DOJ-OGR-00005731.jpg
723 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing / court document (case 1:20-cr-00330-pae - likely us v. ghislaine maxwell)
File Size:
723 KB
Summary
This legal filing from October 2021 discusses the 2006 investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, highlighting a conflict between the Palm Beach Police (led by Chief Reiter) and state prosecutors regarding the leniency of the prosecution. It notes that while police believed they had probable cause to charge Epstein and two redacted individuals, Ghislaine Maxwell was not named in charging documents. The document also raises serious issues regarding the chain of custody of evidence, stating that Detective Recarey is dead and that the FBI allegedly received empty evidence packages.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Suspect |
Detectives believed they had probable cause to charge him in 2006; police felt he was not treated harshly enough.
|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant/Subject |
Referred to as 'Ms. Maxwell'; document notes her name was absent from any charging document or probable cause stateme...
|
| Mr. Reiter | Chief of Police (Palm Beach) |
Wrote letters criticizing the prosecuting attorneys for conflict of interest and delay; referred the matter to the FBI.
|
| Detective Recarey | Detective |
Deceased; his absence makes it impossible to verify chain of custody for seized evidence.
|
| [REDACTED] | Suspects |
Two individuals whose names are redacted, whom detectives believed they had probable cause to charge alongside Epstein.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Palm Beach Police Department |
Investigating agency; had disagreements with State Attorney; handled evidence.
|
|
| Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) |
Agency the case was referred to by Chief Reiter; allegedly received empty evidence packages.
|
|
| State Attorney |
Prosecuting authority; accused by police of inaction and conflict of interest.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of the Police Department mentioned.
|
Relationships (2)
Reiter wrote letters suggesting prosecutors had a conflict of interest and complained about inaction.
Document contrasts that police had probable cause for Epstein but Maxwell's name was absent from charging documents.
Key Quotes (6)
"According to the police reports, the investigating detectives believed that they had probable cause to charge Jeffrey Epstein, [REDACTED] and [REDACTED]"Source
DOJ-OGR-00005731.jpg
Quote #1
"Ms. Maxwell’s name is absent from any charging document or probable cause statement."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005731.jpg
Quote #2
"I do not feel that justice has been sufficiently served by the indictment that has been issued."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005731.jpg
Quote #3
"Therefore please know that his (sic) matter has been referred to the Federal Bureau of Investigation to determine if violations of federal law have occurred."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005731.jpg
Quote #4
"Detective Recarey is dead, and no record custodian exists that can identify what was (1) seized..."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005731.jpg
Quote #5
"Other documents provided to the defense suggest that when the FBI opened packages that were alleged to have contained evidence nothing was inside"Source
DOJ-OGR-00005731.jpg
Quote #6
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,137 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 391 Filed 10/29/21 Page 6 of 11
In approximately April 2006 the investigation was concluded. According to the police
reports, the investigating detectives believed that they had probable cause to charge Jeffrey
Epstein, [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] Ms. Maxwell’s name is absent from any charging document or
probable cause statement.
reports, the investigating detectives believed that they had probable cause to charge Jeffrey
Epstein, [REDACTED] and [REDACTED] Ms. Maxwell’s name is absent from any charging document or
probable cause statement.
The police reports reflect that a disagreement arose between the police and the state
attorney as to how the case was being handled. Essentially, the police believed that Mr. Epstein
was not being treated harshly enough and that here had been an excessive amount of delay in the
prosecution because of the inaction by the prosecuting attorneys. The disagreements over how
the case was being prosecuted became significant and public. The Chief of Police, Mr. Reiter,
wrote several letters to the prosecuting attorneys including a letter suggesting that the
prosecutors had a conflict of interest. In a letter to one of the alleged victims Chief Reiter wrote:
“I do not feel that justice has been sufficiently served by the indictment that has been issued.
Therefore please know that his (sic) matter has been referred to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation to determine if violations of federal law have occurred.”
attorney as to how the case was being handled. Essentially, the police believed that Mr. Epstein
was not being treated harshly enough and that here had been an excessive amount of delay in the
prosecution because of the inaction by the prosecuting attorneys. The disagreements over how
the case was being prosecuted became significant and public. The Chief of Police, Mr. Reiter,
wrote several letters to the prosecuting attorneys including a letter suggesting that the
prosecutors had a conflict of interest. In a letter to one of the alleged victims Chief Reiter wrote:
“I do not feel that justice has been sufficiently served by the indictment that has been issued.
Therefore please know that his (sic) matter has been referred to the Federal Bureau of
Investigation to determine if violations of federal law have occurred.”
The reports and seized documents are a mash-up of a various hearsay sources. More often
than not, it is difficult to determine how many multiple layers of hearsay exist with regard to a
particular piece of alleged evidence. Significantly, the Palm Beach Police Department Property
Receipt/Search Warrant Return (Government Exhibit 295), attached as Exhibit A, is cursory, and
reflects items moved in and out of the property department. Detective Recarey is dead, and no
record custodian exists that can identify what was (1) seized; (2) what was maintained by the
Palm Beach Police Department and by whom; (3) what was returned and (4) what was
purportedly transferred to the FBI. Other documents provided to the defense suggest that when
the FBI opened packages that were alleged to have contained evidence nothing was inside and
than not, it is difficult to determine how many multiple layers of hearsay exist with regard to a
particular piece of alleged evidence. Significantly, the Palm Beach Police Department Property
Receipt/Search Warrant Return (Government Exhibit 295), attached as Exhibit A, is cursory, and
reflects items moved in and out of the property department. Detective Recarey is dead, and no
record custodian exists that can identify what was (1) seized; (2) what was maintained by the
Palm Beach Police Department and by whom; (3) what was returned and (4) what was
purportedly transferred to the FBI. Other documents provided to the defense suggest that when
the FBI opened packages that were alleged to have contained evidence nothing was inside and
3
DOJ-OGR-00005731
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document