk-rap group Bob Vylan, following their provocative chant of “death, death to the IDF” at Glastonbury 2025, exposes a chilling double standard in Western governance.

The swift and heavy-handed response, launching a criminal investigation, revoking the band’s visas, cancelling future concerts, and seeing them dropped by their agency, stands in stark contrast to western government's silence on Israel’s ongoing atrocities in Gaza. 

This is not merely an attack on free speech; it's a grotesque display of selective outrage, where dissent against a genocidal military machine is punished while mass starvation and slaughter is ignored.


Yesterday, The Irish News reported:

Police investigate Bob Vylan over ‘death to IDF’ call at gig before Glastonbury

Punk duo Bob Vylan are being investigated by police after allegedly calling for “death to every single IDF soldier out there” at a concert one month before Glastonbury.

The pair are already being investigated by Avon and Somerset Police over their appearance at Worthy Farm when rapper Bobby Vylan led crowds in chants of “death, death to the IDF (Israel Defence Forces)” during their livestreamed performance at the Somerset music festival last weekend.

In video footage, Bobby Vylan, whose real name is reportedly Pascal Robinson-Foster, 34, appears to be at Alexandra Palace telling crowds: “Death to every single IDF soldier out there as an agent of terror for Israel. Death to the IDF.”

Bob Vylan’s chant, raw and unfiltered, was a cry against the Israel Defense Forces’ documented brutality, which has seen over 56,000 Palestinians killed since October 2023, many of them women and children. The United Nations has described Israel’s actions as consistent with genocide, yet Western governments continue to arm and defend Israel while condemning artists who dare speak truth to power. 

Bobby Vylan’s words, far from inciting violence, we're a justified response to a military force that has shot unarmed Palestinians seeking food aid, with soldiers admitting to using “unnecessary lethal force” against civilians. This is the real scandal, not a musician’s chant, but the West’s complicity in a humanitarian catastrophe.

Silence is not an option. pic.twitter.com/i5ubnDntUo

— Bob Vylan (@BobbyVylan) July 1, 2025

In New Zealand, the hypocrisy is equally glaring. Free speech advocates like David Seymour, who once championed unfettered expression, have been conspicuously silent or contradictory when it comes to Bob Vylan’s case. Seymour’s libertarian rhetoric falters when the speech challenges Israel, revealing a selective commitment to free expression that bends to geopolitical convenience. 

Meanwhile, Foreign Minister Winston Peters has sat on his hands over what is clearly a terrorist group, the IDF, as New Zealand quietly removed the Proud Boys from its terrorist list, despite their history of violent assaults, including the January 6 Capitol riot in the US, which caused the deaths of nine people, including police officers.

Today, RNZ reported:

It's no longer illegal to be a proudly violent Proud Boy

Then, in 2022, the New Zealand government took a bold stance, listing the Proud Boys as a terrorist entity, a move that made global headlines and was praised by anti-extremism campaigners.

"It was big news... and what it would mean in practice was that anyone who supported or funded or participated in Proud Boys actions here was committing a criminal act, imprisonable by up to seven years, so it was a big deal," Penfold says.

But then last month, without any fanfare, the group slipped off the list of designated terrorist entities.

The only statement on the move was released on the website of the New Zealand Gazette - the newspaper of the government. Penfold describes it as bland and brief.

"The designation had been made under the Terrorism Suppression Act... and every three years that designation will expire unless the prime minister seeks to extend it."

When asked why he didn't extend it, a response to Penfold from the prime minister's office "didn't specifically answer that", but she was told "the Proud Boys remain on the radar... and if any new information comes to hand, they will consider it."

"Those who monitor terrorist organisations and far-right extremist groups... are really concerned at this step that the designation has been allowed to lapse", Penfold says.

So as New Zealand grapples with the rise of conspiracy-fuelled protests and declining trust in democratic institutions, the Proud Boys' shadow, although faint, may still be felt.

 

The government should not be ignoring the Proud Boys' role in spreading white supremacist propaganda, propaganda that has lead directly to people dying. This leniency towards far-right extremists, who've incited and committed real violence, contrasts sharply with the heavy-handed crackdowns on pro-Palestinian voices.

Brenton Tarrant, the Christchurch mosque shooter, was radicalised on websites like 4chan and 8chan, where white supremacist narratives, including the "Great Replacement" conspiracy, festered in unmoderated forums. These same platforms, known for their extremist subcultures, were also used by the Proud Boys to propagate their "Western chauvinist" ideology, share memes, and recruit members, creating an overlapping digital ecosystem of hate.

Other white supremacist figures linked to the Proud Boys and similar online spaces include Dylann Roof, who massacred nine Black worshippers in Charleston in 2015 and was active on sites like Stormfront...and Patrick Crusius, the 2019 El Paso shooter, who posted a manifesto on 8chan echoing the same anti-immigrant rhetoric embraced by Proud Boys, which is earily similar to the rhetoric used by Donald Trump to justify the illegal ICE abductions. The shared use of these platforms underscores a broader network of far-right radicalisation fuelling violent acts.

On Tuesday, the NZ Herald reported:

Christchurch mosque attacks: Podcast questions lone wolf theory

Tarrant was asked to join the Lads Society, an Australian white nationalist and Islamophobic extremist group, in 2017.

Following Tarrant’s attack in Christchurch, the group’s members posted to a closed social media channel.

Some celebrated the attack, others questioned if it was a false flag, possibly to restrict firearms access in New Zealand.

“This one’s not a false flag. Take my word for it,” the group’s founder Thomas Sewell said.

“He seems to know more than the others,” another member replied.

“What do you mean, take my word for it. That almost sounds like you know the cobber.”

Sewell then responded – Tarrant had “been in the scene for a while”.

Sewell later compared Tarrant to Nelson Mandela, saying he would be imprisoned until “we win the revolution”.

 
In stark contrast, the designation of Palestine Action as a terrorist group for spray-painting planes and buildings with red paint is another grotesque overreach. This non-violent protest group, which seeks to disrupt western arms supplies to Israel, is branded a threat to national security, while Israel’s starvation policies and bombing of civilians in tents and aid sites go unchallenged.

In Gaza, hundreds have been killed near food distribution hubs, with Israeli soldiers openly admitting to treating starving women and children as a “hostile force.” Western governments offer tepid criticisms at best, while their actions, continued arms exports and diplomatic support, enable the carnage.

The hypocrisy extends beyond individual cases to systemic patterns of enforcement. Across Western nations, authorities deploy extraordinary measures against pro-Palestinian demonstrations while showing remarkable restraint toward far-right rallies that openly promote racial hatred. Police forces that brutalise peaceful protesters demanding an end to the collective punishment in Gaza then turn their attention to escorting white supremacist marches safely through diverse communities.

Free speech advocates who once championed absolute protection for controversial expression now perform intellectual contortions to justify censoring criticism of unjustified military actions. These same voices, who defended the rights of Holocaust deniers and racial provocateurs under abstract principles of open discourse, suddenly discover compelling state interests that justify silencing uncomfortable truths about contemporary violence.

UK PM Keir Starmer has condemned Bob Vylan’s “Death to the IDF” chant at Glastonbury, calling it “appalling hate speech” and saying no artist should incite violence or make threats on stage.

🔴 LIVE updates: https://t.co/hdtNygFZAk pic.twitter.com/HJlqAKruoQ

— Al Jazeera English (@AJEnglish) June 29, 2025

This selective censorship reveals the true nature of Western liberal democracy's commitment to free expression: it extends only as far as speech that doesn't threaten established power structures or challenge strategic geopolitical relationships. Artists, activists, and ordinary citizens who dare name ongoing atrocities face swift punishment, while actual violent extremists operate with relative impunity.

The Bob Vylan controversy thus represents far more than an isolated incident of artistic censorship. It exemplifies a broader authoritarian drift wherein Western governments abandon foundational democratic principles when confronted with dissent that threatens preferred narratives. When free speech becomes conditional upon political convenience, democracy itself withers.

This is the West’s moral collapse: a world where punk bands are vilified for decrying genocide, but white supremacists and war criminals are indulged. Bob Vylan’s blacklisting isn't just an attack on art; it's a warning to all who dare challenge the status quo. As socialist Jewish activist Naomi Wimborne-Idrissi noted, suppressing outrage against a “televised genocide” only fuels its expression. If New Zealand and its Western allies truly valued free speech and justice, they would hold Israel to account, not silence those who speak for the oppressed.

Democracy Under Siege: NZ Government Gags Youth MPs

In a development that epitomises authoritarian overreach masquerading as administrative procedure, the Coalition of Chaos government has decided to censor Youth MPs during the 11th Youth Parliament, an event that was meant to amplify the free voices of our young people.

The revelation that youth representatives, invited to Parliament to debate the very issues that will define their futures, have been forced to water down or outright remove criticisms of government policy represents a fundamental assault on the democratic principles this coalition once claimed to champion.

Yesterday, RNZ reported:

 

Youth MPs accuse government of 'censoring' them, ministry says otherwise

The government is rejecting accusations it is censoring Youth MPs, saying the protocols followed are the same as 2022 and the young people get the final say on their speeches.

However, the email sent to one Youth MP carries the subject line "changes required", and stated the ministry "have had to make some changes".

Some of the Youth MPs involved say they will not be suppressed and the issue has fuelled the fire to make their voices heard.

 

Coalition parties spent years in opposition decrying Labour's supposed nanny state mentality, lambasting what they saw as overbearing governmental control. Yet here they stand, dictating what young people can say in a forum explicitly designed to foster free expression and democratic participation. This isn't the bold, open democracy that Chris Luxon promised, it's a masterclass in hypocrisy that would embarrass even the most cynical political operator.

The current Youth Parliament involves 123 young people aged 16-18, selected by MPs to represent their constituencies. But despite this broad church of political views, these voices are being systematically silenced when they dare to speak truth to power. 

The Ministry of Youth Development's decision to issue emails with the subject line "changes required" to approximately half of the Youth MPs preparing to address Parliament reveals breathtaking audacity from a government that has transformed from opposition critics into zealous practitioners of the very control they once condemned.

Youth MP Thomas Brocherie, co-director of Make It 16, cut straight to the heart of the matter:

However, the Youth MPs spoke to reporters at Parliament with one - Thomas Brocherie, a spokesperson for Make it 16, a group pushing for a voting age of 16 - saying the approach taken to the speeches was diluting the value of the Youth Parliament.

"We have been told to not argue on either side of contentious issues such as the pay equity reforms or the Treaty Principles Bill for the excuse that they are current topics in the current Parliament. This is not just illogical, it is censorship," he said.

"We cannot say we value democracy unless we actually show and prove we value democracy. Silencing the stakeholders of the future does not value democracy."

Another Youth MP Nate Wilbourne, a spokesperson for Gen Z Aotearoa, said rangatahi were being silenced and censored.

"We've been told to soften our language, to drop key parts of our speeches and to avoid criticizing certain ministers or policies. This isn't guidance. This is fear based control."

Brocherie said the emails being titled "changes required" was "not at all a suggestion, that is blatant editing, they want us to change something to suit their purpose, to suit their agenda".

Youth MP Lincoln Jones said they were provided with "a PDF of edited changes... delivered to our inbox, and that was the expected requirement, that we speak that speech".

"It's honestly like they've gone through with it with a microscope to find any little thing that might be interpreted wrong against, I guess, the current government."

These young people's arguments carry particular weight when considering the existential nature of the issues they're attempting to address, climate change being foremost among them.

Two-thirds of New Zealanders expect severe climate impacts in their area over the next 10 years, whilst New Zealand ranks 41st internationally as a "low climate performer". These are not abstract policy debates for young New Zealanders, they represent the scaffolding of their future. When Youth MP Nate Wilbourne speaks of the "war on nature" and attempts to name ministers responsible for environmental vandalism, he exercises the fundamental democratic right to hold power accountable on matters of existential urgency.

The government's justification for this censorship reveals either breathtaking ignorance or calculated dishonesty. Minister for Youth James Meager insists speeches are not being censored whilst simultaneously defending a process that removes criticisms of government policy, edits references to environmental action, and sanitises language deemed "too political." This isn't guidance; it's censorship dressed up in bureaucratic doublespeak.

However, the decision to abandon livestreaming of this year's Youth Parliament, citing "resource constraints" represents perhaps the most cynical element of the government's censorship regime. Previous Youth Parliaments were fully livestreamed, allowing young New Zealanders across the country to witness democratic participation in action. Youth MP Lincoln Jones rightly identified this change as an attempt to "ensure that speeches that don't fit the narrative of this government are not getting out to the general public."

⚠️ News that this year’s 3-day Youth Parliament has been heavily censored by the Ministry of Youth Development is a shocking act of political control.

Youth MPs were invited to engage — yet have been told to stay silent on issues like climate change, voting rights, and pay… pic.twitter.com/gplINLmaC2

— Kelvin Morgan 🇳🇿 (@kelvin_morganNZ) July 1, 2025

Youth MP Sam Allen noted that participants have gone "from what should be a really exciting event" to "just feeling quite scared" about potential consequences. This erosion of confidence in democratic participation reflects something far more troubling than isolated administrative overzealousness, it's symptomatic of a broader democratic crisis that extends well beyond Parliament's youth programme.

This pattern of democratic erosion has not gone unnoticed by New Zealand's most respected institutions. The New Zealand Law Society's recent watershed report painted a stark picture of rule of law deterioration, highlighting "unequal access to justice and concern at an increased failure to follow good lawmaking processes." 

The Society warned that "accelerated legislative processes have restricted public consultation and select committee review through the use of urgency and Amendment Papers," cautioning that "without deliberate action and adequate investment public confidence in the justice system, and the principle that all are equal before the law, will continue to erode."

On Friday, NZ Lawyer reported:

Access to justice barriers and poor legislative and policy making processes were two major threats

The New Zealand Law Society | Te Kāhui Ture o Aotearoa has released a watershed report that has cautioned against the rule of law being eroded.

The Strengthening the rule of law in Aotearoa New Zealand report indicated that significant and urgent threats included access to justice barriers, poor legislative and policy making processes, and sustenance of the judicial system's independence.

"Predominantly, what we heard focused on unequal access to justice and concern at an increased failure to follow good lawmaking processes. Issues with access to fair justice processes were particularly prevalent in the conversations. The barriers vary, including unaffordability of legal services, underfunded legal aid and duty lawyer schemes, and delays in courts and tribunals", Law Society President Frazer Barton said.

Outgoing Auditor-General John Ryan delivered an equally damning assessment in his final report, noting that "public trust in government is declining." His observation that "trust is the lifeblood of a well-functioning democracy but it is vulnerable" proves particularly prescient when examining how this government treats criticism from any quarter, whether from teenagers, councils, or democratic institutions themselves. 

Ryan identified that Māori, disabled, and Pasifika communities, who "experience disproportionately worse outcomes," show less trust in the public sector, a crisis compounded when young advocates for these communities face systematic silencing.

Yesterday, the Controller and Auditor General reported:

Public trust in government is declining

The public sector represents about one third of the economy. To be successful as a country, we need an effective and efficient public sector that demonstrates that it provides value and is trusted by the public. Although there is much to celebrate in the quality and resilience of New Zealand’s public sector in recent years, the public’s trust in democratic institutions is declining.

Trust is the lifeblood of a well-functioning democracy but it is vulnerable. We saw, for example, in the latter stages of the Covid-19 pandemic how disinformation and a breakdown in trust in parts of the community negatively affected how some responded to public health messages, guidance, and restrictions aimed at protecting the health of all New Zealanders.

We know that levels of trust vary considerably between different population groups. Māori, the disabled, and Pasifika communities experience disproportionately worse outcomes in health, education, housing, employment, and justice. It is likely no coincidence that they are less inclined than the rest of the New Zealand population to trust the public sector.

In my view, the persistent inequity of outcomes needs to be tackled if we are to increase and maintain the trust of all New Zealanders in our system of government.

 

This government’s penchant for undermining democratic processes is further evidenced by its handling of the Fast-track Approvals Act, passed in December 2024.

The government's authoritarian legislation, which allows ministers to bypass standard regulatory processes for infrastructure and resource projects, was rushed through Parliament with limited public consultation and minimal transparency. Documents detailing the 149 projects included in the bill were withheld from MPs until just 72 hours before the final vote, severely restricting scrutiny and public debate. 

Critics, including the Waitangi Tribunal, have raised alarms about the Act’s potential to erode Māori rights under the Treaty of Waitangi, particularly in relation to seabed mining off Pātea. This blatant sidelining of democratic oversight and indigenous voices underscores a troubling willingness to prioritise corporate interests over public accountability.

Equally concerning is the government’s suspension of three Māori Party MPs in June 2025 for performing a haka in protest against policies perceived to undermine Māori rights. This heavy-handed response to a cultural expression of dissent within Parliament, a space meant to embody free speech, signals an intolerance for any opposition that runs counter to their authoritarianism.

The haka incident, coupled with the coalition’s broader moves to review the Treaty of Waitangi and reduce the use of Māori language in government, has sparked widespread protests and accusations of rolling back decades of indigenous progress. Such actions suggest a government more interested in consolidating control than fostering inclusive debate.

The government’s moves to override local councils through Resource Management Act (RMA) reforms further exemplify this democratic erosion. By centralising decision-making powers and sidelining local authorities’ ability to reflect community priorities on housing and environmental protections, the coalition has effectively neutered local democracy. 

These reforms, driven by a top-down approach, limit public input and undermine the ability of councils to represent their constituents, echoing the same authoritarian impulse seen in the censorship of Youth MPs. This pattern of stripping away local agency betrays the coalition’s earlier promises to empower communities, revealing a government more concerned with control than collaboration.

When teenagers can't criticise ministers over climate inaction without bureaucratic interference, when councils can't represent their communities without central government override, and when proper legislative processes are abandoned in favour of urgency and expedience, we witness democracy's foundations being systematically undermined by a government that treats participation as an inconvenience rather than a cornerstone of good governance.

This government must immediately reverse its shameful censorship of Youth MPs, restore transparent democratic processes, and abandon its attacks on local governance. The warnings from our legal and auditing experts are clear, we stand at a crossroads between democratic renewal and authoritarian drift. New Zealand's democracy cannot survive when those in power systematically silence criticism and circumvent accountability. Our young people deserve better, our communities deserve better, and our democracy demands nothing less.