Prosecution
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
requested person
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
EFTA00027727.pdf
An email exchange from March 2021 between prosecutor Maurene (likely Comey) and US Attorney Audrey Strauss. Maurene requests approval to issue a 'friendly subpoena' to an attorney who possesses a 2009 settlement agreement between a victim and Jeffrey Epstein. The attorney is cooperative but requires the subpoena for legal cover to release the document, which prosecutors believe is relevant to proving Ghislaine Maxwell's participation in the abuse of underage girls.
EFTA00020321.pdf
This document is an email thread between officials at the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) dated April 26, 2019. The correspondence concerns the circulation of a status memo regarding Jeffrey Epstein intended for the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, originally dated March 13, 2019. The emails also reference the controversial Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) from the Florida prosecution and discuss providing updates on the investigation's progress since March 2019.
EFTA00016026.pdf
This document is an email chain from December 2020 discussing extradition law, specifically concerning the enforceability of a defendant's consent to extradition from the UK to the US. The emails involve individuals from the US Department of Justice and the Crown Prosecution Service, clarifying that consent given in the US would not be binding in the UK and that a UK judge must independently verify extradition compliance with UK law. The discussion centers on a UK citizen, detained in the US, attempting to use prophylactic consent to extradition as proof of not being a flight risk for bail purposes.
EFTA00011192.pdf
This document is a legal opinion provided by David Perry QC regarding the extradition law of England and Wales in the context of Ghislaine Maxwell's bail proceedings in the United States. It outlines the extradition process between the UK and US, potential bars to extradition, human rights considerations, and the implications of Ms. Maxwell waiving her right to extradition. The document concludes that if Ms. Maxwell were to abscond to the UK, it is highly unlikely she would be granted bail or successfully resist extradition.
DOJ-OGR-00001434.jpg
This document is a cover page for Exhibit D (Doc. 270) within a larger legal case (Case 21-770). It is titled 'Government's Response to Ghislaine Maxwell's conditions at Metropolitan Detention Center' and is dated May 5, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00020885.jpg
This document is a printout of a Daily Mail article dated January 26, 2022, filed as a court exhibit (Case 22-1426). It details an interview with a juror named 'Scotty' who explains that the jury convicted Ghislaine Maxwell because her life was inextricably 'intertwined' with Jeffrey Epstein's, making her fully aware of and culpable for the crimes. The document includes standard webpage elements like ads and comments, along with court filing headers and a DOJ Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00020407.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering filings between January 25, 2021, and February 2, 2021. It details the defense filing twelve pre-trial motions, including requests for separate trials, dismissal of counts due to multiplicity and lack of specificity, and dismissal based on Sixth Amendment violations. The document also records a dispute involving the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and MDC Brooklyn regarding laptop access for the defendant, resulting in the Judge denying the BOP's request to vacate a previous order.
DOJ-OGR-00016230.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. It records the swearing-in and initial direct examination of a government witness named William Brown. Brown identifies himself as an employee of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles, Division of Field Investigations.
DOJ-OGR-00015658.jpg
This document is a photograph entered into evidence as Government Exhibit 342 in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (S2 20 Cr. 330). The image depicts Ghislaine Maxwell massaging Jeffrey Epstein's foot inside the cabin of a private aircraft.
DOJ-OGR-00002120.jpg
This document is an annex from a legal case, filed on December 14, 2020, which outlines the procedural stages and time limits for extradition requests from the United States to the United Kingdom under the Extradition Act 2003. It details the preliminary stages, including certification of the request and arrest procedures, providing commentary on practical timelines and the conditions under which bail is considered. The document references specific sections of the Extradition Act 2003 for each stage.
DOJ-OGR-00008990.jpg
This document is page 11 of a legal filing (Document 609) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), dated February 24, 2022. It is the conclusion of a motion filed on behalf of 'Juror 50' requesting that the Court release his Jury Questionnaire and voir dire transcript under seal to his attorney, the Prosecution, and the Defense. The filing argues that privacy concerns should not prevent Juror 50 from accessing his own documents, which are necessary to comply with a prior order from Judge Nathan regarding an inquiry into the juror's conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00008985.jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal filing (Document 609) from February 24, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It argues for Juror 50's right to intervene in the action to obtain a copy of his Jury Questionnaire under seal and asserts his right to privacy regarding his history as a sexual assault survivor. The text references an inquiry initiated by Judge Nathan regarding Juror 50's conduct and potential non-disclosure during jury selection, heightened by intense media scrutiny.
DOJ-OGR-00010499.jpg
This document is a letter from Isabel Maxwell, filed on June 15, 2022, concerning the pre-trial detention of someone named Ghislaine. Maxwell describes Ghislaine's detention at MDC Brooklyn as arduous, lasting over 500 days, and violating UN rules, citing examples provided by Ghislaine's counsel. Maxwell expresses admiration for Ghislaine's character and fortitude, reiterates that the government and Court have found her not to be a threat, and hopes for her release soon.
DOJ-OGR-00002753.jpg
This document is page 6 of a US Government filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) opposing the defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) third bail motion. The prosecution argues that the defendant's offer to renounce her French and British citizenships is "window dressing" and a strategic but meaningless gesture. The document cites correspondence with the French Ministry of Justice confirming that France will not extradite her because she held French nationality at the time of the alleged crimes (1990s and 2016), regardless of current renunciation. It further notes that while UK extradition is not barred by nationality, the process is lengthy, uncertain, and subject to extensive litigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016551.jpg
This document is the final page (42 of 42) of a 2018 Minnesota Law Review article discussing the legal theory of 'underenforcement,' particularly regarding sexual assault crimes and police violence. It compares U.S. federal oversight and local prosecution to systems in England and Canada. The text concludes that current safeguards are insufficient for marginalized victim groups. The document contains the name 'DAVID SCHOEN' at the bottom and bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, suggesting it was included as an exhibit in a congressional inquiry, likely related to Schoen's representation of high-profile clients.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016530.jpg
This page from the Minnesota Law Review discusses the legal concept of "dual sovereignty" and the Double Jeopardy Clause, specifically focusing on federal oversight of state prosecution decisions. It highlights the Department of Justice's policy of reviewing state enforcement practices in areas like civil rights violations and notes the upcoming Supreme Court case United States v. Gamble. The footnotes provide comparative legal analysis regarding victim rights to review non-prosecution decisions in Scotland, England, France, and Ireland.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016520.jpg
This page is an extract from a legal brief or filing submitted by attorney David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee (likely related to the Epstein investigation). It cites a Minnesota Law Review article discussing the limitations of victims' rights in the U.S. compared to other jurisdictions, specifically noting that U.S. victims generally lack the power to challenge prosecutorial discretion (decisions not to prosecute). The document includes extensive footnotes citing various examples of enforcement discretion and budget limitations in contexts like tax law and marijuana enforcement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_016548.jpg
This document is a page of footnotes from the Minnesota Law Review, citing various legal cases, statutes, and news reports regarding police misconduct, officer-involved shootings, and criminal justice policies. It references specific incidents like the shootings of Philando Castile and Walter Scott, as well as legislative acts like the Death in Custody Reporting Act.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity