Mr. Weinberg
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Client |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Client |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Filip
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Your Honor (The Court)
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
your Honor
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
registrant
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Client (Epstein)
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. WEINGARTEN
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Fernich
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Proposed trial | Mr. Weinberg requests the court set a preliminary trial date for immediately after Labor Day. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2020-03-12 | Oral argument | The court scheduled an oral argument for 10 a.m. | Court | View |
| 2020-02-24 | Briefing deadline | A date by which substantive motions are to be fully briefed before the court. | Court | View |
| 2019-09-03 | N/A | Court Hearing (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| 2019-09-03 | N/A | Court Hearing for Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (United States v. Jeffrey Epstein) | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| 2019-08-06 | N/A | Court hearing regarding case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (Jeffrey Epstein case). Discussion focuses on sett... | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| 2019-08-06 | N/A | Court hearing/status conference filing date. | Courtroom | View |
| 2019-08-06 | Court hearing | A hearing to discuss and set a trial date in case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2019-08-06 | N/A | Court hearing regarding trial scheduling in United States v. Jeffrey Epstein. | Courtroom | View |
| 2019-08-06 | N/A | Court hearing regarding trial scheduling in Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. | Courtroom | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A court hearing regarding Mr. Epstein's bail conditions. | Courtroom | View |
| 2019-07-24 | N/A | Court hearing (Filing date of document). | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A legal argument took place in court concerning Rule 29, the scope of a statute, and the conditio... | Courtroom | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A court proceeding where Mr. Weinberg and the Court discuss the impact of publicity and wealth on... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A discussion in court regarding the financial summary and potential bond for Mr. Epstein. | Court | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A court proceeding where Mr. Weinberg is presenting arguments to the Court regarding pretrial con... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A court hearing where Mr. Weinberg and The Court discuss a registrant's compliance with monitorin... | Southern District Court (im... | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A court proceeding where Mr. Weinberg and The Court are discussing Mr. Epstein's legal history an... | Courtroom | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A court hearing for case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB where counsel and the judge discussed whether trustees... | Court in the Southern District | View |
| 2019-07-24 | N/A | Court hearing regarding bail and detention for Jeffrey Epstein (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| 2019-07-24 | N/A | Court hearing (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) regarding bail and remand. | Southern District (implied ... | View |
| 2019-07-24 | N/A | Court hearing regarding Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A legal proceeding where the government presented arguments against the defendant's legal claims ... | A courtroom in an unspecifi... | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A court hearing where Mr. Weinberg and The Court discuss the relevance of a 14-year period of goo... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2019-07-24 | Court hearing | A court hearing where the judge and a counsel (Mr. Weinberg) discuss Mr. Epstein's compliance wit... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
DOJ-OGR-00000658.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on September 3, 2019, in the case against Jeffrey Epstein. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg describes the conditions at the MCC and SHU as 'medieval' and 'horrific,' citing vermin and lack of sunlight. He also explicitly states that the defense disputes the conclusions of the medical examiner regarding their client's death.
DOJ-OGR-00000621.jpg
This document is a court transcript from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, filed on August 6, 2019. The transcript captures a discussion between the judge, Ms. Moe (representing the government), and Mr. Weinberg (representing the defense) to schedule future court dates. Key dates set include an appearance on October 28, a briefing deadline on February 24, 2020, and an oral argument on March 12, 2020.
DOJ-OGR-00000620.jpg
This is page 9 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (United States v. Jeffrey Epstein), filed on August 6, 2019. The Judge (The Court) rules to exclude time from the Speedy Trial Act calculations to allow for extensive pretrial preparation and tentatively schedules a trial for June 8, 2020. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg requests oral arguments for motions, which the court schedules for October 28, 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00000619.jpg
This document is page 8 of a court transcript filed on August 6, 2019, in the case against Jeffrey Epstein. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg argues for a 13-month timeline to prepare for trial, citing the need to litigate a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), unseal files for potential witnesses, and difficulties working with Epstein under current jail conditions. The Court responds by setting a monitoring period and excluding time through June 8.
DOJ-OGR-00000618.jpg
This document is page 7 of a court transcript from August 6, 2019, in the case United States v. Jeffrey Epstein (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg agrees the case meets complexity criteria for an extension. Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues against a delay until September, advocating for a trial in May or June due to the 'public interest' in a swift resolution and the significant time passed since the charged conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00000617.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (the federal case against Jeffrey Epstein), filed on August 6, 2019. The transcript records a discussion between the Judge ('The Court') and defense attorney Mr. Weinberg regarding the scheduling of the trial. They agree to target September 2020 for the trial date, as Mr. Weinberg argues that 13 months is necessary to prepare for a case of this 'magnitude and scope.'
DOJ-OGR-00000616.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a court hearing on August 6, 2019, where Epstein's lawyer, Mr. Weinberg, requests a trial date of Labor Day 2020. Weinberg cites the need to review over a million pages of discovery and address complex constitutional issues related to Epstein's previous Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and double jeopardy protections. The text also notes Epstein's incarceration at the MCC and the defense's intent to file early motions to dismiss based on the NPA.
DOJ-OGR-00000580.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, detailing a discussion between a judge and several lawyers. The conversation covers an agreement between the U.S. Attorney and defense counsel regarding whether trustees or guards will be armed. Attorney Mr. Boies, representing a victim, interrupts to clarify that payments of $250,000 and $100,000 were made by the defendant at a time when a legal proceeding was pending, contradicting a prior statement by the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00000577.jpg
This is page 67 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, in the case United States v. Jeffrey Epstein. The proceedings involve a discussion regarding victims wishing to be heard, with Mr. Boies present to represent them. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg clarifies that Epstein does not concede the government's evidence and intends to mount a defense.
DOJ-OGR-00000570.jpg
This document is page 60 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, regarding the case against Jeffrey Epstein. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg argues for Epstein's release and disputes the relevance of a 1982 passport cited by the government, while the Judge sets a 5:00 PM deadline for the next day's submissions. Prosecutor Mr. Rossmiller agrees to the filing schedule, and the court briefly mentions evidence potentially arising from the search of Epstein's East 71st Street mansion.
DOJ-OGR-00000569.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 24, 2019, where a speaker identified as Mr. Weinberg argues against the imposition of monetary bail conditions. He supports his position by referencing the federal Bail Reform Act of 1984, a similar movement in Massachusetts, and a broader societal shift away from the overcriminalization policies of the 1980s. Weinberg contends that defendants should not be incarcerated simply because they are unable to pay bail.
DOJ-OGR-00000568.jpg
This is page 58 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, in the case of United States v. Jeffrey Epstein (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). The page captures a debate between the Judge (The Court) and defense attorney Mr. Weinberg regarding the fairness of bail conditions and access to counsel. Weinberg argues that the unique complexity of the case (facing a well-resourced prosecution and 'a million pages of discovery') justifies different treatment than typical defendants at Rikers Island, while the Court counters by highlighting the serious nature of crimes faced by indigent defendants.
DOJ-OGR-00000565.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, concerning bail conditions for Mr. Epstein. His attorney, Mr. Weinberg, argues that Epstein is not a flight risk, contrasting him with another defendant who lied to pretrial services. Weinberg proposes an additional condition of a credible trustee living in Epstein's home to ensure compliance, in an attempt to persuade the judge to reconsider the detention order.
DOJ-OGR-00000564.jpg
This document is page 54 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, in the case United States v. Jeffrey Epstein. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg argues for Epstein's release on bail, citing high-profile defendants like Madoff and Skilling who honored their bail conditions and surrendered for prison. The Judge asks if those precedents involved a 'presumption' of detention, which Weinberg admits they may not have, but argues that Epstein's 14-year history of non-danger negates that presumption.
DOJ-OGR-00000562.jpg
This document is page 52 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019 (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). Attorney Mr. Weinberg argues with the Court about the confidentiality of the defendant's financial information, specifically in the context of a bail determination. Notably, Weinberg explicitly states that the defendant (implied to be Jeffrey Epstein) does not possess a billion dollars while discussing hypothetical bail amounts of $20 million.
DOJ-OGR-00000560.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court hearing on July 24, 2019, concerning Mr. Epstein. The judge expresses dissatisfaction with a provided financial summary, calling it unverified and not detailed enough. In response, Mr. Weinberg, representing Epstein, states that his client is prepared to sign any bond the court requires, including one for $100 million, to guarantee his appearance.
DOJ-OGR-00000557.jpg
This document is page 47 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, in the case United States v. Epstein (1:19-cr-00490). Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg is arguing against the government's claim that payments of $250,000 and $100,000 made by the defendant constituted witness tampering or obstruction of justice. Weinberg contends these were acts of generosity to employees or friends and argues that, under the Aguilar Supreme Court precedent, these actions do not rise to federal obstruction because there was no pending judicial proceeding at the time.
DOJ-OGR-00000553.jpg
This document is page 43 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, in the case of United States v. Jeffrey Epstein. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg argues that his client has meticulously complied with sex offender registration requirements for nine years, informing authorities in the Virgin Islands of travel to Paris, Florida, and New York. The Judge (The Court) questions Weinberg about the specific criteria for reporting presence (the 10-day rule) and questions the registration requirements in New Mexico.
DOJ-OGR-00000552.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019. In it, the judge (THE COURT) raises a concern based on a New York Post article suggesting Mr. Epstein was not in compliance with his sex offender registration obligations in New York. A speaker, Mr. Weinberg, responds that while he is aware of the story, Mr. Epstein has never been officially informed of any violation by New York authorities.
DOJ-OGR-00000551.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019. In it, a lawyer named Mr. Weinberg argues that his client, a tier 3 registrant, has a long history of compliance with daily monitoring and has been careful to avoid any violations. Mr. Weinberg explains that his client was advised he did not need to physically appear in New York and details how his client's travel, monitored from the Virgin Islands, is carefully reported.
DOJ-OGR-00000549.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, in which a speaker, Mr. Weinberg, discusses the legal history of his client, Mr. Epstein's, sex offender classification. Weinberg argues that Epstein has complied with all registration requirements, noting his principal residence is the Virgin Islands where he is a tier 1 offender, and that an attempt to register in New Mexico was deemed unnecessary by that state.
DOJ-OGR-00000546.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, where attorney Mr. Weinberg is defending his client, Mr. Epstein. Weinberg argues that Epstein is not an out-of-control offender or a flight risk, citing previous intensive investigations by state and federal authorities in 2005 and 2006 and the high level of publicity as reasons why any misconduct would already be known. The judge questions the basis of Weinberg's claims about his client's character.
DOJ-OGR-00000545.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. A speaker, Mr. Weinberg, argues to the court that the immense publicity surrounding Mr. Epstein, combined with his wealth, makes him an attractive target for both civil and criminal complaints. Weinberg contends that this unprecedented level of attention would motivate any individuals victimized by Epstein after 2005 to come forward.
DOJ-OGR-00000543.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 24, 2019, capturing a discussion between a speaker, Mr. Weinberg, and the Court. Mr. Weinberg argues that a defendant's 14 years of self-discipline should be considered evidence against future risk, questioning the government's ability to prove otherwise. The Court expresses significant interest in this argument, referencing government-supported studies on long-term recidivism among sex offenders that it has reviewed.
DOJ-OGR-00000541.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 24, 2019, in which an attorney, Mr. Weinberg, argues against the detention of his client, Mr. Epstein. Weinberg contends that after he rebuts the presumption of danger, the burden of proof falls on the government, and he asserts that the government has found no allegations of illegal sexual activity by Epstein since 2005, despite a lengthy investigation.
Prison Conditions and Medical Examiner Conclusions
Oral argument regarding the horrific conditions at the MCC/SHU and disputing the medical examiner's findings.
Trial Scheduling
Weinberg argues that the defense needs 13 months to prepare due to sealed files, the NPA, and jail conditions.
Trial Scheduling
Discussion regarding the scheduling of the trial for either June or September 2020.
Trial Scheduling and Discovery
Weinberg argues for a trial date of Labor Day 2020 due to the volume of discovery (1 million pages) and complex legal issues surrounding the NPA.
Legal arguments regarding a case
Mr. Weinberg argues that the current case is not one of 'quintessential commercial sex trafficking' and that the presumption for detention is rebuttable, wishing to address the 'danger' and 'flight' prongs separately.
Arguments against monetary bail conditions
Mr. Weinberg argues against monetary bail conditions, citing the complexity of pretrial preparation, a movement in Massachusetts, the federal Bail Reform Act of 1984, and a broader societal reaction against the overcriminalization of the 1980s.
Mr. Epstein's compliance with New York sex offender regis...
Mr. Weinberg acknowledges seeing the story and states that nobody from the "New York side" has ever informed Mr. Epstein that he was in violation.
Defense of Mr. Epstein's character and flight risk status
Mr. Weinberg argues that Mr. Epstein is not an out-of-control offender or a flight risk, citing past intensive investigations and the high level of publicity surrounding him. The Court questions the basis for Mr. Weinberg's assessment of his client's character.
Response to the Court
Mr. Weinberg thanks the judge and begins to provide context for the case before responding to the Court's questions.
Bail Hearing / Applicability of Statute 1591
Weinberg argues that while the allegations are grave, Epstein's case differs from the 'heartland' of commercial sex trafficking involving servitude and pimps.
Bail Hearing Argument
Discussion regarding the confidentiality of financial records submitted for bail determination.
Compliance with registration and travel notification
Argument regarding the defendant's compliance with sex offender registration and lack of violation notices.
Bail Hearing Arguments
Discussion regarding the right to counsel, fairness relative to other defendants, and the complexity of the current case involving 'a million pages of discovery'.
Registrant's compliance and travel monitoring
A discussion between Mr. Weinberg and the Court about a registrant's obligations, travel, and history of compliance.
Publicity and its effect on the case against Mr. Epstein
Mr. Weinberg argues that the high level of publicity and Mr. Epstein's wealth make him an attractive defendant and would motivate any potential victims to come forward with allegations.
Bail conditions for Mr. Epstein
Mr. Weinberg argues for the reconsideration of bail conditions for his client, Mr. Epstein. He contrasts Epstein with another defendant who had foreign passports and lied to pretrial services, and proposes appointing a credible trustee to live at Epstein's home to ensure compliance.
DOJ involvement in 2007 NPA
Discussion regarding the timing of Epstein's arrest relative to CVRA filings and the identification of DOJ officials involved in the 2007 non-prosecution agreement.
Position on unsealing
Stated 'we take no position on behalf of Mr. Epstein' regarding the unsealing request.
Position on Unsealing
Stated they take no position on behalf of Mr. Epstein regarding the unsealing.
Position on unsealing briefs
Stating that after consideration, they take no position on behalf of Mr. Epstein regarding the unsealing request.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity