The government
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Attorneys for the Government
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Representation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Juror No. 1
|
Investigative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Defendant (Maxwell)
|
Adversarial |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge Sweet
|
Judicial |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
the client
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lawyers for witnesses
|
Cooperation coordination |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Prosecution juror |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Rocchio
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Indyke
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
witnesses
|
Cooperation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Richard M. Berman
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Paul A. Engelmayer
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Palm Beach Police Department
|
Investigative prosecutorial |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Representation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
defendants
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Cooperator |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell)
|
Litigation opposition |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
MDC legal counsel
|
Professional cooperative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Court proceedings/Trial discussions | Courtroom (referenced by Tr... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Modification of a Protective Order | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal Argument regarding NPA applicability | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Limited Hearing | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Closing Arguments and Jury Charge | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Modification of Protective Order | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Boies Schiller began producing materials not covered by protective orders in response to subpoenas. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial Testimony (Trial Tr. at 2518–22) | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Submission of evidence (Journal) | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Anticipated trial where evidence regarding victims and terms like 'rape' will be used. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Review of Motion to Unseal Grand Jury Materials | Court (Southern District of... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government's motion to unseal testimony and exhibits | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Entry of Non-Prosecution Agreement | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Previous hearing where government touted documentary evidence. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Three bail renewal hearings | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Proffer session | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Hearing regarding requested discovery | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Transfer of legal materials | Court / MDC | View |
| N/A | N/A | The government served a redacted party with a subpoena to produce [redacted items]. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal defense against charges | United States | View |
| N/A | N/A | Criminal indictment alleging Ms. Maxwell committed perjury. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness preparation for trial where the government asked McHugh to review exhibits. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government charged Jeffrey Epstein with conduct falling within the NPA time scope. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Bail hearing argument. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government secret deal (Non-Prosecution Agreement) | Florida (implied context of... | View |
DOJ-OGR-00000614.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding filed on August 6, 2019. In it, a representative for the government, Ms. Moe, proposes a detailed schedule to the court for the defense to file discovery-related and pretrial motions, with corresponding deadlines for the government's responses. Ms. Moe concludes by requesting that the court schedule a trial for June of the following year.
DOJ-OGR-00000599.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) dated July 25, 2019. It defines "Confidential Information," which can include personal data and witness identities, and sets forth strict rules for how this information must be handled by the defendant and their Defense Counsel. The rules govern the use, storage, review, and disclosure of the sensitive material throughout the legal proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00000595.jpg
This document is a Protective Order filed on July 25, 2019, in the criminal case of the United States of America v. Jeffrey Epstein in the Southern District of New York. The order, issued by Judge Richard M. Berman, is intended to protect sensitive, confidential, and personal information contained in the discovery materials that the Government will provide to the defense. The purpose is to safeguard the privacy of individuals, prevent impediment to ongoing investigations, and avoid prejudicial pretrial publicity.
DOJ-OGR-00000592.jpg
This is page 7 of a court filing (Document 37-1) from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (United States v. Jeffrey Epstein), filed on July 25, 2019. It outlines strict protocols for a Protective Order regarding discovery materials, specifically prohibiting the Defendant from possessing materials outside the presence of counsel or copying them. It also establishes requirements for 'Designated Persons' to sign agreements before receiving confidential information and mandates the return or destruction of discovery materials at the case's conclusion.
DOJ-OGR-00000590.jpg
This legal document, part of case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB filed on July 25, 2019, establishes the rules for handling "Confidential Information." It dictates that the defendant's counsel is responsible for the secure maintenance of this information and outlines strict limitations on how the defendant can access it and to whom it can be disclosed, such as Designated Persons and Potential Witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00000588.jpg
This document is page 3 of a protective order filed on July 25, 2019, in the case of United States v. Jeffrey Epstein (Case 1:19-cr-00490). It outlines strict protocols for handling discovery materials, including requirements for encryption when sharing with staff and a specific prohibition against the Defendant, Government, or Counsel posting any discovery information on the Internet or social media. It also specifies that potential witnesses may view materials for trial preparation but cannot retain copies.
DOJ-OGR-00000576.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, from a case in the Southern District. A speaker, likely a prosecutor, argues against granting bail to a defendant, claiming he is a flight risk due to a lengthy, covert government investigation and his recent indictment. The judge ('THE COURT') questions the speaker about a recent submission that mentioned victims or their counsel oppose the defendant's release and asks if any of them wish to be heard.
DOJ-OGR-00000575.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, in a case involving Mr. Epstein. An unidentified speaker, likely the prosecutor, argues against the credibility of the defense's claims, particularly the idea that Epstein has disciplined himself. The speaker contends that this claim is an admission of his "appetite for children" and that the court should not risk community safety based on it, also referencing articles by the Miami Herald about Epstein's past misconduct.
DOJ-OGR-00000570.jpg
This document is page 60 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, regarding the case against Jeffrey Epstein. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg argues for Epstein's release and disputes the relevance of a 1982 passport cited by the government, while the Judge sets a 5:00 PM deadline for the next day's submissions. Prosecutor Mr. Rossmiller agrees to the filing schedule, and the court briefly mentions evidence potentially arising from the search of Epstein's East 71st Street mansion.
DOJ-OGR-00000566.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. An unidentified speaker, likely an attorney, argues before the court about the bail conditions for Mr. Epstein, specifically advocating for the use of a private guard. The speaker cites Second Circuit precedents, including the Esposito case, to argue that such a condition is not discriminatory and is appropriate given that the flight risk arguments are predicated on the defendant's wealth.
DOJ-OGR-00000563.jpg
This document is page 53 of a court transcript filed on July 24, 2019, concerning the detention hearing of Jeffrey Epstein (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). A defense attorney argues to the Judge that specific financial details ('values and accounts') and evidence of seizures should remain confidential to ensure Epstein's right to a fair and impartial jury in Manhattan, citing the enormous publicity surrounding the case. The speaker mentions opposing counsel Mr. Rossmiller at the end of the page.
DOJ-OGR-00000557.jpg
This document is page 47 of a court transcript from July 24, 2019, in the case United States v. Epstein (1:19-cr-00490). Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg is arguing against the government's claim that payments of $250,000 and $100,000 made by the defendant constituted witness tampering or obstruction of justice. Weinberg contends these were acts of generosity to employees or friends and argues that, under the Aguilar Supreme Court precedent, these actions do not rise to federal obstruction because there was no pending judicial proceeding at the time.
DOJ-OGR-00000546.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, where attorney Mr. Weinberg is defending his client, Mr. Epstein. Weinberg argues that Epstein is not an out-of-control offender or a flight risk, citing previous intensive investigations by state and federal authorities in 2005 and 2006 and the high level of publicity as reasons why any misconduct would already be known. The judge questions the basis of Weinberg's claims about his client's character.
DOJ-OGR-00000542.jpg
Transcript from a July 24, 2019 court hearing (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) where Epstein's defense argues for his release. The defense claims Epstein 'disciplined himself' and cites a 14-year gap in allegations (referencing 2002 and 2005) as proof he is no longer a danger. The Judge ('The Court') challenges this position, quoting the defense's previous letter which stated any danger had 'abated' or 'evaporated.'
DOJ-OGR-00000529.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019. In it, an attorney named Mr. Rossmiller responds to the Court, stating that Florida police reports suggest the defendant harassed individuals through agents or investigators. Mr. Rossmiller also explains that the government took no position on the defendant's application to seal financial information because they were unsure what would be submitted and had little time to respond.
DOJ-OGR-00000528.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019. In it, a representative for the government argues against a defendant's release, citing a significant danger to victims and witnesses. The government alleges the defendant previously instructed people to lie to law enforcement and has recently sent hundreds of thousands of dollars to two individuals, supported by police reports from Florida.
DOJ-OGR-00000525.jpg
This document is page 15 of a transcript from a bail hearing filed on July 24, 2019, in the case against Jeffrey Epstein (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). The prosecutor argues that the defendant's financial disclosure is insufficient, unsworn, and fails to list accounts, currencies, or high-value assets like diamonds and art found during the search of his Manhattan mansion. The government further argues that the Manhattan mansion cannot be used as security for a bond because the government has already designated it for seizure.
DOJ-OGR-00000523.jpg
This legal document is a transcript from a court proceeding where the prosecution argues for the detention of a defendant, citing them as a significant flight risk due to vast financial assets, including a net worth over $500 million and a single bank account with over $110 million. The prosecution also states that the evidence against the defendant is already "strong" and is growing stronger daily as more victims and witnesses come forward following a months-long covert investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00000522.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019. A prosecutor is arguing to a judge that the defendant should be detained, citing evidence of witness tampering through payments to associates, and highlighting that the defendant is an 'extraordinary flight risk' due to his immense wealth (over $500 million), six homes, two private islands, and a residence in France.
DOJ-OGR-00000520.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. In the transcript, a government lawyer, Mr. Rossmiller, argues before a judge for the pretrial detention of a defendant, citing an extraordinary risk of flight and danger to the community. Rossmiller states that for the sex trafficking offense charged, there is a legal presumption for detention which the defendant has not provided any information to rebut.
DOJ-OGR-00000515.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, for a bail proceeding in case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. The judge is addressing the prosecution ('the government') and the defense, outlining the two charges of conspiracy to commit sex trafficking and substantive sex trafficking. The judge references the relevant statute, 18 U.S. Code, Section 1591, and the Bail Reform Act, highlighting the unusual legal presumption in such cases that no conditions can ensure the defendant's appearance and the community's safety.
DOJ-OGR-00000497.jpg
This document is a page from a government filing (July 18, 2019) arguing against bail for Jeffrey Epstein. It details his immense wealth, listing specific property values totaling hundreds of millions of dollars, and notes the discovery of over $70,000 in cash and loose diamonds in his safe, which the government argues indicates a flight risk. The document also asserts that Epstein previously used employees to facilitate the exploitation of minors in New York and Florida.
DOJ-OGR-00000494.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing from July 18, 2019, argues for the pre-trial detention of the defendant, Mr. Epstein. The prosecution asserts that the severity of the charges, which carry a maximum sentence of 45 years, creates a presumption for remand. The document outlines the strength of the evidence, including victim and witness testimony, physical evidence, and reports of witness tampering, and notes Mr. Epstein's prior felony convictions in Florida involving minors.
DOJ-OGR-00000488.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Government on July 18, 2019, alleges that Jeffrey Epstein attempted to tamper with witnesses. The Government contends that shortly after the Miami Herald published an exposé on his 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement, Epstein paid $100,000 and $250,000 respectively to 'Individual I' and 'Individual II', both described as potential co-conspirators who allegedly facilitated his crimes. The payments are presented as evidence of an attempt to influence potential witnesses in his ongoing case.
DOJ-OGR-00000487.jpg
This page from a court filing details allegations that Jeffrey Epstein's associates used intimidation tactics, such as aggressive driving, against victims' parents to silence them. It also outlines 2007 plea discussions where federal prosecutors and Epstein's counsel considered charges of witness tampering and obstruction of justice, specifically referencing statutes 18 U.S.C. § 1512(d) and 18 U.S.C. § 403.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity