United States
LocationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
32
Very Strong
|
72 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
19 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
organization
Iran
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Davis
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Bodmer
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Dreier
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
English
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Boustani
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Torres
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
4 | |
|
location
China
|
Unknown |
10
Very Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Smith
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
location
China
|
Geopolitical rivals |
9
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Sampson
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Carrillo-Villa
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Petrov
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Dominguez
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Hung
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Abdellatif El Mokadem
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Rowe
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Alindato-Perez
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Crowell
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Deutsch
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal agreement modification | An addendum was created to modify paragraph 7 of a Non-Prosecution Agreement between the United S... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Lawsuit | Case No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON, where Jane Doe #1 and Jane Doe #2 are petitioners against th... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Argument presented that Ms. Maxwell has standing to enforce a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) as ... | Southern District of New York | View |
| N/A | Legal filing | The United States filed a sealed motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Legal case | Criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, Case No. 20 Cr. 330 (AJN). | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Legal case | The ongoing criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, case number 20 Cr. 330 (AJN). | United States Courthouse, N... | View |
| N/A | Trial | The trial of United States v. Maxwell, during which Juror 50 served on the jury. | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal agreement | Epstein entered into a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) where he agreed to a sentence of eighteen ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | The Supreme Court ruling in Giglio v. United States, which held that an Assistant United Stated A... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal agreement | Epstein agrees to waive his Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial and his Fifth Amendment right... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | Legal case | United States v. Maxwell | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal motion | The United States shall make a motion for the appointment of a guardian ad litem for the identifi... | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Legal case | The ongoing legal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, case number S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN). | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Sentencing proceeding | The Government proposes scheduling a sentencing proceeding approximately three to four months fro... | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Trial | The ongoing legal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Potential war/conflict between the US and Iran. | Iran/Middle East | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's guilty plea and other penalties and concessions. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | A hearing was held in the District of Arrest where the government moved for detention and the def... | District of Arrest | View |
| N/A | Legal agreement | A Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was made with Epstein, which is argued to provide immunity to h... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The legal case United States v. Rooney, 37 F.3d 847, 855 (2d Cir. 1994) is cited as precedent. | 2d Cir. | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The government filed a Rule 48 motion for leave to dismiss a charge against a defendant in the ca... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding / discussion | Analysis of legal principles regarding the setting aside of a Non-Prosecution Agreement, specific... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Consultation with the State Attorney's Office regarding Epstein's case. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Struggle for the eastern Mediterranean between US and USSR. | Eastern Mediterranean | View |
| N/A | N/A | Potential military interventions in the Central Command theater. | Middle East | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024196.jpg
This J.P. Morgan "Eye on the Market" report from October 2012 analyzes components contributing to increased US energy independence, including a net increase in domestic oil production from tight oil formations like the Bakken and Eagle Ford. It discusses reduced consumption due to higher CAFE standards and the rising penetration of natural gas vehicles (NGVs) offering cost savings over diesel. The document references a paper by Leonardo Maugeri and includes data on fuel economy standards and oil import/export dynamics.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024195.jpg
This document is page 2 of a J.P. Morgan 'Eye on the Market' report dated October 22, 2012. It analyzes US energy independence, citing rising oil production in Texas and North Dakota, and projects future import reductions. The document includes a Bates stamp (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024195), indicating it was part of materials produced for the House Oversight Committee, likely during investigations into J.P. Morgan's internal records (often associated with the Epstein inquiry, though this specific page contains generic market analysis).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024194.jpg
A J.P. Morgan 'Eye on the Market' newsletter dated October 22, 2012, authored by Michael Cembalest. The document provides market updates on global GDP, US tax proposals (Obama vs. Romney), Chinese manufacturing, and European financial markets. It features a discussion with energy expert Vaclav Smil regarding energy independence initiatives in 2012. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024194), indicating it was likely produced as part of the congressional investigation into J.P. Morgan's relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, although the content itself is standard market analysis.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024167.jpg
This document is a UBS financial analysis slide dated June 27, 2012, titled 'EM currencies'. It provides tactical and strategic investment recommendations for Emerging Market currencies, lists economic scenarios, and details upcoming central bank policy dates. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was likely produced as part of a congressional investigation, though the content itself is a standard market report with no direct mention of Jeffrey Epstein.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024162.jpg
This is a UBS financial analysis slide dated June 26, 2012, recommending an 'overweight' preference for US high-yield corporate bonds. The document analyzes spread targets, default rates, and economic scenarios (positive vs. negative), while comparing US markets favorably against European markets. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024162' Bates stamp, indicating it was likely produced as part of a Congressional investigation, potentially related to the House Oversight Committee's probe into banks' relationships with Jeffrey Epstein or similar financial compliance matters.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024144.jpg
This document is a page from a UBS financial presentation dated June 20, 2012, analyzing US economic policy and market drivers. It outlines three scenarios (Base Case, Positive, Negative) regarding the 2012 elections, Federal Reserve actions (QE3), and the impending 'fiscal cliff.' The document includes a Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024144,' indicating it was produced as part of a House Oversight Committee investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024126.jpg
This document is page 20 of a regulatory guide produced by Protiviti, stamped with a House Oversight Bates number. It outlines various enforcement actions available to U.S. regulators regarding Anti-Money Laundering (AML) compliance, ranging from Commitment Letters and MOUs to Civil Money Penalties and the so-called 'Death Penalty' (charter revocation). It also defines the enforcement authority of FinCEN and mentions Deferred Prosecution Agreements.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024124.jpg
This document is page 18 of a report produced by the consulting firm Protiviti, likely part of a production to the House Oversight Committee (indicated by the Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024124). The text provides a high-level overview of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN), detailing its history, mission, and role in Anti-Money Laundering (AML) regulation. It outlines FinCEN's initiatives, including the BSAAG and FFETF, and describes various information-sharing systems like the BSA E-Filing System and Egmont Secure Web.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024123.jpg
Page 17 of a report produced by Protiviti, bearing a House Oversight Committee bates stamp. The document is a reference manual regarding Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Counter-Terrorism Financing (CTF) regulations. It outlines various government strategies and reports, including the Money Laundering Threat Assessment (MLTA), the National Money Laundering Strategy (NMLS) of 2007, and State Department reports on narcotics (INCSR) and terrorism. While part of a production likely related to Epstein's financial enablers, this specific page discusses general regulatory frameworks rather than specific transactions.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024120.jpg
This document is page 14 of a report produced by the consulting firm Protiviti, submitted to the House Oversight Committee (Bates: HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024120). It serves as an educational guide defining key US financial regulatory bodies (FFIEC, SEC, CFTC, FINRA, etc.) and their specific roles in Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and compliance. While part of a larger discovery production likely related to financial investigations, this specific page contains no direct references to Jeffrey Epstein, his associates, or specific illicit transactions; it outlines the regulatory framework under which financial institutions operate.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024119.jpg
This document is page 13 of a regulatory compliance guide authored by the consulting firm Protiviti, included in the House Oversight Committee's investigation (Bates stamp 024119). It outlines the U.S. regulatory framework for Anti-Money Laundering (AML), defining legal standards of knowledge such as 'Reckless Disregard' and 'Willful Blindness,' and listing the authorities responsible for enforcement including FinCEN, the DOJ, and the Federal Reserve. While no specific individuals are named, this document likely serves as evidence regarding the compliance standards that financial institutions were expected to uphold regarding high-risk clients.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024118.jpg
This document appears to be page 12 of a compliance guide or white paper produced by Protiviti, which was included in a House Oversight Committee production (Bates: HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024118). The text provides a historical overview of US Anti-Money Laundering (AML) legislation from 1992 to 2004, explains the role of the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), discusses metrics for measuring AML regime effectiveness, and notes that the US is not in full compliance with international FATF recommendations regarding beneficial ownership.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024117.jpg
This document is a page from a compliance or training manual produced by Protiviti, likely submitted as evidence to the House Oversight Committee. It provides an overview of U.S. Anti-Money Laundering (AML) laws and regulations, distinguishing between money laundering and terrorist financing. It details key legislation including the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, and the Money Laundering Control Act of 1986, outlining penalties and compliance requirements for financial institutions.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024111.jpg
This document is page 100 of a confidential Private Placement Memorandum (Control Number 257) produced for the House Oversight Committee (Bates stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024111). It outlines legal offering notices and regulatory disclaimers for potential investors in Florida, Non-U.S. residents generally, Australia, Austria, and Belgium. The text specifies that the fund is not registered in these jurisdictions and sets out the legal conditions under which the securities may be privately offered, including a minimum investment threshold of €100,000 for Belgian investors.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024109.jpg
This document page contains footnotes (C through G) for a financial report, detailing the methodology used to calculate investment returns (IRR, DPI) for 'Sprout Funds' and funds identified as 'NLV-I' and 'NLV-II'. It establishes a valuation date of March 31, 2014, defines healthcare technology sectors, and references data provided by Cambridge Associates for benchmarking. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024097.jpg
This document is page 86 of a confidential legal document, likely a Private Placement Memorandum, stamped with 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024097'. It details compliance matters, specifically stating that the Management Company and General Partner are not registered under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. It outlines strict Anti-Money Laundering (AML) requirements, including verifying investor identities and ensuring funds are not derived from illegal activities or associated with OFAC-sanctioned entities. It also briefly introduces 'Pay-to-Play' laws in the context of recent scandals involving money managers.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024093.jpg
This document appears to be page 82 of a confidential offering memorandum (PPM) for an investment fund. It contains standard legal disclaimers regarding U.S. tax consequences and the necessity for investors to consult their own tax advisors. The page also introduces 'Certain ERISA Considerations,' outlining the regulatory environment (Department of Labor) and fiduciary duties for employee benefit plans considering investment in the Fund. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp and a specific control number (257), indicating it was part of a Congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024092.jpg
This document is page 81 of a confidential legal document, likely a Private Placement Memorandum (PPM) for an investment fund. It details tax consequences for investors, specifically focusing on currency conversion issues for Non-U.S. Partners, withholding taxes (FATCA) on foreign entities, and state/local tax liabilities. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' stamp, indicating it was part of a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024091.jpg
This document is page 80 of a confidential financial or legal document, likely an Offering Memorandum, marked with a House Oversight bates stamp. It details U.S. federal income tax considerations for 'Non-U.S. Partners' investing in 'the Fund,' specifically covering withholding taxes, branch profits tax, tax treaties, and capital gains rules regarding U.S. sources and real property holding corporations (USRPHC).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024090.jpg
This document is page 79 of a confidential legal memorandum, likely a Private Placement Memorandum (PPM) for an investment fund. It details U.S. tax reporting requirements for U.S. partners owning non-U.S. entities and outlines the 'General Partner's' obligation to structure the fund's activities to avoid being classified as a U.S. trade or business, thereby limiting tax liabilities for non-U.S. partners. The document bears a House Oversight Committee stamp, indicating it is part of a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024089.jpg
Page 78 of a confidential financial offering document (likely a PPM) describing U.S. federal income tax consequences for investors ('Partners') in 'The Fund.' The text details complex regulations regarding Controlled Foreign Corporations (CFCs), the applicability of U.S. Foreign Tax Credits for taxes paid in other jurisdictions, and the tax treatment of Foreign Currency gains and losses. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024088.jpg
This document is page 77 of a confidential financial disclosure (likely a Private Placement Memorandum) bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp. It details complex U.S. tax compliance rules for investors ('U.S. Partners') in 'The Fund,' specifically regarding Passive Foreign Investment Companies (PFIC) and Controlled Foreign Corporations (CFC) under Sections 951 through 957 of the Tax Code. It warns investors of potential tax liabilities on earnings from non-U.S. corporations even if those earnings are not distributed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024087.jpg
This document is page 76 of a confidential legal or financial offering memorandum (marked with a House Oversight Bates stamp). It details the tax implications for U.S. partners regarding investments in Passive Foreign Investment Companies (PFICs) and Controlled Foreign Corporations (CFCs). It explains the IRS criteria for PFIC classification, the taxation of excess distributions, and the option for a Qualified Electing Fund (QEF) election to mitigate certain tax liabilities.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024086.jpg
This document is page 75 of a confidential offering memorandum or partnership agreement, marked with a House Oversight control number. It details the tax implications for both tax-exempt and taxable U.S. partners in an investment fund, specifically addressing Unrelated Business Taxable Income (UBTI), limitations on deductions (Section 67 and 68 of the Code), and the 3.8% surtax on unearned income (Section 1411). It outlines the obligations of the General Partner to mitigate tax liabilities for investors.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024085.jpg
This document is page 74 of a confidential legal or financial memorandum, likely related to an investment fund connected to the Epstein investigation (indicated by the House Oversight Bates stamp). The text details U.S. federal income tax definitions for U.S. and Non-U.S. partners, explains that the fund is taxed as a partnership (pass-through entity), and discusses the General Partner's authority regarding Section 754 tax elections to adjust the basis of fund assets.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity