United States
LocationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
location
Israel
|
Political alliance |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Citizenship |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
China
|
Geopolitical economic conflict |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Israel
|
Alliance |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
China
|
Economic strategic |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Israel
|
Unknown |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
|
Diplomatic adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Saudi Arabia
|
Diplomatic economic |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Gulf States (UAE, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar)
|
Strategic alliance |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Soviet Union
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Soviets
|
Diplomatic adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Iran
|
Adversarial diplomatic |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Thomas
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Schafrick
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Schmidt
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Seabrook
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sensi
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sergentakis
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Serrano
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Shaw
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sliker
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
SNYDER
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Soares
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Spears
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sprouts
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-12-02 | N/A | Legal case: United States v. Coccagna, No. 1:22-cr-00407-YK, ECF No. 3-1 | N/A | View |
| 2022-07-07 | N/A | Legal case: United States v. Chuong, No. 1:21-cr-00164, ECF No. 67 | N/A | View |
| 2022-05-09 | Court decision | A decision was rendered in the case of United States v. Suarez. | 3d Cir. | View |
| 2022-04-22 | Court decision | A decision was rendered in the case of United States v. Santos. | 5th Cir. | View |
| 2022-04-01 | N/A | Legal case: United States v. Barnes, No. 3:19-cr-00112-K, ECF No. 355 | N/A | View |
| 2022-03-11 | Legal filing | A legal document was filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, arguing against the government's reliance o... | N/A | View |
| 2022-03-08 | Hearing | A hearing is scheduled in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, at which a redacted ind... | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-02-01 | Court decision | A decision was rendered in the case of United States v. McGrain. | W.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2022-01-25 | Legal proceeding | A ruling was made in the United States v. Guzman Loera case by the Second Circuit. | Second Circuit | View |
| 2022-01-06 | Legal proceeding | Court case: United States v. Bright | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2022-01-01 | Legal case | Ruling in United States v. Guzman Loera, where the Second Circuit affirmed the denial of a hearin... | Second Circuit | View |
| 2021-12-16 | Court ruling | The Court denied the Government's motion to preclude remaining witnesses. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2021-12-04 | Legal proceeding | The ongoing trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, case S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN), where the gove... | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2021-08-03 | Court proceeding | A transcript was recorded in the case United States v. Kelly. | E.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2021-06-30 | Legal order | The Court issued an Order directing the parties to indicate whether they propose any redactions t... | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2021-05-10 | Legal ruling | A ruling was made in the case United States v. Chandler. | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2021-04-29 | Sentencing hearing | Sentencing hearing for the case United States v. Tiffany Days. | N/A | View |
| 2021-04-01 | Court filing | Filing of Document 20-3 in Case 21-770, which is Exhibit N, a Memorandum Opinion and Order from C... | District of New Mexico | View |
| 2021-01-11 | Legal decision | Certiorari denied for United States v. Brown, 800 F. App’x 455 (9th Cir. 2020). | U.S. Supreme Court | View |
| 2021-01-01 | N/A | United States v. Maxwell, 534 F. Supp. 3d 299 (S.D.N.Y. 2021) case cited. | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2021-01-01 | Legal case | Citation of United States v. McCoy, 995 F.3d 32 (2d Cir. 2021). | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2021-01-01 | Legal decision | Decision in the case United States v. Skelos. | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2021-01-01 | Legal case | Russell v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 2601 (2021) | N/A | View |
| 2021-01-01 | Legal case | Citation of United States v. Khalupsky, 5 F.4th 279 (2d Cir. 2021). | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2020-09-23 | N/A | Deadline for parties to respond to the United States' letter brief. | United States Court of Appe... | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026803.jpg
A presentation slide produced by Deutsche Bank's Global Public Affairs department, authored by Francis J. Kelly. The slide announces the beginning of the 2016 US election campaigns and features a graphic of voting booths. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production for a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026800.jpg
This document is a slide from a Deutsche Bank Global Public Affairs presentation, authored by Francis J. Kelly (page 6, Bates stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026800). It outlines a regulatory relief bill proposed by Senator Richard Shelby intended to benefit small- and mid-sized banks, including raising the 'Systemically Important' asset threshold from $50B to $500B and reforming the Federal Reserve structure. The document includes a strategic note suggesting the bill has potential for success due to Shelby's legislative skill, despite skepticism from observers.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026796.jpg
A Deutsche Bank Global Public Affairs presentation slide, authored by Francis J. Kelly, providing a geopolitical and market outlook for 2015-2016. It predicts long-term instability in the Middle East and identifies short-term market drivers such as the Iran nuclear deal, TPP approval, and US energy policy changes. The document bears a House Oversight Committee stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026783.jpg
This document is a page from a legal memorandum summarizing changes brought about by the 'Tax Act' (likely the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017). It details specific changes regarding foreign subsidiary earnings, the elimination of Section 1031 exchanges for personal property (like artwork and cryptocurrency), revisions to Net Operating Loss (NOL) rules, and significant increases in Estate and Gift Tax exemptions for 2018. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a Congressional investigation production.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026779.jpg
This document is a legal 'Client Alert' analyzing the impact of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act signed in late 2017, specifically focusing on how the new laws affect asset management firms and 'carried interest.' It details the new three-year holding period requirement for capital gains to be eligible for long-term tax rates. The document bears a House Oversight Bates stamp, suggesting it was obtained during a congressional investigation, likely related to financial records.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026750.jpg
This document is a program page or partner list for the 2017 Swedish American Life Science Summit (SALSS). It lists corporate partners (including Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Embassies) and the leadership team, including Founder Barbro C. Ehnbom. The Senior Advisory Board includes notable figures such as Dr. Robert Langer (MIT) and Dr. William A. Haseltine. The document originates from a House Oversight Committee release (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026750).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026748.jpg
This document is a program page, likely from the 2017 Swedish American Life Science Summit (visible in watermark), obtained from House Oversight files. It lists Joe Biden as the Keynote Speaker representing the Biden Cancer Initiative. The list of speakers includes prominent scientists and executives, notably Dr. William A. Haseltine, a known associate in the Epstein network, representing ACCESS Health International. The document also lists presenting companies in the life sciences sector.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026728.jpg
This document is a legal disclaimer page (page 48) from an Invesco report, dated March 31, 2017. It outlines regulatory compliance and distribution restrictions for professional and institutional investors across various global jurisdictions, including Europe, the US, Australia, Hong Kong, and New Zealand. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production for a Congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017969.jpg
This document is a page from a Miami Herald article filed as a court exhibit, detailing allegations by Virginia Roberts and testimony from Maritza Vasquez regarding Jeffrey Epstein and Jean-Luc Brunel's involvement in trafficking underage models via the Mc2 agency. It describes how young girls were recruited, housed in Epstein-owned apartments, and allegedly coerced into sexual acts with wealthy clients under the guise of modeling contracts.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017943.jpg
This page from a legal filing details allegations against Jeffrey Epstein regarding the abuse of minors and outlines the experiences of a victim named Roberts who fled to Australia. It also introduces a section regarding Alan Dershowitz's close personal relationship with Epstein, citing public statements and travel history.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017936.jpg
This document is Page 2 of a legal complaint filed on April 16, 2019, by Virginia L. Giuffre against Alan Dershowitz. It outlines the nature of the action, stating the suit arises from defamatory statements by Dershowitz, and details Giuffre's victimization by Jeffrey Epstein between 2000-2002. The document cites a 2016 order by Judge Marra describing Epstein's trafficking scheme and explicitly alleges that Dershowitz was one of the persons with whom Epstein acted in concert to abuse minors.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017933.jpg
This document is page 30 of a Westlaw printout detailing a court order from 'In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' (392 F.Supp.2d 539). The text outlines the court's rulings on various motions to dismiss filed by numerous defendants, including charities, financial entities (National Commercial Bank), and individuals such as Tarik Hamdi, Abdulrahman Alamoudi, and members of the Saudi royal family (Prince Salman and Prince Naif mentioned in footnotes). The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a congressional inquiry.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017932.jpg
This document is a page from a court opinion (392 F.Supp.2d 539) concerning the September 11 terrorist attacks litigation. It discusses the court's decision to prioritize personal jurisdiction discovery over subject matter jurisdiction (FSIA) for NCB to avoid intrusion into Saudi Arabia's sovereignty. The conclusion section lists rulings granting motions to dismiss for SHC, Prince Salman, and Prince Naif, while denying others.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017928.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 legal opinion (392 F.Supp.2d 539) regarding litigation surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. It details rulings on motions to dismiss for various defendants including the Success Foundation (dismissed), Wa'el Jalaidan (denied), IIRO (denied), Rabita Trust (denied), and the SAAR Network. It discusses allegations of financial support for al Qaeda and corporate structures involving entities in Herndon, Virginia. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, suggesting it was part of a congressional inquiry, potentially related to financial oversight, though Jeffrey Epstein is not explicitly mentioned on this specific page.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017925.jpg
This document is page 22 of a Westlaw printout of a 2005 court opinion titled 'In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001.' It details legal standards for civil liability under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), and civil RICO statutes (Section 1962), specifically defining 'material support' for terrorism. While the document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, suggesting it was part of a congressional production (possibly related to the Epstein investigation given the context of the request), this specific page discusses 9/11 litigation and does not explicitly name Jeffrey Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017923.jpg
This document is page 20 of a legal opinion (392 F.Supp.2d 539) regarding *In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001*. It discusses the court's jurisdiction over defendants Wa'el Jalaidan and the Rabita Trust, detailing Jalaidan's alleged role as a founder and logistics chief for al Qaeda and his connections to Osama bin Laden. While the document bears a House Oversight stamp (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017923), often associated with broader financial investigations, the text itself focuses strictly on 9/11 terrorist financing liability and does not mention Jeffrey Epstein.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017922.jpg
This page from a court opinion discusses motions to dismiss regarding jurisdiction over Saudi princes and the Rabita Trust in litigation related to the September 11, 2001 attacks. The court grants the motions to dismiss for Prince Salman and Prince Naif due to a lack of minimum contacts with the United States necessary for personal jurisdiction. The document also begins discussing allegations against the Rabita Trust, including its designation as a terrorist entity and alleged ties to al Qaeda.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017921.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 legal opinion (In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001) discussing the court's jurisdiction over Saudi defendants Prince Salman and Prince Naif. It details plaintiffs' arguments that Prince Salman funded terrorist-linked entities (IIRO, WAMY, etc.) and establishes his contacts with the U.S., including stock ownership in Texas and a 1989 meeting with George H.W. Bush. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017918.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 court opinion regarding terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, specifically addressing the sovereign immunity of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Saudi High Commission (SHC), Prince Salman, and Prince Naif under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). The court discusses whether the 'torts exception' or 'commercial activities exception' to immunity applies, noting that the commercial activities exception is inappropriate and analyzing the requirements for the torts exception and the discretionary function rule. The text concludes that the defendants are considered foreign states for FSIA purposes when acting in official capacities and examines legal precedents regarding jurisdiction.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017917.jpg
This document is a page from a court opinion (In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001) analyzing whether the Saudi High Commission (SHC) qualifies as an organ of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and is thus entitled to foreign sovereign immunity. The text details arguments regarding SHC's status, funding sources, and structure, citing declarations from Saudi officials and legal precedents like Filler v. Hanvit Bank.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017916.jpg
This document is a page from a 2005 court opinion (*In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001*) discussing the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) status of Saudi defendants. It details the court's denial of a motion to supplement the record against Prince Salman and Prince Naif regarding a 1998 article linking Saudi charities to al Qaida, citing lack of authentication. It also establishes the 'Saudi High Commission' (SHC) as an organ of the Saudi government, noting Prince Salman's role as its President. The document bears a House Oversight stamp, suggesting it was part of a congressional production.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017915.jpg
This document is a page from a court opinion regarding the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, specifically discussing allegations against Saudi Princes Salman and Naif. It details claims that Prince Salman and Prince Naif used their positions and various charities (such as the SHC, IIRO, and SJRC) to fund and support Islamic militants, including Al Qaeda and Hamas, in regions like Bosnia, Afghanistan, and Palestine. The text cites various complaints alleging the princes knowingly supported terrorist networks and ignored warnings from Western governments.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017908.jpg
This document is a page from a Westlaw legal database printout (dated 2019) referencing the 2005 case 'In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001'. It contains legal headnotes [20-24] summarizing court rulings on Federal Civil Procedure, personal jurisdiction over foreign terrorist entities/charities, and requirements for RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) claims. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production for a congressional investigation, potentially serving as legal precedent or research within that file.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907.jpg
This document is a page from a Westlaw legal research printout regarding the case 'In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' (392 F.Supp.2d 539). The page lists legal headnotes defining the standards for personal jurisdiction, conspiracy pleading requirements under New York law, and specific federal jurisdiction rulings concerning Saudi Arabian officials accused of funding terrorism through humanitarian channels. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017907' stamp, indicating it was part of a document production for a House Oversight Committee investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017906.jpg
This document is a Westlaw printout of legal headnotes from the case 'In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001'. It details legal precedents regarding the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA), specifically confirming immunity for a Saudi Arabian relief agency and its chairman regarding allegations of funding the 9/11 attacks. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' stamp, indicating it was part of a Congressional investigation production.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity