Johnson
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Burton
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-01 | Legal decision | Decision in the case United States v. Johnson, 93 F.4th 605 (2024). | N/A | View |
| 2019-07-04 | N/A | Englewood Gathers for Fireworks | Englewood | View |
| 2019-03-09 | N/A | Execution of Warranty Deed | Palm Beach County, Florida | View |
| 1991-01-01 | Legal case | The case of Burton v. Johnson was decided, holding in a murder case. | 10th Cir. | View |
| 1991-01-01 | Legal case | The case of Burton v. Johnson, a murder case. | 10th Cir. | View |
016-06.pdf
This document is a court order dated July 1, 2010, from the Southern District of Florida in the case of Jane Doe v. Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Peter R. Palermo grants the plaintiff's motion to modify the scheduling of a settlement conference set for July 6, 2010, to ensure Jane Doe does not come into contact with Epstein, citing existing no-contact orders. The order stipulates specific arrival times for Epstein (8:30 AM), dismissal procedures, and explicitly forbids communication or harassment between the parties.
016.pdf
This document is a legal motion filed on November 9, 2009, by third-party witness Igor Zinoviev, seeking a protective order to prevent or limit his deposition in the case of Jane Doe No. 2 v. Jeffrey Epstein. Zinoviev, a driver and bodyguard for Epstein since November 2005, claims he has no relevant information regarding Epstein's criminal or civil cases, particularly concerning events prior to September 2005. The motion cites legal precedents regarding the scope of discovery and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 26(c) to argue against the deposition.
EFTA00037239.pdf
An email exchange between Melvyn Kohn and Mark L. Epstein (Jeffrey Epstein's brother) occurring shortly after Jeffrey's death in August 2019. Kohn claims a background in US military intelligence and warns Mark about his physical security, suggesting he is vulnerable now that Jeffrey is 'out of the equation.' The email discusses the identity of 'Jumas' (Haim Oron), alleges Jeffrey had exposure to North Korean/Chinese agents and arms dealers like Gerald Bull, and mentions the 'Humpty Dumpty charity' and potential threats to 'GM' (Ghislaine Maxwell).
EFTA00032589.pdf
This document is a Google Alerts email digest dated July 8, 2019, tracking the keyword "Michael Cohen." It aggregates news headlines concerning Cohen's involvement with Donald Trump, the Mueller Report, and mentions a payment Cohen arranged to a Playboy playmate in the context of Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking charges. It also includes alerts regarding Elliott Broidy's federal investigation and a local news item about a different Michael Cohen (a councilman) attending July 4th fireworks.
EFTA00032410.pdf
This document is a 'White Collar Law360' email newsletter dated December 12, 2018, sent to a redacted recipient. It summarizes various legal news stories, including the conviction of an ex-FDIC staffer, the sentencing of SUNY Polytechnic's president, bribery charges against Bloomberg/Turner executives, and updates on Paul Manafort, Huawei, and Stormy Daniels. The document lists numerous law firms and companies in its sidebar, including 'Epstein Becker Green', which likely triggered its inclusion in Epstein-related searches, though it refers to a law firm, not Jeffrey Epstein.
EFTA00019200.pdf
This document is a Warranty Deed executed on March 9, 2019, transferring property at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, from 'Laurel Inc' (presided over by Jeffrey Epstein) to 'Love & Bliss Inc,' a non-profit religious organization. The deed was signed by Epstein in the presence of witnesses Jody Tutt and Jenny Martinez and notarized by Liana L. Johnson. Notably, while the deed was signed in March 2019, it was not recorded with the Palm Beach County Clerk until October 23, 2020, well after Epstein's death.
DOJ-OGR-00020999.jpg
This document is a page from a court filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on April 29, 2022. The Court denies the Defendant's Rule 29 motion for a judgment of acquittal, which was made at the close of the Government's case. The text outlines the legal standard for such a motion, citing numerous precedents that require the court to view evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution.
DOJ-OGR-00021830.jpg
This document is a legal filing (Case 22-1426) arguing for an en banc review of a panel decision. The core argument is that the precedent set by United States v. Annabi, which limits a plea agreement's scope to a single U.S. Attorney's office by default, conflicts with the broader, long-standing legal principle that plea agreements should be construed strictly against the government. The filing cites several other cases to demonstrate this tension with established circuit and Supreme Court jurisprudence.
DOJ-OGR-00021829.jpg
This document is page 'iv' of a legal filing, specifically Document 117 in Case 22-1426, dated November 1, 2024. It serves as a Table of Authorities, listing various court cases and statutes that are cited within the main body of the document. The citations include references to federal court decisions from various circuits and the Supreme Court, along with federal statutes.
DOJ-OGR-00021766.jpg
This page from a legal document, dated July 27, 2023, argues that the District Court abused its discretion in the case against Maxwell. The argument focuses on the court's handling of Juror 50, whose failure to provide truthful answers during voir dire and whose personal life experiences mirrored trial testimony, should have been grounds for a challenge for cause due to unexplored potential bias.
DOJ-OGR-00021765.jpg
This legal document argues that juror bias can be implied when a juror's personal experiences are similar to the issues in a case. It cites several legal precedents where new trials were granted because jurors failed to disclose relevant personal histories, such as being victims of similar crimes or domestic abuse. The author contends that based on this precedent, 'Juror 50' should have been struck for cause, but notes that the Court inexplicably held otherwise.
DOJ-OGR-00009038.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing from February 24, 2022, defines and analyzes the concept of "implied bias" as a basis for challenging potential jurors. It cites numerous legal precedents to explain that implied bias is presumed by law, regardless of a juror's stated impartiality, especially when a juror's personal experiences are similar to the issues being litigated. The document provides examples from past cases, such as jurors who were victims of crimes similar to those in the case they were hearing.
DOJ-OGR-00010311.jpg
This legal document argues that Juror 50 was incapable of being impartial due to his own past trauma of childhood sexual abuse, which was highly similar to that of the victims in the case. The filing cites multiple legal precedents where jurors were dismissed or new trials were granted for failing to disclose such biasing personal experiences. The document further contends that Juror 50's decision to speak to the international press after the trial to 'tell his story' demonstrates his deep identification with the victims and confirms his bias.
DOJ-OGR-00009729.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing that defines and discusses the concept of "implied bias" in the context of jury selection. It cites several legal precedents (Torres, Haynes, Sampson, etc.) to explain that implied bias is presumed by law and is determined by the juror's circumstances, not their stated ability to be impartial. The text highlights that bias can be implied when a juror's personal experiences are similar to the issues being litigated, providing examples from cases involving murder and burglary.
DOJ-OGR-00002951.jpg
This document is page xvi from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on April 16, 2021. It serves as a table of authorities, listing numerous 'United States v.' court cases with defendants ranging from Israel to Laurenti. Each entry provides the legal citation for the case and the page numbers where it is referenced within the main document.
DOJ-OGR-00004698.jpg
This document is a legal declaration by A. Marie Villafaña, an Assistant United States Attorney, filed on July 9, 2008, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Villafaña outlines her professional background, including her 1993 graduation from Berkeley Law, her bar admissions in Florida, California, and Minnesota, and her past work as a judicial clerk. The declaration establishes her credentials and her employment as an AUSA during the events relevant to the case involving petitioner Jane Doe.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029872.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a House Oversight production containing a news clipping or web printout. It features a headline about the Acting DHS chief ordering an investigation into offensive posts by Border Patrol agents and a snippet from an AP News story regarding arrests at Hong Kong protests. There is a technical error message at the top indicating a missing image file.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity