FBI
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
NYPD
|
Joint task force |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Investigation subject |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Subject of investigation |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
NSA
|
Business associate |
9
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
PBPD / PBSO
|
Inter agency cooperation |
9
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Witness's stepmom
|
Interviewee interviewer |
9
Strong
|
1 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Witness investigator |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Investigative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Witness investigator |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Michael Horowitz
|
Oversight investigated entity |
7
|
1 | |
|
person
Christopher Steele
|
Source terminated |
7
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Subject of investigation |
6
|
2 | |
|
location
USANYS
|
Legal representative |
6
|
6 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Informant |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
SDNY
|
Collaboration |
6
|
6 | |
|
organization
[REDACTED]
|
Investigative subject witness |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
MIA
|
Professional bureaucratic |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
[REDACTED Interviewee]
|
Investigative subject witness |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Adversarial |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
MIA
|
Inter agency cooperation |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Amanda Young
|
Employment |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
USAO
|
Inter agency professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Informant interviewee |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Annie Farmer
|
Investigative informant |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Loftus
|
Professional |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Interview | An interview of Rodgers conducted by the FBI. The document states it was 'roughly almost 15 years... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Investigation | The FBI was conducting an investigation and monitoring Ghislaine Maxwell's location. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Consultation | Dr. Loftus consulted with the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the Secret Service. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Seizure of evidence | CDs containing photographs were seized from Jeffrey Epstein's residence and subsequently reviewed... | Jeffrey Epstein's residence | View |
| N/A | Search and seizure | The FBI conducted a search of a residence and seized hard drives that were found in boxes sealed ... | a residence | View |
| N/A | Investigation | The DOJ and FBI conducted an exhaustive review of investigative holdings relating to Jeffrey Epst... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Police Chief Reiter refers matter to FBI. | Palm Beach/Miami | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI attempted to interview Sarnoff's 'source' regarding allegations, but the source did not appear. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Seizure of 3 devices from Epstein's NY residence. | Epstein's NY Residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI conducts background checks on George and visits his neighbors. | George's neighborhood | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI Interview of a white female | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Operation Leap Year task force formed. | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI investigation finding photos of Virginia at Epstein's Palm Beach house. | Palm Beach house | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI provided more than 190,000 services to victims. | USA/Global | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI search/raid of the property. | Epstein Residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sting operation against Alfredo Rodriguez for selling the stolen book. | South Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Political Convention and Protests | Convention Center area | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI investigation reached a 'fork in the road' regarding whether Snowden acted alone or had help. | USA | View |
| N/A | Legal action | Execution of a search warrant for one of Epstein's devices. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI busted Rodriguez for attempting to sell the black book. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI Investigation | The Center | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI investigation determined allegations of abuse against Epstein were credible. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI investigation reached a 'fork in the road' regarding whether Snowden acted alone or had help;... | USA | View |
| N/A | N/A | Law enforcement investigation initiation | Licata's home | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI case closure | Unknown | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021387.jpg
This document is page 187 of an OPR report (filed in 2021/2023 court cases) analyzing former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. The report concludes that Acosta exercised 'poor judgment' by pursuing a state-based resolution and the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) without adequate consideration or team consultation, allowing Epstein to manipulate the process. It highlights that the decision left victims, the public, and federal agents (FBI and line AUSAs) dissatisfied with the justice achieved.
DOJ-OGR-00021378.jpg
This page from an OPR report critiques the USAO's handling of the Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), specifically regarding the failure to seize Epstein's computers. It details how prosecutors Sloman and Villafaña postponed litigation to obtain the computers, and how US Attorney Acosta signed the NPA—which effectively ended the pursuit of this critical evidence—despite likely being aware of the ongoing efforts to obtain it. The report argues the USAO gave away significant leverage and potential evidence of crimes without proper consideration.
DOJ-OGR-00021375.jpg
This document is a page from an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report criticizing former U.S. Attorney Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. The report concludes that Acosta's decision to resolve the case with a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) before the investigation was complete was 'poor judgment' and prevented the USAO from obtaining significant evidence, such as surveillance footage from the PBPD and cooperation from potential co-conspirators. The document notes that key investigative steps, like interviewing Epstein's assistants, were not taken before the lenient deal was offered.
DOJ-OGR-00021374.jpg
This document is a page from an OPR report analyzing U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It criticizes the reliance on state procedures for the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), noting that the specific state charges selected allowed Epstein to avoid sex offender registration in New Mexico due to age-of-consent laws. It also details that Acosta was aware the Palm Beach Police Department distrusted the State Attorney's Office, yet he proceeded with a plea deal that relied heavily on state authorities.
DOJ-OGR-00021372.jpg
This document is page 172 of a DOJ OPR report (filed in court in 2021 and 2023) criticizing former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. The text details Acosta's justification for the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), citing the 'Petite policy' and a desire to avoid stepping on state sovereignty, reasoning the report calls 'flawed and unduly constricted.' The report notes that Acosta admitted the NPA was not an 'appropriate punishment' federally and that Epstein faced 168-210 months under federal guidelines.
DOJ-OGR-00021367.jpg
This legal document details prosecutor Villafaña's statements to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) regarding a non-prosecution provision for co-conspirators in Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). Villafaña explains her rationale for including the provision, her communications with her supervisor Lourie, and her belief at the time that it would only protect Epstein's four female assistants, not any of his influential associates. The document suggests a lack of substantive discussion among prosecutors about the provision's potential implications.
DOJ-OGR-00021361.jpg
This legal document details the post-meeting communications and ongoing negotiations between the U.S. Attorney's Office (represented by Acosta and Sloman) and Jeffrey Epstein's defense counsel (Lefkowitz) regarding Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It highlights a significant dispute over alleged concessions Acosta made during a breakfast meeting, as claimed by Lefkowitz in an October 23, 2007 letter, and a contemporaneous draft response from the USAO refuting those claims.
DOJ-OGR-00021358.jpg
This legal document details a series of meetings and communications in 2007 between federal prosecutors (USAO) and Jeffrey Epstein's defense team regarding a potential prosecution. It outlines the strategic maneuvering on both sides, including the defense's presentation of legal arguments and the prosecutors' internal deliberations, led by figures like Acosta and Lourie, on charging strategy and a potential non-prosecution agreement. The document highlights key meetings in June and September 2007 where the parties exchanged information and argued their positions.
DOJ-OGR-00021347.jpg
This legal document details internal discussions and challenges within the prosecution team handling the Jeffrey Epstein case. It reveals concerns among prosecutors like Acosta, Lourie, and Sloman regarding victim testimony, legal weaknesses, and setting unfavorable federal precedent, contrasting with Villafaña's proposed charges. The document highlights the complexity of the case, including victims' reluctance to testify, credibility issues raised by the defense, and the influence of Acosta's past role in the Civil Rights Division on his legal strategy.
DOJ-OGR-00021346.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a DOJ OPR report (page 146 of the original report, filed in court in 2021 and 2023) detailing the justifications provided by USAO prosecutors (Lourie, Menchel, Sloman, and Acosta) for entering into a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein rather than pursuing a federal trial. The prosecutors cite significant evidentiary challenges, including unreliable witnesses, victims who 'loved' Epstein or would claim they lied about their age, and the trauma a trial would cause victims. Acosta admits his knowledge of the case facts was not 'granular' and that he relied on the diligence of his team, particularly Villafaña.
DOJ-OGR-00021345.jpg
This legal document details the significant reluctance of Jeffrey Epstein's victims to participate in a public trial, primarily due to privacy concerns, fear of public exposure, and emotional distress. Statements from officials Villafaña and Lourie, along with a declaration from an FBI agent, indicate that this victim sentiment was a major factor for the U.S. Attorney's Office in its handling of the case. The document highlights specific instances of victim trauma, such as a teenager's distress when her parents discovered her involvement after the FBI left a business card at their home.
DOJ-OGR-00021342.jpg
This page from a DOJ OPR report concludes that there was no evidence that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) or the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein was influenced by bribes, corruption, or his wealth and status. It notes that while Epstein was not initially well-known to the FBI agents or prosecutors in 2006, press coverage in July 2006 alerted them to his high-profile connections, including Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, and Kevin Spacey. An FBI agent is quoted acknowledging they knew who had been on Epstein's plane.
DOJ-OGR-00021315.jpg
This document details internal DOJ conflicts in November 2008 regarding Jeffrey Epstein's work release. Prosecutor Villafaña argued Epstein's 12-hour-a-day release to the 'Florida Science Foundation' breached his Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) requiring 24-hour confinement, prompting her to ask superiors if she could indict him. Concurrently, USAO official Alex Acosta recused himself from the case due to employment discussions with Epstein's defense firm, Kirkland & Ellis.
DOJ-OGR-00021314.jpg
This document details the conflict between federal prosecutors (USAO) and local officials regarding Jeffrey Epstein's work release. It reveals that Epstein and his lawyer, Jack Goldberger, misled the court about Epstein's employment at the 'Florida Science Foundation,' a shell entity created in November 2007 using Goldberger's office address, despite Epstein claiming in court it had existed for 15 years. The Palm Beach Sheriff's Office placed Epstein on work release in October 2008 without notifying the USAO, contradicting previous assurances.
DOJ-OGR-00021311.jpg
This document details Jeffrey Epstein's guilty plea in a Palm Beach County state court on June 30, 2008. It outlines last-minute negotiations and changes to his plea agreement regarding the wording of his sentence and clarifies the detention facility. The document also includes the specific criminal charges read in court and a colloquy where the prosecutor, Ms. Belohlavek, confirmed to the judge that there were 'several' victims.
DOJ-OGR-00021299.jpg
This document details the tense negotiations between the USAO (Acosta) and Epstein's defense team (Starr, Lefkowitz, Dershowitz) in December 2007. Following defense submissions, the USAO initiated a de novo review of evidence by Criminal Chief Robert Senior and held a meeting in Miami on December 14, 2007, where the defense argued state charges did not apply. The defense subsequently threatened to seek review from DOJ Washington (AAG Fisher), prompting Acosta to request an expedited review to preserve a scheduled January 4th plea date.
DOJ-OGR-00021290.jpg
This document describes the conflicting accounts surrounding a breakfast meeting between prosecutor Acosta and Epstein's attorney, Lefkowitz. A letter from Lefkowitz claims Acosta promised the USAO would not interfere with Epstein's state-level plea deal, a claim Acosta's office refuted in an unsent draft letter calling it "inaccurate." The text also details Acosta's later, differing recollections of the meeting and contrasts them with media reports that a secret deal was struck at that time.
DOJ-OGR-00021289.jpg
This page of a DOJ report details negotiations in October 2007 regarding the Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). Defense attorney Lefkowitz argued strongly against federal agents or the USAO contacting victims about the settlement, citing confidentiality and grand jury rules. The document chronicles the scheduling of a breakfast meeting between US Attorney Acosta and Lefkowitz in West Palm Beach on October 12, 2007, while prosecutor Villafaña was on sick leave.
DOJ-OGR-00021285.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the internal communications regarding the finalization of Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It highlights efforts by the prosecution team (Villafaña, Acosta) to limit the disclosure of the agreement's terms, specifically regarding financial damages, to the Palm Beach Police Chief and the public. The document outlines the specific provisions of the NPA, including the guilty plea to solicitation of minors, the 30-month recommended sentence structure, and the handling of victim damages.
DOJ-OGR-00021282.jpg
This legal document details communications from Jeffrey Epstein's defense team, specifically Sanchez and Lefkowitz, to prosecutors Acosta and Lourie on September 22-23, 2007. The defense vehemently argues against a sexual offender registration requirement, claiming it was based on a 'misunderstanding' from a September 12 meeting where they were allegedly told by prosecutors Krischer and Belohlavek that the charge was not registrable. The document contains excerpts from emails where the defense calls the registration a 'life sentence' and pleads for reconsideration.
DOJ-OGR-00021270.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the plea negotiations between prosecutor Villafaña and Epstein's counsel, Lefkowitz. It outlines the strategy to structure state and federal sentencing to manipulate jurisdiction for prison purposes without alerting the judge. It also explains Villafaña's justification for the non-prosecution agreement covering co-conspirators, stating that the USAO viewed Epstein as the priority and wished to avoid highlighting uncharged conduct to the court.
DOJ-OGR-00021262.jpg
This legal document details events in the Jeffrey Epstein case from 2007, focusing on the circulation of a draft non-prosecution agreement (NPA) by USAO attorney Villafaña. It describes a key meeting on September 7, 2007, where Epstein's defense attorneys, including Starr, met with prosecutors, including Acosta, to argue against federal charges. Starr specifically appealed to Acosta by highlighting their shared experience as Senate-confirmed officials.
DOJ-OGR-00021253.jpg
This document outlines the specific terms of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between the government and Jeffrey Epstein, requiring a guilty plea to state charges involving minors and a two-year prison sentence. It details the legal statutes violated (Florida statutes regarding lewd battery, solicitation, and sexual activity with minors) and stipulates that federal investigations would close upon his state sentencing. The document also includes a narrative section describing the contentious negotiation process between July and September 2007, noting the prosecution's frustration with defense tactics.
DOJ-OGR-00021249.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the internal conflict and confusion regarding the decision to offer Jeffrey Epstein a plea deal with only a two-year prison term. It highlights Prosecutor Villafaña's shock at the decision, noting she felt it violated sentencing guidelines and that she had not been consulted. The document confirms that U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta ultimately made the decision for the two-year term, despite conflicting recollections from supervisors Menchel, Sloman, and Lourie regarding how and when this was communicated.
DOJ-OGR-00021245.jpg
This legal document details internal conflict within the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding the prosecution of Epstein. It describes prosecutor Villafaña's unsuccessful attempt to meet with her superior, Acosta, a contentious email exchange with her colleague Menchel that was later reviewed by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), and her efforts to obtain computer evidence from Epstein's home. The document highlights disagreements on strategy and procedure among the prosecutors handling the case.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity