defendants
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Al-Qaeda
|
Financial |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
Al-Qaeda
|
Alleged support |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
Defense team
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
al Qaeda
|
Alleged involvement |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Plaintiffs
|
Litigation |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Counsel of record
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
independent expert witnesses
|
Employment retainer |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Al-Qaeda
|
Material support |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Bennet J. Moskowitz
|
Legal representative |
2
|
2 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. FIGGINS
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
prosecutors
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2009-06-12 | N/A | Scheduled Court Hearing on Defendants' Motion to Stay (Subject of the request to reschedule). | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2008-07-21 | N/A | Defendants removed the case to federal court citing diversity of citizenship. | Federal Court | View |
| 2008-07-21 | N/A | Defendants removed action to federal court | Federal Court | View |
| 2005-01-01 | N/A | Court Opinion/Ruling | Federal Court | View |
| 2005-01-01 | N/A | Legal Opinion Issued | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2004-09-14 | N/A | Oral argument transcript (referenced in footnote) | Court | View |
| 2001-09-11 | N/A | Terrorist attacks involving hijackers; basis for the 'Burnett action' lawsuit. | United States | View |
| 1990-01-01 | Court decision | Concluding defendants did not present a flight risk | D. Mass. | View |
| 1982-01-01 | N/A | Date of alleged conspiracy in initial EDNY charges. | EDNY | View |
| 1982-01-01 | N/A | Period of criminal conduct alleged in new SDNY charges. | SDNY | View |
| 0015-07-01 | Meeting | A telephone conference was held where the Court questioned the defendants about their knowledge o... | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001651.jpg
This document is a page from a Protective Order in criminal case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on July 27, 2020. It establishes strict rules for handling 'Discovery' materials, limiting their use by both government and defense witnesses and counsel solely for preparation for the criminal trial. The order explicitly prohibits using the information for civil proceedings and forbids any party, including the Defendant and defense team, from posting the Discovery or its contents on the Internet.
DOJ-OGR-00021991.jpg
This is the final page (page 15) of a court transcript filed on December 19, 2019, for Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT. The judge rules to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act until April 20, 2020, to allow for discovery production and motion preparation. The hearing is adjourned, and the defendants' bail status remains unchanged.
DOJ-OGR-00021984.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) filed on December 19, 2019. Defense attorney Mr. Figgins argues to the judge that an ongoing Inspector General's report investigating the Bureau of Prisons' supervision and policies is crucial for the defense. Figgins requests clarity on the status and release date of this report, citing media reports about testimony from the head of the BOP and statements by the U.S. Attorney.
DOJ-OGR-00021974.jpg
This document is page 3 of a court order (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) filed on December 16, 2019. It outlines protocols for handling 'Protected Materials' during discovery, specifically defining authorized personnel (legal staff, experts, jury consultants) who may access the data. It also establishes rules for showing materials to 'Fact Witnesses' without providing them copies, and mandates the destruction or return of materials to the Government upon the case's conclusion.
DOJ-OGR-00021961.jpg
This document is page 3 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT, filed on December 16, 2019. The presiding judge is reading the defendants their rights, including the right to silence and counsel, and noting that they have been charged in a six-count indictment. The case was referred by Judge Torres for presentment and arraignment.
DOJ-OGR-00019506.jpg
This document is a page from a Protective Order in a criminal case (Case 20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on July 27, 2020. It outlines strict rules for handling discovery materials, specifying that they can only be used by authorized individuals (such as the defense team and potential witnesses) for the sole purpose of preparing for the trial. The order explicitly prohibits all parties from posting any discovery information on the Internet and requires encryption for materials shared via non-electronic mail methods.
DOJ-OGR-00004870.jpg
This document is page 58 of 80 from a legal filing (likely a brief or opinion) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on July 2, 2021. The text analyzes legal precedents, specifically *Government of Virgin Islands v. Scotland*, to argue that prosecutors must be held to their promises and assurances to defendants, particularly when a defendant relies on those promises to their detriment. The page discusses the concepts of specific performance, due process, and plea agreements.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017869.jpg
This is page 804 of a legal opinion from the Federal Supplement (likely In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001, though the case name is not explicitly at the top). It details the court's decision to grant the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's motion to dismiss a complaint based on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). The text also discusses standards for Personal Jurisdiction and the New York Long-Arm Statute, citing various legal precedents. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' stamp, indicating it was part of a congressional document production.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023386.jpg
This document is a page from a legal opinion (2012 WL 257568) regarding litigation over the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. It discusses legal theories of primary and secondary liability under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) for defendants accused of providing material support or financing to al-Qaeda. The document does not explicitly mention Jeffrey Epstein, but bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, suggesting it was included in a larger production of documents to the House Oversight Committee.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_032322.jpg
This is page 2 of a court order from Case 1:16-cv-07673-RA, filed on October 4, 2016, and signed by U.S. District Judge Ronnie Abrams. The document outlines requirements for the parties to submit a joint case management plan by December 9, 2016, and orders the Plaintiff to serve the Defendants with the order. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Paid | defendants | Jane | $0.00 | Discussion of a plan to 'get more money from th... | View |
| N/A | Received | plaintiff | defendants | $15,000.00 | Action for damages in excess of $15,000. | View |
| 2010-12-13 | Paid | defendants | plaintiff | $0.00 | Settlement referenced in stipulation (amounts n... | View |
Motions to Dismiss
Approx 100 defendants moved to dismiss claims based on FSIA, lack of jurisdiction, or failure to state a claim.
No Subject
A motion filed by the defendants, which informed Mr. Okula's side for the first time that the government had not conducted its own research as they had assumed.
Unknown
A motion filed by defendants that prompted the government to realize the significance of the note.
Response to Plaintiff's motion
Opposition letter filed as ECF No. 38.
Response to Plaintiff's motion
Defendants filed a letter (ECF No. 47) calling the request a waste of time.
Promise to amend responses
Defendants promised to serve amended responses to interrogatories by the end of the week.
Response to discovery requests
Addressed requests for IG report materials and MCC video surveillance; provided video timestamps.
Document Preservation Notice
Plaintiff sent a document preservation notice and identified various email accounts used by Jeffrey Epstein.
Request for trial adjournment
The letter mentions the defendants' letters of January 27, 2020, in which they requested at least a six-month adjournment of the trial date.
Pre-motion letter
Proposing to file a motion to dismiss (ECF 16).
Pre-motion letter
Proposing to file a motion to dismiss
Reading of Rights and Arraignment
Judge advises defendants of right to remain silent, right to bail/release conditions, and right to counsel. Judge notes they have retained private counsel.
Notice regarding amended pleading
Plaintiff notified that she did not intend to file an amended pleading and would rely on current First Amended Complaint.
Notice of Appearance
Notification that Daniel Mullkoff is appearing as counsel for the Plaintiff and providing contact details for service.
Plaintiff's Identity
Mandatory written disclosure of the Plaintiff's true identity to the defense counsel.
Request for extension
Requesting two-week extension to respond to Plaintiff's Complaint [DE 27].
Support of a New Trial
Defendants' Brief in Support of a New Trial
Support of a New Trial
Defendants' Brief in Support of a New Trial
Resolution of issues in motion
Good faith effort to resolve issues raised in the motion, but unable to do so.
Service by publication
Order approving service by publication for Defendants including Mr. Batterjee.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity