Epstein
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Business associate |
26
Very Strong
|
25 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Business associate |
13
Very Strong
|
30 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Business associate |
13
Very Strong
|
23 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
15 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
19 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Business associate |
12
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
Lefkowitz
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
SDNY
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Jack Goldberger
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Abuser victim |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Co conspirators |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Co conspirators |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Edwards
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Friend |
11
Very Strong
|
19 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Co conspirators |
11
Very Strong
|
56 | |
|
person
Juan Alessi
|
Employee |
11
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Co conspirator |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Prosecutor defendant |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Lefcourt
|
Client |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Friend |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Abuser victim |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Co conspirators |
10
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
location
Palm Beach residence
|
Ownership |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
USAO-SDFL
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Provision regarding USAO's efforts to obtain Epstein's computers and the safeguarding of these co... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's alleged sexual molestation of minor girls on a daily basis for many years, including at... | West Palm Beach mansion | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discussion about Ghislaine Maxwell's relationship with Epstein continuing and her responsibilitie... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Litigation involving Epstein where his lawyers attacked the credibility of the girls. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discovery process blocked by Epstein and co-conspirators, leading to the need for alternative inv... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Ghislaine Maxwell began looking for real estate for her dad and Epstein asked for help finding an... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein asked Ghislaine Maxwell to continue helping him (find a house, etc.) after her father's d... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's alleged criminal scheme and the defense's efforts to secure non-prosecution and immigra... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Agreement provisions precluding criminal charges and immigration proceedings against certain indi... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Federal investigation resolved through a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's plea agreement and sentencing for an 18-month incarceration, reduced from a 'non-negoti... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Plaintiffs' motion to deny a protective order, which seeks to exclude Epstein from depositions, i... | Court proceedings | View |
| N/A | N/A | Minor girl (Jane Doe #5) was taken to Epstein's mansion on El Brillo Way for massages and/or sex ... | Epstein's mansion on El Bri... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein serving 12 months of house arrest at his Palm Beach home, with curfew, no unsupervised co... | Palm Beach home | View |
| N/A | N/A | District Court's findings and application of sentencing guidelines, including a four-level leader... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | 11-month investigation by Palm Beach police into Epstein paying underage girls for massages and s... | El Brillo Way home | View |
| N/A | N/A | State Attorney Barry Krischer declined to prosecute Epstein on unlawful sex acts with minors, ins... | N/A | 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 | Epstein's state plea hearing. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Menchel made substantive changes to Villafaña's draft letter concerning Epstein's plea deal, incl... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's plea deal (non-prosecution agreement) for two prostitution charges. | state court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein served 13 months in Palm Beach County jail with work release privileges. | Palm Beach County jail | View |
| N/A | N/A | FBI investigation into Epstein's international sex trafficking organization was quashed. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Relocation of victims from Palm Beach to other places in the U.S. (including Southern District of... | Palm Beach, other places in... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's attempt to get out of the NPA after it was signed. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00030392.jpg
This legal document, dated March 31, 2008, is a motion for a protective order filed by the law firm Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. on behalf of 'Witness Y. Doe'. The motion requests that the court order the witness's deposition for an unspecified criminal case and the civil case 'Jane Doe No. 3 v. Jeffrey Epstein' to be conducted simultaneously. The stated purpose is to prevent potential harassment of the witness by the defendant, Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00021102.jpg
This legal document argues that all remaining counts in a case must be dismissed because they fall within the scope of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) that binds the USAO-SDNY. The author contends the NPA's co-conspirator immunity is not limited to specific timeframes or offenses, citing a provision that allows the U.S. to prosecute Epstein for any federal offense upon a breach of the agreement as evidence of its broad scope. At a minimum, it is argued that Counts Three and Six must be dismissed as they fall within the NPA's scope as construed by the District Court.
DOJ-OGR-00021098.jpg
This legal document page describes the extensive, eight-month negotiation of Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) starting in January 2007, contrasting it with a potential plea agreement that was also drafted. It emphasizes the deep involvement of multiple levels of the U.S. government, including the Department of Justice, the USAO for the Southern District of Florida, the Office of the Deputy Attorney General, and the FBI, in the negotiation and approval process.
DOJ-OGR-00021097.jpg
This legal document, dated February 28, 2023, is a page from a court filing that argues about the scope of plea agreements. It discusses whether a plea agreement made with a U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) in one district can prevent prosecutions in other districts, citing several legal precedents like United States v. Alessi and United States v. Russo. The document uses Leslie Groff, an assistant to Epstein, as an example and analyzes factors such as whether other USAOs or the Department of Justice were involved in the negotiations.
DOJ-OGR-00021095.jpg
This legal document argues that a charge (Count Six) should be dismissed because the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY) is bound by a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). The author contends that the NPA shows an "affirmative appearance" of a broad restriction on prosecution for co-conspirators, contrasting it with the specifically limited non-prosecution provision for Epstein, which was restricted to "in this District."
DOJ-OGR-00021094.jpg
This legal document argues that the government is precluded from charging the Appellant under Count Six due to a prior Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). The argument is based on legal precedent against prosecuting the same crime in a new district and asserts that the charge, involving the trafficking of a witness named Carolyn, falls within the time period covered by the NPA. The document also references a court's finding that the NPA covers Maxwell's involvement in offenses committed by Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00021089.jpg
This page is from a legal filing (Case 22-1426, dated Feb 28, 2023) arguing that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) signed by Jeffrey Epstein should be interpreted under Eleventh Circuit law rather than Second Circuit law. The text asserts that under Eleventh Circuit precedent, the NPA's promise by 'the United States' not to prosecute Epstein's potential co-conspirators (specifically including the Defendant) is binding on all U.S. Attorneys' Offices and any ambiguity must be resolved against the government.
DOJ-OGR-00021087.jpg
This legal document is a page from a defendant's brief arguing that the court made an error. The defendant contends the court improperly applied the 'Annabi' rule from the Second Circuit to a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) that was negotiated in Florida, which falls under the Eleventh Circuit. The argument is that since the NPA was negotiated with Florida prosecutors in exchange for Epstein's guilty plea in a Florida state court, Eleventh Circuit law should apply instead.
DOJ-OGR-00021078.jpg
This legal document argues that the Appellant, identified as Maxwell, is a third-party beneficiary of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) related to Epstein and therefore has standing to enforce it. The brief contends that a District Court erred in its ruling that the NPA's immunity for co-conspirators only applied to the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL), arguing the agreement's plain text referring to "the United States" should bind all U.S. Attorney's Offices, including the one in the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY).
DOJ-OGR-00021075.jpg
This document is page 28 of a legal appellate brief filed on February 28, 2023, arguing that all counts against Ghislaine Maxwell should be dismissed based on the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between the Government and Jeffrey Epstein. It claims the NPA immunized Maxwell as a 'potential co-conspirator' and cites Supreme Court precedent requiring prosecutors to fulfill plea agreement promises. Additionally, the text argues jury prejudice occurred due to media interviews given by accusers named Carolyn and Kate.
DOJ-OGR-00021069.jpg
This legal document summarizes testimony from two witnesses, Kate and Annie Farmer, regarding their interactions with Maxwell and Epstein. Kate testified that Maxwell introduced her to Epstein, leading to sexual activity during massages, while Annie Farmer testified about being introduced to Epstein by her sister, being inappropriately touched by him, and later receiving a massage from Maxwell. The document concludes by noting a jury instruction that the physical contact described was not considered “illegal sexual activity” in the context of the indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00021040.jpg
This legal document is a judicial analysis regarding the sentencing of a defendant. The judge concludes that the evidence, including message pads, does not sufficiently prove the offense continued after November 1, 2004, and therefore the 2003 sentencing guidelines must apply instead of the 2004 guidelines. The judge then begins to address the defendant's objections to specific sentencing enhancements under the 2003 guidelines, confirming that the requirements for an enhancement under 4B1.5(b) have been met.
DOJ-OGR-00021039.jpg
This legal document, dated February 28, 2023, analyzes evidence to determine if a sex trafficking conspiracy involving Epstein continued into late 2004. It scrutinizes the testimony of a woman named Carolyn, detailing her visits to Epstein's house, phone calls she made to him in the summer of 2004, and her final visit in 2005 after she turned 18. The analysis suggests a lack of evidence for conspiratorial conduct in the specific period of November-December 2004.
DOJ-OGR-00021032.jpg
This court transcript excerpt discusses the roles and relationships of individuals involved in a scheme, specifically focusing on the defendant's leadership over Sarah Kellen and their shared association with Jeffrey Epstein and Maxwell. It highlights evidence from flight records showing the defendant and Sarah Kellen traveling on Epstein's private jet, indicating an overlap in their involvement as close associates in an ongoing scheme. The discussion also touches upon legal arguments regarding the supervision of criminal participants.
DOJ-OGR-00021031.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 28, 2023, in which an attorney, Ms. Moe, responds to a judge's question about the hierarchy of a criminal conspiracy. Ms. Moe argues that trial evidence shows the unnamed defendant held a leadership position superior to that of Sarah Kellen, who was an assistant to Ms. Maxwell and Epstein. The argument is based on the defendant's role shifting over time and Kellen taking on tasks like calling victims, placing the defendant higher in the scheme's structure.
DOJ-OGR-00021025.jpg
This legal document is a page from a court filing arguing against a defendant's claim of prejudice due to the death of potential witnesses. The prosecution contends that the defendant's assertions about what these witnesses (architects and a housekeeper) would have testified are speculative and unsubstantiated. It further argues that other witnesses, such as Juan Alessi, Larry Visoski, and David Rodgers, were available and did testify about similar matters, like renovations at Epstein's residences, meaning the information was obtainable through other means.
DOJ-OGR-00021023.jpg
This legal document is a court's analysis of a defendant's claim that missing evidence—such as financial records, phone records, and flight manifests—was prejudicial to her case. The court rejects this argument, stating the defendant failed to demonstrate what the absent documents would have shown or how they would have been beneficial, concluding the claims are purely speculative. The court notes that the missing evidence could just as easily have further substantiated the government's case.
DOJ-OGR-00021007.jpg
This document is page 24 of a court ruling (filed April 29, 2022) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (referred to as the Defendant). It addresses a defense motion regarding a 'constructive amendment,' specifically discussing whether the jury improperly convicted the Defendant based on intent for sexual activity in New Mexico (involving a victim named 'Jane') rather than New York, as charged in the indictment involving a scheme with Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00021004.jpg
This legal document is a court filing that denies a defendant's motions for acquittal and to vacate convictions related to the Mann Act. The court found sufficient evidence from witness testimonies (including from 'Carolyn', 'Annie', and 'Kate') to conclude that the defendant conspired with Epstein to transport minors to locations like New York, New Mexico, and the Caribbean for illegal sexual activity. The defendant's actions, such as paying for sexualized massages and inviting girls to travel, were considered part of this conspiracy, justifying the jury's conviction.
DOJ-OGR-00021003.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing dated April 29, 2022, outlines the court's conclusion that trial evidence supported a guilty verdict for the Defendant on Count Three, conspiracy to transport minors for illegal sexual activity. The document summarizes testimony from victims 'Jane' and 'Annie,' who described being groomed and taken on trips to New York and New Mexico by the Defendant and co-conspirator Epstein. The court found this and other evidence sufficient to prove the Defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
DOJ-OGR-00021002.jpg
This legal filing (page 19 of 45) details court testimony regarding 'Count Six' and 'Count Five' of sex trafficking charges against the Defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell). It summarizes victim Carolyn's testimony that the Defendant scheduled sexualized massages for Epstein, paid her, and touched her inappropriately while she was 14 years old. A footnote discusses corroborating evidence involving Virginia Roberts, Juan Alessi, and flight logs from December 2000.
DOJ-OGR-00021001.jpg
This legal document is a court's conclusion that sufficient evidence exists for a jury to find the Defendant guilty on counts of transporting a minor and sex trafficking. The conclusion is based on the testimony of a victim, "Jane," who stated the Defendant facilitated her travel with Jeffrey Epstein from Palm Beach to New York, assisted her in boarding flights, and was present during Epstein's sexual abuse of her when she was a minor.
DOJ-OGR-00020998.jpg
This legal document is a court filing that analyzes whether two criminal counts (Count Three and Count Five) are multiplicitous, meaning they charge the same crime. The court concludes that because the Government presented the case as a single, broad conspiracy involving the Defendant and Epstein, the counts are indeed multiplicitous. To avoid double jeopardy, the court rules that it will only impose judgment on one of the counts (Count Three).
DOJ-OGR-00020996.jpg
This legal document details how the Defendant and Epstein used financial gifts and payments as a grooming tactic to gain victims' trust and facilitate sexual abuse. It cites testimony from a victim named 'Jane' about receiving money and payments for lessons, and mentions promises made to another victim, 'Annie'. The document also discusses the geographic scope of the conspiracy, noting that sexual conduct occurred not only in New York and Florida but also in New Mexico and London, involving other victims like Carolyn and Virginia Roberts.
DOJ-OGR-00020992.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (likely an appeal brief) arguing that certain counts against the Defendant are 'multiplicitous' (charging the same offense multiple times). It cites legal precedents regarding conspiracy charges and argues that because the participants (specifically the Defendant and Epstein) and the objectives (acquiring underage girls for Epstein to abuse) overlapped substantially, the counts should be considered the same conspiracy. It explicitly describes the Defendant's role as procuring girls for Epstein.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | $0.00 | Epstein paid for a lot in Ghislaine Maxwell's l... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Unspecified recip... | $0.00 | Mention of a 'donation' Epstein had made on a d... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | underprivileged g... | $200.00 | Payment for massages | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | underprivileged g... | $300.00 | Payment for massages | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Defense Attorneys | $0.00 | Cost of Epstein's defense | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | victim | $300.00 | Payment for services (massage) | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Bill Richardson (... | $0.00 | Campaign donations from Epstein that Richardson... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | [REDACTED] | $350.00 | Payment for massage | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Harvard | $30,000,000.00 | Donation for a theoretical physics research cen... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | MD | $200.00 | Payment for providing a massage (first incident). | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | MD | $200.00 | Payment for providing a massage (second incident). | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Jane Doe #5 | $200.00 | Payment for giving a massage. | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | $0.00 | Epstein paid Ghislaine Maxwell millions and mil... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | The Defendant (Gh... | $10,000,000.00 | Bequest included in defendant's assets for dete... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Edwards' clients | $0.00 | Settlement amounts Epstein voluntarily agreed t... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Ms. Maxwell | $10,000,000.00 | Bequest listed as an asset | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Ms. Maxwell | $10,000,000.00 | Bequest from estate | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Interlochen Arts ... | $0.00 | Alleged payment for 'Jane'. The document text s... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | [REDACTED] | $300.00 | Payment for massage services | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Victims (implied) | $0.00 | Reference to 'Epstein's agreement... to provide... | View |
| N/A | Received | Edwards | Epstein | $0.00 | Epstein is attempting to force Edwards to pay '... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Unknown (Construc... | $0.00 | Purchase or construction of a cabin at Interloc... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | Interlochen School | $0.00 | Possible donation of the cabin to the school (w... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | the defendant | $0.00 | Receipt of funds mentioned in context of missin... | View |
| N/A | Paid | Epstein | victims | $0.00 | General reference to victims' right to seek dam... | View |
Future contact for work
Epstein told ML to leave her telephone number with his assistant so she could be contacted for work again.
Invitation to New Mexico
Epstein called Annie's mom to invite Annie to New Mexico, falsely claiming that 20 to 25 other girls and his wife, Ghislaine, would be there.
Instruction to write down contact information
After the alleged assault, Epstein told Jane Doe to write down her name and phone number.
No Subject
Message pads entered at trial show Carolyn called Epstein several times in the summer of 2004: once in late April or early May, again on July 6, and again on July 30.
No Subject
Message pads entered at trial show Carolyn called Epstein several times in the summer of 2004: once in late April or early May, again on July 6, and again on July 30.
Presence at New Mexico residence
Epstein consistently notified Detective Deborah Anaya, a New Mexico official, whenever he spent time at his residence in New Mexico.
Invitation to New Mexico
Epstein called Annie's mom to invite Annie to New Mexico, falsely claiming that 20 to 25 other girls and his wife, Ghislaine, would be there.
Arranging a trip
The speaker states that Epstein, not Ghislaine, called Annie's mom to arrange the trip.
Job offer
Epstein called Maria and offered her a job at his mansion in New York City.
Maria's artistic career
Burt Fields or Eileen Guggenheim spoke to Epstein about Maria to help advance her artistic career.
Future contact
If a girl had not been to his home before, Epstein asked for her phone number to contact her in the future.
Recruiting other girls
Epstein encouraged girls to find other girls interested in performing massages for him.
Ghislaine being there
Epstein called Annie's mom and talked to her about Ghislaine being present for a trip.
No Subject
Accusers offered to send photos to Epstein while he was in jail.
Contact Information
Before the witness left, Epstein asked her to leave her phone number.
General conversation
The witness, A. Farmer, testified that she spoke with Epstein by phone approximately two or three times after her trip to New York.
Firearms Simulator / Investigation Probe
Epstein asked if Palm Beach had bought the firearms simulator yet and offered funds to provide them.
Asking the time
At 0445 am, Epstein asked the time after using the bathroom.
Medication
At 7:15 AM, the log notes that Epstein asked the Lieutenant for his medication.
Shower
At 7:40 AM, Epstein asked for a shower.
Psychological evaluation
At 8:30 AM, an observer noted 'interviewed I/M Epstein for psychology'.
Request for Medication
At 7:15 AM, Epstein asked the L/T for his medication.
Request for Shower
At 7:40 AM, Epstein asked for a shower.
Psychological Evaluation
From 8:20 AM to 8:30 AM, an observer interviewed Epstein for psychology.
Asking the time
At 0430 am, the log notes Epstein woke at 0425 am to ask the time.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity