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 | N/A | OPR working with FBI Palm Beach Office, including case agents and Victim Witness Specialist, to o... | Palm Beach | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI search of Automated Case Support system and documentation of victim notification system. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI Meeting | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Notification received by OPR from FBI and USAO regarding federal investigation and Epstein's plea. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI investigation into Epstein's international sex trafficking organization was quashed. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Federal investigation began, contemporaneous with news reports of Epstein's arrest. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Victims provided OPR with information regarding their contacts with the FBI and USAO. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Rothstein's firm was raided. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI produced a criminal complaint related to Alfredo Rodriguez. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Potential arrest of Ghislaine Maxwell ('green lighting ab arrest'). | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Launch of counterintelligence investigation into Trump campaign | USA | View |
| N/A | N/A | Defense counsel review of nude images | FBI | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI interview of a victim pursuant to a federal investigation regarding the sexual exploitation o... | Unknown | View |
| N/A | Investigation | Epstein investigation | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Transfer of evidence | New York Office (NYO) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Criminal Investigation / Agency Interviews | MCC New York | View |
| N/A | N/A | Search of Epstein's island | Little St. James | View |
| N/A | N/A | Seizure of images from Jeffrey Epstein's residences pursuant to search warrants. | New York and Virgin Islands | View |
| N/A | N/A | Planned Arrest upon return to US | Unspecified Airport | View |
| N/A | N/A | Closure of federal investigations by FBI and U.S. Attorney | Federal jurisdiction | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI Raid / Evidence Collection | Epstein Residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | Identification of new victims | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government interviews with accusers | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Opening of the case/Investigation | New York | View |
| N/A | N/A | Referral of case to FBI | Palm Beach | View |
DOJ-OGR-00004701.jpg
This legal document, filed in 2021, describes events in September and October 2007 surrounding a non-prosecution agreement with Jeffrey Epstein. It details that victims were not consulted before the agreement, which deferred prosecution to Florida, and outlines subsequent attempts to notify them, including an FBI interview attempt with victim S.R. and contact with victim C.W.
DOJ-OGR-00004700.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (affidavit) detailing the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. It highlights a significant conflict of interest where Epstein paid the legal fees for James Eisenberg, who was representing T.M., a victim/witness in the case. The text also outlines the Summer 2007 negotiations resulting in the controversial non-prosecution agreement, where federal prosecution was deferred in favor of state charges to preserve federal remedies for victims.
DOJ-OGR-00004678.jpg
This document is a page from a Grand Jury testimony transcript (filed May 25, 2021). A witness, likely an FBI agent, testifies about a 'Merged Flight Manifests Chart' created by the FBI based on data obtained via subpoenas issued to Jeffrey Epstein's pilots. The testimony clarifies aircraft identifiers, noting that 'Hyperion' refers to the Gulfstream and 'JEGE' refers to the Boeing 727, and mentions Overt Acts 191 through 225.
DOJ-OGR-00004666.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a Grand Jury proceeding filed on May 25, 2021. It depicts the swearing-in of an FBI Special Agent (name redacted) based in West Palm Beach. The agent confirms involvement as a case agent in 'Operation Leap Year' and testifies that additional subpoenas have been issued and documents received in response.
DOJ-OGR-00004612.jpg
This document is a page from an OPR report regarding the investigation into the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. It details a technological error that resulted in a gap in U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta's emails from May 2007 to April 2008 during a system migration, concluding there was no intentional concealment of evidence. The report also notes that OPR gathered records from the FBI's Palm Beach Office, the Criminal Division, CEOS, and the Office of the Deputy Attorney General to reconstruct the timeline and communications.
DOJ-OGR-00004611.jpg
This document outlines the methodology used by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) to review documents from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (USAO) and other federal agencies concerning the Epstein investigation. It details the types of records examined, including case files, correspondence, and electronic data from key individuals like Acosta, Sloman, and Villafaña. The review uncovered a significant data gap in Acosta's emails, which was partially resolved after the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA) discovered and corrected a data association error, recovering over 11,000 emails.
DOJ-OGR-00004609.jpg
This document is an excerpt from an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report reviewing the Department of Justice's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein investigation. It concludes that while attorneys did not commit professional misconduct regarding the CVRA or victim communications, Alexander Acosta exercised poor judgment by failing to ensure victims were notified of the state plea hearing and by providing insufficient oversight during the NPA negotiation process.
DOJ-OGR-00004607.jpg
This document is the conclusion section of an OPR report detailing an investigation into the USAO's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, specifically regarding the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) authorized by R. Alexander Acosta. The report confirms that the government violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) by concealing the NPA from victims and sending misleading letters. It identifies five former USAO attorneys (Acosta, Sloman, Menchel, Lourie, and Villafaña) as subjects of the investigation due to their involvement in the NPA negotiations.
DOJ-OGR-00004606.jpg
This page from an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report criticizes the U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) and the FBI for their handling of communications with victims in the Epstein case. The report finds that the decision to keep the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) secret and the delivery of inconsistent messages left victims feeling ignored and undermined public confidence. Decisions by officials Acosta, Sloman, and Villafaña are noted as contributing factors to these failures in providing transparent and unified communication.
DOJ-OGR-00004604.jpg
This document is a page from an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report criticizing the government's handling of victims in the Epstein case. It concludes that prosecutors, including Acosta and Sloman, failed to treat victims with forthrightness and sensitivity, particularly by not consulting them before the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was signed and by providing confusing information afterwards. The case of one victim, 'Wild,' is used as a specific example of these failures in communication by government representatives like Villafaña and the FBI.
DOJ-OGR-00004598.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report detailing the internal decision-making process regarding the notification of victims in the Jeffrey Epstein case. It highlights that prosecutors (Villafaña, Acosta) deliberately chose not to inform victims about the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) or their rights to damages, citing concerns that doing so would compromise the victims' credibility as witnesses and give the appearance of financial motivation. The document specifically references interviews with victim Courtney Wild and others in early 2008 where the existence of the signed NPA was withheld.
DOJ-OGR-00033085.jpg
This document is page 97 of a deposition transcript produced by Consor & Associates. A witness is being questioned about whether she has text messaged FBI agents or federal prosecutors, or if they have shared information with her regarding what 'other girls' have said; she denies both. She also discusses her parents' knowledge of how to contact the FBI, noting that her mother 'doesn't care to know any of this stuff' and mentioning an individual named Paul associated with her mother.
DOJ-OGR-00033084.jpg
This document is page 96 of a deposition transcript recorded by Censor & Associates. Attorney Mr. Tein is questioning a witness about their knowledge of communications between FBI agents, federal prosecutors (specifically Marie Villafona and Jeff Sloman), and other individuals (Mr. Leopold and Mr. Herman). The questioning specifically probes whether the witness knew if Mr. Herman was allowed to review or discuss a 'draft indictment' with federal prosecutors.
DOJ-OGR-00033082.jpg
This document is a transcript of an interview where an individual (A) is questioned about statements provided to law enforcement. The individual confirms giving one taped statement to Detective Pagan of the police and describes a separate conversation with the FBI that took place at their father's residence on Downers Road in Loxahatchee. The interviewee is uncertain whether the FBI conversation was taped.
DOJ-OGR-00025435.jpg
This document is an email thread from August 11, 2019, between Hugh Hurwitz (BOP) and an OAG official regarding a timeline of Jeffrey Epstein's custody status shortly before his death. The emails discuss the accuracy of a timeline detailing Epstein's placement on and removal from suicide watch (July 23-29) and the removal of his cellmate on August 9. Hurwitz expresses caution about releasing this information to the public without clearing it with the OIG/FBI due to the ongoing investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00014717.jpg
This document is the cover page for a court transcript from the jury trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 20 CR 330), dated December 28, 2021. It lists Judge Alison J. Nathan as presiding, along with the appearances of the prosecution team (led by US Attorney Damian Williams) and the defense team (including attorneys from Haddon Morgan and Foreman and Cohen & Gresser). Also noted as present are representatives from the FBI and NYPD.
DOJ-OGR-00014679.jpg
This document is the cover page of a court transcript for the jury trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated December 22, 2021. It lists Judge Alison J. Nathan as presiding, details the legal teams for both the prosecution (SDNY) and the defense (Haddon Morgan and Foreman, Cohen & Gresser), and notes the presence of FBI agent Amanda Young and NYPD officer Paul Byrne. The document was filed on August 10, 2022, bearing the Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00014679.
DOJ-OGR-00014665.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving a dispute between defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca and prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding a response to a jury note. The jury requested an 'FBI deposition 3505-005' referenced during the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn. The defense attempted to include testimony from Special Agent Jason Richards in the response, but the Court overruled the request, deeming it unresponsive to the jury's specific ask.
DOJ-OGR-00014660.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between the judge and counsel while the jury is not present. The conversation centers on two notes from the jury requesting testimony transcripts for individuals named Jane, Annie, and Carolyn, as well as an FBI deposition of Carolyn. The counsel confirms they are finalizing redactions before sending the documents to the jury via court staff.
DOJ-OGR-00014659.jpg
Cover page for the official court transcript of the Jury Trial in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 20 CR 330) held on December 21, 2021, before Judge Alison J. Nathan. The document lists appearances by the prosecution (US Attorney's Office) and the defense (Haddon Morgan and Foreman, Bobbi Sternheim, Cohen & Gresser), as well as the presence of FBI and NYPD representatives.
DOJ-OGR-00014577.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring a rebuttal argument by prosecutor Ms. Comey. Comey refutes the defense's suggestion (attributed to Ms. Menninger) that the FBI manipulated witnesses or asked leading questions, citing the ethical testimony of Special Agent Young. She argues that the victims (Jane, Kate, Carolyn, and Annie) did not misremember the defendant's role in their abuse and that the defense's argument relies on the jury believing all witnesses are liars.
DOJ-OGR-00014575.jpg
This document is a transcript of a rebuttal argument by Ms. Comey in a criminal case against a defendant named Maxwell. Ms. Comey argues against the defense's theory that lawyers fabricated stories about Maxwell for financial gain. She presents evidence that three victims—Jane, Carolyn, and Annie—had reported Maxwell's involvement to friends, boyfriends, and the FBI years prior (in 2006 and 2007), long before any compensation fund or financial incentive existed, thus making the defense's theory untenable.
DOJ-OGR-00014574.jpg
This document is page 174 of a court transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Comey is delivering a rebuttal argument, refuting the defense's theory that witnesses (Kate, Carolyn, Annie, Jane) had false memories implanted by the media, the FBI, or greedy lawyers seeking money from the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund. Comey argues there is no evidence the witnesses consumed each other's media interviews or that their lawyers conspired to fabricate stories, noting specifically that Annie's lawyer worked pro bono.
DOJ-OGR-00014547.jpg
This document is a page from a legal summation in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. The speaker, likely Ms. Menninger, argues about the unreliability and malleability of memory, using Annie Farmer's incorrect recollection of an April 1996 date as an example and citing expert testimony from Dr. Loftus. The speaker also asserts that Dr. Loftus is not just a defense witness, as she has previously consulted for the Department of Justice, FBI, and Secret Service, the same agencies involved in the prosecution.
DOJ-OGR-00005798.jpg
This document is page 15 of a legal filing from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It argues for the admissibility of testimony by expert witness Dr. Rocchio, distinguishing her clinical, academic-based conclusions from those of an FBI agent in a precedent case (*Raymond*) whose testimony on child molester profiles was found unreliable. The filing emphasizes that Dr. Rocchio will testify on psychological underpinnings rather than offender profiling.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity