Southern District of New York
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Lara Pomerantz
|
Employment |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
FBI
|
Professional collaborative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Southern District of Florida
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Southern District of Florida
|
Jurisdictional separation |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
|
Institutional independence |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
OFF
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein's attorneys
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Subject of prosecution |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Redacted Sender
|
Employment |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jack Scarola
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
[Redacted] AUSA
|
Employment |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Efrain Reyes
|
Defendant prosecutor |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Oath Keepers
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Investigation subject |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge Nathan
|
Judicial |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein Investigation (2018R01618)
|
Investigating authority |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Southern District of Florida
|
Jurisdictional dispute |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Employee |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell by the Southern District of New York | New York | View |
| N/A | N/A | Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyers were in touch with the Southern District of New York. | Southern District of New York | View |
| N/A | N/A | Southern District of New York was in touch with Mr. Epstein. | N/A | View |
| 2020-06-10 | N/A | UMB received a request/subpoena regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. | UMB (Kansas City, MO) | View |
| 2019-07-17 | N/A | Filing of detention submission document for JE (Jeffrey Epstein). | New York, NY | View |
| 2019-01-01 | N/A | Miami Herald filed federal court motion seeking access to sealed documents. | Southern District of New York | View |
DOJ-OGR-00000934.jpg
This legal document, part of case 21-770, argues for granting bond by citing four precedent cases from the Southern District of New York (Hussain, Buser, Acosta, and McFadden). In each cited case, defendants charged under similar statutes (18 U.S.C. 2422 and 2423) were granted personal recognizance bonds ranging from $100,000 to $250,000 with various conditions like home detention and electronic monitoring. The document uses these examples to demonstrate a pattern of granting bond in similar circumstances within the same jurisdiction.
DOJ-OGR-00000917.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (dated April 1, 2021) presenting the 'Facts' from the defense's perspective regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. It details her arrest in New Hampshire in July 2020, characterizing it as unnecessary and 'showy,' and harshly criticizes her confinement conditions, comparing her isolation to that of Hannibal Lecter and alleging sleep deprivation and invasive searches.
DOJ-OGR-00000877.jpg
This document is an electronic filing notice from the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, dated March 24, 2021. It informs recipients that the appeal record for the case USA v. Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-AJN), concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's Notice of Appeal, has been electronically transmitted to the U.S. Court of Appeals. The notice also includes important information regarding PACER access fees and the policy for obtaining free electronic copies of court documents for legal professionals.
DOJ-OGR-00000771.jpg
A legal letter dated August 5, 2025 (Document 73), from the Edwards Henderson law firm to Judge Richard M. Berman regarding United States of America v. Jeffrey Epstein. The firm, representing numerous Epstein survivors, writes to address the DOJ's request to unseal grand jury materials, urging the court to protect victims' rights and privacy under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act (CVRA). The document is 'Memo Endorsed' and signed by Judge Berman.
DOJ-OGR-00000764.jpg
This legal document, filed on August 4, 2025, is a letter from the U.S. Government to Judges Berman and Engelmayer regarding motions to unseal grand jury transcripts. The government discusses legal precedents for maintaining grand jury secrecy and updates the court on its progress in notifying victims, particularly those related to the 'Maxwell and Epstein matters'. The government commits to continuing its efforts to contact all relevant victims and to protect the interests of all third parties involved.
DOJ-OGR-00000695.jpg
This document is a court transcript from September 3, 2019, containing a victim impact statement by Sarah Ransome. Ransome identifies herself as a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's sex trafficking ring, thanks the prosecutors of the Southern District of New York, and urges them to continue their investigation, stating that Epstein did not act alone.
DOJ-OGR-00000694.jpg
This document is a transcript of a court statement given by Virginia Roberts Giuffre on September 3, 2019. Giuffre identifies herself as a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, recounting how Maxwell recruited her at Mar-a-Lago just before her 17th birthday. She commends the prosecutors of the Southern District of New York for their investigation and expresses hope for justice and accountability for all victims.
DOJ-OGR-00000663.jpg
This court transcript from a hearing on September 3, 2019, details an argument by Ms. Comey against the court conducting its own investigation into the death of Mr. Epstein. She informs the court that an active and separate investigation is already being conducted by a grand jury, Assistant U.S. Attorneys from the Southern District of New York, and the FBI. Ms. Comey asserts that such an investigation is the proper function of these entities, not the court, especially concerning uncharged matters.
DOJ-OGR-00000638.jpg
This legal document is a court order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, filed on August 29, 2019, which formally dismisses the criminal case against defendant Jeffrey Epstein. The order, signed by Judge Richard M. Berman, follows a recommendation and directive from the U.S. Attorney's office to file a nolle prosequi. The judge's order also references a hearing held on August 27, 2019, and the Crime Victims' Rights Act.
DOJ-OGR-00000629.jpg
This legal document, filed on August 19, 2019, in the Southern District of New York, is an order of nolle prosequi for the case against defendant Jeffrey Epstein. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Alison Moe, Alex Rossmiller, and Maurene Comey recommend dropping the charges, and U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman directs the filing, which is then ordered by Judge Richard M. Berman. This action formally terminates the criminal prosecution against Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00000572.jpg
This document is page 62 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, appearing to be a bail hearing for Jeffrey Epstein (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). A prosecutor argues against the defendant's request for home detention, describing it as a 'gilded cage' and 'private jail' that necessitates actual detention. The prosecutor also clarifies that the SDNY case was independently investigated by the FBI, CBP, and NYPD, explicitly stating there was no coordination with the Southern District of Florida regarding the initiation of this specific case.
DOJ-OGR-00000420.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court hearing (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) filed on July 16, 2019. Attorney Mr. Weingarten argues before the Court that the Florida nonprosecution agreement should stand, asserting that a plea deal cannot be undone simply because prosecutors failed to notify victims, provided the defendant fulfilled their obligations (prison time, restitution, registration). Weingarten emphasizes that voiding such deals would make it impossible for defense attorneys to negotiate future agreements.
DOJ-OGR-00000419.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 16, 2019, capturing a dialogue between Mr. Weingarten and the Court. The discussion centers on a nonprosecution agreement (NPA) from the Southern District of Florida, referencing a prior ruling by Judge Marra who found that prosecutors failed to properly notify victims about the deal. The Court also inquires about the geographic limitations of such agreements, a point Mr. Weingarten identifies as a key issue for future pretrial motions.
DOJ-OGR-00000399.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court hearing on July 16, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. The discussion centers on pretrial matters for a Mr. Epstein, including clarification that he has one effective passport and a debate over whether a pretrial report indicates he refused to provide financial information or was simply incomplete. The judge also questions another attorney, Mr. Rossmiller, about allegations of witness tampering by Mr. Epstein, confirming these will be part of the government's bail submission.
DOJ-OGR-00000398.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 16, 2019, from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. An attorney, Mr. Rossmiller, argues before a judge that a nonprosecution agreement made in the Southern District of Florida was understood by that district to be limited in scope, and therefore does not impede a separate prosecution in the Southern District of New York. This argument is intended to counter the defense's position and validate the ongoing investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00000395.jpg
This document is page 9 of a court transcript from July 16, 2019, in the case United States v. Epstein (SDNY). The prosecution argues that the Southern District of New York is not bound by the 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg counters that the NPA provided Epstein with immunity for the conduct currently being prosecuted, including interstate travel and communications, and asserts that Epstein fulfilled the terms of that agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00000348.jpg
This document is Page 6 of a legal filing (likely a bail/detention memorandum) submitted to Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman on July 8, 2019, in the case against Jeffrey Epstein. The prosecution argues for detention based on overwhelming evidence, including an 'extraordinary volume' of nude photographs of minors found at Epstein's New York residence and call records linking him and his agents to victims. The document also argues that the previous Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with the Southern District of Florida does not prevent the Southern District of New York from prosecuting this case.
DOJ-OGR-00000345.jpg
This document is Page 3 of a legal filing addressed to Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman on July 8, 2019, arguing regarding Jeffrey Epstein's bail status. It details Epstein's extreme wealth, including a $77 million Manhattan mansion, a private island in the USVI, and multiple private jets, alongside his possession of three active passports and frequent international travel. The document also summarizes the prior 2005 Florida investigation, the subsequent 2007 non-prosecution agreement with the Southern District of Florida (which the SDNY explicitly notes it did not sign), and his 2008 state conviction.
DOJ-OGR-00000328.jpg
This document is a letter dated July 11, 2019, from the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) to Judge Richard M. Berman in the Epstein case (1:19-cr-00490), requesting an adjournment of a bail hearing. The document includes a handwritten order by Judge Berman dated July 12, 2019, denying the application and noting it is 'Hard to imagine it would take the Govt extra time to review submission.' The letter is signed by AUSAs Rossmiller, Moe, and Comey, and copies defense counsel Weinberg and Weingarten.
DOJ-OGR-00000324.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal letter filed on July 11, 2019, in Case 1:19-cr-00490 (USA v. Epstein). The US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York is requesting Judge Richard M. Berman to adjourn a bail hearing to a later date to allow the Court time to review the Government's reply. The letter is signed by Assistant US Attorneys Rossmiller, Moe, and Comey, and copied to defense counsel Weinberg and Weingarten.
DOJ-OGR-00000323.jpg
This is a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice to Judge Richard M. Berman regarding the case United States v. Jeffrey Epstein. The Government requests an extension to respond to the defendant's Bail Motion because the defense has failed to provide necessary financial disclosures.
DOJ-OGR-00000268.jpg
This document is Page 11 of a 2019 federal indictment (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) against Jeffrey Epstein. It details overt acts committed by 'Employee-2' and 'Employee-3' in 2004 and 2005, specifically phone calls made to 'Minor Victim-3' to schedule paid sex acts with Epstein. The page also introduces 'Count Two: Sex Trafficking,' charging Epstein with recruiting and enticing minors for commercial sex acts between 2002 and 2005.
DOJ-OGR-00000266.jpg
This document, a page from a legal filing dated July 2, 2019, details "Overt Acts" committed in furtherance of a conspiracy involving commercial sex acts. It describes how JEFFREY EPSTEIN, the defendant, enticed and recruited multiple minor victims (Minor Victim-1, Minor Victim-2, Minor Victim-3) for sex acts at his residences in New York and Florida, paying them hundreds of dollars. The document also notes that EPSTEIN encouraged Minor Victim-1 to recruit other girls, and mentions an "Employee-1" acting on EPSTEIN's behalf.
DOJ-OGR-00000265.jpg
This document is page 8 of a federal indictment filed on July 2, 2019, against Jeffrey Epstein. It outlines statutory allegations of sex trafficking conspiracy occurring between 2002 and 2005 in the Southern District of New York and elsewhere. The text details how Epstein paid 'victim-recruiters' hundreds of dollars to bring other minor girls to his Palm Beach residence.
DOJ-OGR-00021085.jpg
This document is page 38 of a legal brief (Case 22-1426, dated Feb 28, 2023) filed in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. It contains legal arguments attempting to distance the current case from the precedent set in *U.S. v. Annabi*, arguing that *Annabi* is an outlier regarding whether a plea agreement in one district binds another. The text consists primarily of extensive footnotes citing various Second Circuit decisions (*Prisco*, *Ashraf*, *Salameh*, etc.) that limited plea agreements to specific US Attorney's Offices, supporting the government's position against the Appellant (identified by case number as Ghislaine Maxwell).
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity