United States Attorney's Office
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jane's counsel
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional adversarial |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Probation Office
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Markus
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Reid Weingarten
|
Professional adversarial cooperative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. CHIUCHIOLO
|
Employment representation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Adversarial professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Wendy Olson
|
Employee |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Redacted Victims
|
Notifier recipient |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
State Attorney's Office
|
Professional collaborative |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Federal Bureau of Investigation
|
Professional collaborative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Honorable Alison J. Nathan
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Party to agreement |
2
|
2 | |
|
organization
Federal Bureau of Investigation
|
Jointly investigated with |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Boies Schiller Flexner LLP
|
Collusion cooperation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Agreement participant subject to prosecution |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
|
Authority representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Federal Bureau of Investigation
|
Collaborative investigation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
[Redacted] (Client)
|
Proffer agreement participant |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Intervention by the United States Attorney's Office ('the feds'), who forced a deal on Epstein af... | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | The United States Attorney's Office intervened and imposed a 'federally-forced deal' on Jeffrey E... | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | A 'federally-forced deal' was imposed on Jeffrey Epstein, resulting in a jail sentence and financ... | Florida | View |
| N/A | Investigation | A joint investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States Attorney's Off... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal agreement | A non-prosecution agreement was established where federal prosecution against Epstein is deferred... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | Legal agreement | A deferred prosecution agreement where federal prosecution of Epstein is deferred in favor of pro... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | Investigation | A joint investigation into Epstein's offenses by the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Unit... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Investigation | Potentially fraudulent claims are forwarded to law enforcement agencies for possible investigatio... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of all charges against Epstein in the District if he timely fulfills all terms and cond... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Agreement for deferred prosecution of Epstein in the Southern District of Florida, contingent on ... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Investigation of Epstein's offenses and background by State and Federal law enforcement agencies. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Potential initiation of prosecution for Epstein if he violates agreement conditions, within 60 da... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of charges against Epstein if all terms and conditions of the agreement are fulfilled, ... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2021-06-30 | Legal filing | The parties jointly submitted a letter to the Court stating they seek no redactions. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2021-04-20 | N/A | Filing of letter regarding redactions on ECF | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| 2021-04-14 | N/A | Production of discovery material (a photograph) by the Government to the Defense. | New York, NY | View |
| 2021-03-09 | N/A | Receipt of letter from MOJ confirming accuracy of highlighted language. | N/A | View |
| 2021-03-09 | N/A | Drafting of Government Opposition to Third Bail Motion | New York, New York | View |
| 2021-03-09 | N/A | Filing deadline for the opposition to the bail application (referenced as 'Tuesday'). | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2020-12-16 | N/A | Planned filing of the government's memorandum of law in opposition to Ghislaine Maxwell's bail mo... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2020-07-02 | N/A | Unsealing of federal felony charges against Ghislaine Maxwell. | New York | View |
| 2020-07-02 | N/A | Filing of detention memorandum in United States v. Maxwell | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2019-08-30 | N/A | Grand Jury Appearance / Deadline for document production | 40 Foley Square, Room 220, ... | View |
| 2019-07-16 | N/A | Legal papers filed by the defense and the US Attorney's Office in the Epstein case | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2008-01-01 | N/A | Filing of a civil action against the US Attorney's Office under the Crime Victims' Rights Act | Unknown | View |
001-02.pdf
This document is the 2019 Sealed Indictment (19 Cr. 490) against Jeffrey Epstein filed in the SDNY, charging him with Sex Trafficking Conspiracy and Sex Trafficking. It details allegations that between 2002 and 2005, Epstein created a network of underage victims in New York and Florida, paying them for sexual acts disguised as massages and incentivizing them to recruit other minors. The indictment lists specific overt acts involving three minor victims and three employees who facilitated the abuse by scheduling appointments, and it seeks forfeiture of Epstein's property at 9 East 71st Street, owned by Maple, Inc.
064.pdf
This document is a 'Nolle Prosequi' filed in the Southern District of New York, formally dismissing criminal charges against Tova Noel and Michael Thomas. The defendants, who were the guards on duty when Jeffrey Epstein died, had previously entered into a deferred prosecution agreement on May 20, 2021. Following their successful completion of community service and good behavior over a six-month period ending November 20, 2021, the U.S. Attorney's Office moved to drop the case.
060.pdf
A formal notice filed on July 29, 2021, by Assistant United States Attorney Jessica Lonergan to Judge Analisa Torres in the case of United States v. Tova Noel et al. Lonergan informs the court that she is leaving the U.S. Attorney's Office for other employment and requests to be removed as counsel of record for the prosecution.
017.pdf
This document is a transcript of a court conference held on November 25, 2019, regarding the case of United States v. Tova Noel and Michael Thomas, the correctional officers charged in connection with Jeffrey Epstein's death. The proceedings cover the schedule for discovery production (including hundreds of hours of video), the setting of a trial date for April 20, 2020, and arguments regarding the relevance of an ongoing DOJ Inspector General report into the Bureau of Prisons. The court also addressed bail conditions, granting a travel restriction modification for Noel and an extension for Thomas to secure cosigners, but denying Noel's request to keep her personal firearm at home due to safety concerns for pretrial services officers.
014.pdf
This document is the transcript of the arraignment for Tova Noel and Michael Thomas, the two prison guards charged in connection with falsifying records related to Jeffrey Epstein's detention. The hearing took place on November 19, 2019, before Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn in the Southern District of New York. Both defendants pleaded not guilty and were released on $100,000 bond with travel restrictions. A significant portion of the hearing involved a debate over whether Noel should be required to surrender her personal firearm; the judge ruled she must surrender it for the safety of pretrial services officers.
052.pdf
This document is a 'Nolle Prosequi' filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, formally dismissing the indictment against Jeffrey Epstein due to his death on August 10, 2019. The order cites the rule of abatement as the legal basis for dismissal since Epstein died before a final judgment was issued. Judge Richard M. Berman signed the order on August 29, 2019, adding a handwritten note incorporating the transcript of an August 27 hearing and emphasizing the Crime Victims' Rights Act.
048.pdf
This document is a court order dated August 21, 2019, from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, signed by Judge Richard M. Berman. It schedules a hearing for August 27, 2019, to discuss the *nolle prosequi* (dismissal) order proposed by the U.S. Attorney following Jeffrey Epstein's death. The order explicitly invites counsel for the victims and the victims themselves to be heard at this proceeding.
040.pdf
This document is a transcript of the bail decision hearing for Jeffrey Epstein held on July 18, 2019, before Judge Richard M. Berman. The court denied Epstein's request for pretrial release and granted the government's application for continued remand, citing clear and convincing evidence of danger to the community and a preponderance of evidence regarding flight risk. The judge highlighted evidence including seized cash, diamonds, a fake Austrian passport, and testimony from victims Annie Farmer and Courtney Wild regarding their fear of the defendant.
003.pdf
This document is an Unsealing Order filed on July 8, 2019, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Case 1:19-cr-00490). Signed by Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman, the order grants the application made by U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman (via AUSA Alex Rossmiller) to unseal the indictment against defendant Jeffrey Epstein.
041.pdf
This document is a 'Motion to Make Court Records Confidential' filed by Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys on June 11, 2009, in the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County. The defense seeks to maintain the seal on the Non-Prosecution Agreement (filed July 2008) and its Addendum, citing threats to the administration of justice and privacy rights of third parties. The motion references interventions by the Palm Beach Post and a non-party identified as 'EW' (whose name is redacted in one section) seeking access to these records.
035.pdf
This document is a motion filed on June 2, 2009, by The Palm Beach Post seeking to intervene in the criminal case against Jeffrey Epstein to unseal a non-prosecution agreement and its addendum. The Post argues that the sealing was improper, lacked necessary legal findings, and that the documents are of significant public interest given the accusations of soliciting minors. The document cites numerous civil lawsuits against Epstein and criticizes the secrecy surrounding his plea deal.
017-12.pdf
This document is an appeal by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein against a Magistrate's Order compelling him to produce discovery materials, including correspondence with prosecutors, tax returns, and passport/travel records. Epstein argues that producing these documents violates his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination because he still faces a real threat of federal prosecution outside the Southern District of Florida, despite his Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). The filing also details privacy concerns for third parties (alleged victims), claims attorney work-product privilege over files selected by his defense counsel, and argues that his offer to stipulate to a high net worth renders the production of his tax returns unnecessary.
010-12.pdf
This document is a Protective Order designated as Exhibit L (and Exhibit 1) in Case 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON, filed in May 2014. Issued by Judge Kenneth Marra, it grants a motion by Intervenors (led by Roy Black) to keep correspondence between themselves and the United States Attorney's Office confidential ('CDM'). The order establishes strict protocols for the handling, marking, and limited disclosure of these materials during the litigation between Jane Does #1-2 and the United States.
010-11.pdf
This is a court order from September 2014 in the case of Jane Doe v. United States, concerning Jeffrey Epstein's intervention. Judge Kenneth Marra granted in part and denied in part Epstein's motion for a protective order regarding correspondence between his lawyers and the US Attorney's Office. While the court agreed to restrict dissemination of materials to the press to avoid publicity in this 'high profile' case, it rejected Epstein's request to automatically require court permission to seal every future filing.
031.pdf
This document is a Reply by Defendant Jeffrey Epstein to Plaintiff Jane Doe II's opposition to his motion to dismiss a civil suit (Case 09-CIV-80469). Epstein's defense argues that a concurrent state action requires dismissal of the federal case, that the 2006 amendment to 18 U.S.C. §2255 ('Masha's Law') cannot be applied retroactively to conduct from 2003-2005 to increase damages, and that the Plaintiff misrepresents the terms of Epstein's non-prosecution agreement with the US Attorney's Office. The document details specific dates in 2003 and 2004 where the Plaintiff alleges she received payments for acts of prostitution.
020.pdf
This document is the Plaintiff's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendant Epstein's Motion to Dismiss in a civil case. The Plaintiff argues that the federal court has jurisdiction alongside state claims, that the 2006 amendments to 18 U.S.C. §2255 regarding damages should apply retroactively or are procedural, and that interstate commerce requirements were met via phone calls made by co-defendant Sarah Kellen from a New York number. The document details specific dates of solicitation between 2003 and 2005 and alleges a conspiracy involving Epstein, Kellen, and Haley Robson to procure minors for prostitution.
015-01.pdf
This document is a Motion to Stay proceedings filed by Jeffrey Epstein's legal team in a civil case brought by a plaintiff identified as C.M.A. Epstein argues that the civil case should be paused until late 2010, when his Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with federal prosecutors expires, to avoid forcing him to waive his 5th Amendment rights against self-incrimination while facing potential ongoing criminal liability. The filing includes an affidavit from his criminal defense attorney, Jack Goldberger, and an Indictment from 2006 for Felony Solicitation of Prostitution.
008.pdf
This document is a Motion to Dismiss filed by Jeffrey Epstein's defense team on July 14, 2009, in the case of Jane Doe No. 8 v. Jeffrey Epstein. The defense argues that the plaintiff's claims of Sexual Assault and Battery (Count I) and Coercion (Count III) are barred by the applicable 4-year (state) and 6-year (federal) statutes of limitations, as the alleged incident occurred in 2001 when the plaintiff was 16. Footnotes in the document provide graphic details of the allegations, describing how Jane Doe was recruited by another girl, brought to Epstein's Palm Beach mansion, and sexually assaulted during a massage.
020.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Limited Appearance' filed on May 29, 2009, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. It lists multiple civil cases involving Jane Doe plaintiffs against Jeffrey Epstein. The United States, represented by Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafaña (under U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta), files this notice to respond to a court order regarding Epstein's 'Motion to Stay Proceedings,' while explicitly stating the U.S. is not becoming a party to the litigation.
064-01.pdf
This document is a Court Order from the Southern District of Florida (Exhibit A), signed by Judge Kenneth A. Marra, granting a motion to preserve evidence in multiple civil cases against Jeffrey Epstein. The order mandates that Epstein and his agents preserve a wide range of materials, specifically including records of domestic and international travel on private airplanes, phone communications, computer data, and items resulting from the October 25, 2005 search of his Palm Beach home. It establishes preservation timelines ranging from 1998 to 2005 depending on the specific plaintiff and defines sanctions for wrongful destruction of evidence.
034.pdf
This document is a response filed by the United States Government (as amicus curiae) in May 2009 opposing Jeffrey Epstein's motion to stay various civil lawsuits against him. The government argues that there are no 'special circumstances' justifying a stay because Epstein is not currently under indictment, and the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was intended to facilitate restitution for victims, not to shield Epstein from civil discovery. The filing lists numerous related civil cases involving Jane Doe plaintiffs and emphasizes that staying the cases would prejudice the victims' rights to speedy proceedings and restitution.
033.pdf
This document is a 'Notice of Limited Appearance' filed by the United States government in the Southern District of Florida on May 29, 2009. The filing, signed by Assistant US Attorney A. Marie Villafaña under US Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, consolidates multiple civil cases against Jeffrey Epstein (Plaintiffs include various Jane Does and C.M.A.). The United States enters as Amicus Curiae solely to respond to a court order regarding Epstein's Motion to Stay Proceedings, explicitly stating it does not become a party to the litigation nor take a position on the outcome of the civil suits.
EFTA00038847.pdf
This document is an email chain from October 2021 between the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) and the FBI New York Field Office regarding the 'GM' case, likely referring to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. An Assistant US Attorney requests the FBI to run 'rap sheets' (criminal history checks) on a list of potential testifying witnesses. The names of the witnesses and the officials involved are redacted.
EFTA00038839.pdf
An email dated October 7, 2021, from an Assistant United States Attorney at the Southern District of New York regarding the preparation of '3500 materials' (Jencks Act disclosures). The sender is seeking missing handwritten notes for two specific interviews conducted in August 2006. The document is stamped with Bates number EFTA00038839.
EFTA00038718.pdf
This document is a subpoena issued by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on September 15, 2021. It commands an unnamed (redacted) individual to appear and testify on November 29, 2021, in the criminal case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (20 Cr. 330). The subpoena is signed by U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss and bears the seal of the court.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity