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 | Acosta's decision to employ Petite policy analysis in Epstein's case, aiming to avert a 'manifest... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dobbs massaging Epstein | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Employee worked for Epstein at East 71st Street residence. | New York residence at East ... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Negotiation of an agreement allowing Epstein to resolve federal investigation in return for an 18... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Grooming and abuse | Unspecified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Review of video disks extracted by PBSO Computer Crime Unit showing Epstein, Sarah Kellen, Nadia ... | Epstein's Office (on video) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein agreed to plead guilty in Florida state court to soliciting minors for prostitution and s... | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | U.S. Attorney's Office agreed not to charge Epstein with federal crimes and not to bring criminal... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | The last call made by Epstein. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Broader investigation into Epstein's sexual abuse of minors, covering periods beyond the Indictment. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Agreement for deferred prosecution of Epstein in the Southern District of Florida, contingent on ... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Investigation of Epstein's offenses and background by State and Federal law enforcement agencies. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Potential initiation of prosecution for Epstein if he violates agreement conditions, within 60 da... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of charges against Epstein if all terms and conditions of the agreement are fulfilled, ... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Local teenaged females visiting Epstein's residence | Palm Beach, Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's plea hearing in state court. | courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Virginia's first encounter with Epstein, involving a massage in a bedroom. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Virginia being 'trained' to entertain Epstein's friends. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Young females traveling on private aircraft | Private Aircraft | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein calling Virginia at her Palm Beach apartment to arrange for her to fly to his island. | Palm Beach apartment | View |
| N/A | N/A | Virginia being sent to meet men on Epstein's private island in the Caribbean or his ranch in New ... | Caribbean private island, N... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sexual assault/misconduct incident where Epstein masturbated during a massage by YL. | Epstein's House | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein pleading guilty to protect associates from federal prosecution, effectively closing the f... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Proposal for Epstein to serve 15 months. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Decision to allow Epstein to plead to one of three charges and reduce sentencing from two years t... | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00022101.jpg
This document is page 5 of a court order filed on June 9, 2020, in Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT. It discusses legal precedents regarding 'joint investigations' and discovery obligations (Brady/Giglio/Rule 16). Specifically, it addresses a request by defendant Thomas for the disclosure of materials from the DOJ Office of the Inspector General (OIG) investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's death, noting that the Government concedes OIG attorneys participated in the investigation leading to Thomas's indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00022086.jpg
This legal document is a filing by the Government arguing against a discovery request from a defendant named Thomas. The Government contends that it is not required to produce records from the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) because the BOP was not part of the prosecution team or involved in a 'joint investigation'. The document distinguishes the roles of the prosecution (U.S. Attorney's Office, FBI, DOJ-OIG) from the BOP, noting the Government obtained BOP records via subpoena and was not involved in the BOP's internal investigation into Epstein's suicide.
DOJ-OGR-00022076.jpg
This legal document is a filing by the Government arguing that it has fulfilled its discovery obligations under Brady, Giglio, and Rule 16. The Government details the materials it has produced, including records surrounding Epstein's suicide and employee files for Noel and Thomas, and cites legal precedents from the Southern District of New York to support its position that the defendant's motion to compel further discovery should be denied.
DOJ-OGR-00022053.jpg
This document, a printout of a news article dated March 31, 2020, discusses the circumstances surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's death in the Manhattan Correctional Center, including a DOJ investigation. It details the unsealing of court records from a lawsuit by accuser Virginia Giuffre against Ghislaine Maxwell, which contained allegations against several high-profile individuals. The article also revisits the controversial 2008 'sweetheart' plea deal Epstein received from former U.S. attorney Alex Acosta in Florida.
DOJ-OGR-00021920.jpg
This document is page 13 of a legal indictment filed on November 19, 2019. It states that Epstein's death was ruled a suicide by the NYC Medical Examiner's Office. The main content is Count One of the indictment, which charges defendants Tova Noel and Michael Thomas with conspiracy in August 2019 to defraud the United States by impairing the functions of the MCC and making false statements to obstruct an investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00021918.jpg
This legal document alleges that correctional officers Tova Noel and Michael Thomas failed to perform their required duties during an overnight shift in the Special Housing Unit (SHU). Instead of conducting mandatory 30-minute rounds, they allegedly slept, browsed the internet for personal reasons, and falsified over 75 log entries to state the rounds had been completed. The document notes their desk was approximately 15 feet from Epstein's cell and that they were visited by a supervisor around 4 a.m.
DOJ-OGR-00021914.jpg
This legal document details the circumstances of inmate Epstein's housing at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) leading up to August 9-10, 2019. It notes his transfer to the Special Housing Unit (SHU) on July 30, 2019, with a requirement for a cellmate, a directive that was not followed after his cellmate was transferred out on August 9. The document identifies defendant TOVA NOEL and another officer, 'Officer-1', as being on duty in the SHU during the evening and night of August 9.
DOJ-OGR-00021901.jpg
This legal document, page 24 of a court filing dated December 2, 2024, discusses the legal standards for reviewing a court sentence for procedural and substantive reasonableness. It specifically addresses a finding by the District Court that Maxwell supervised her assistant, Sarah Kellen, which was based on testimony from two of Epstein's pilots. This testimony was deemed credible and corroborated by other testimony describing Maxwell as Epstein's 'number two and the lady of the house' in Palm Beach.
DOJ-OGR-00021900.jpg
This legal document page addresses two arguments from the defendant, Maxwell. First, it refutes her claim of 'substantial prejudice' from evidence of her conduct in New Mexico, noting she received the evidence weeks before trial. Second, it introduces Maxwell's argument that her sentence was procedurally unreasonable due to a leadership enhancement, an argument the court states it will disagree with.
DOJ-OGR-00021889.jpg
This legal document page discusses the jurisdictional limits of U.S. Attorneys' offices in the context of Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It states that the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY) was not notified of the NPA made by the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL), and that the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division denied any involvement. The text argues, based on the Judiciary Act of 1789, that a U.S. Attorney's authority is confined to their specific district and does not bind other districts.
DOJ-OGR-00021883.jpg
This page discusses the legal proceedings involving Epstein and Maxwell, detailing Epstein's plea agreement and the non-prosecution agreement (NPA) protecting his co-conspirators. It outlines the indictment against Maxwell, which included eight counts, and provides footnotes referencing specific Florida statutes and federal charges related to sex trafficking and conspiracy.
DOJ-OGR-00021873.jpg
This document is a legal opinion from an appellate court, filed on October 20, 2022, which summarizes its reasons for affirming a lower District Court's judgment of conviction against Maxwell. The court found no error in the lower court's rulings, including that Epstein's non-prosecution agreement did not prevent Maxwell's prosecution and that her conviction and sentence were sound.
DOJ-OGR-00021871.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing, discusses the standards for reviewing a sentence for procedural and substantive reasonableness. It specifically addresses a sentencing enhancement for Maxwell, arguing that the District Court correctly found she had a leadership role based on testimony from two of Epstein's pilots. The pilots testified that Sarah Kellen was Maxwell's assistant, which was corroborated by other testimony describing Maxwell as Epstein's "number two and the lady of the house" in Palm Beach.
DOJ-OGR-00021859.jpg
This document excerpt discusses the jurisdictional scope of a U.S. Attorney's office, questioning whether the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) made with Epstein by the USAO-SDFL could bind other districts like the USAO-SDNY. It references the Judiciary Act of 1789 to argue that a U.S. Attorney's authority is limited to their specific district. The document also notes that the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division denied any role in reviewing or approving Epstein's NPA.
DOJ-OGR-00021856.jpg
This legal document is a court opinion regarding an appeal by Maxwell. The court affirms a lower District Court's decision, ruling that a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL) does not prevent the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY) from prosecuting Maxwell. The court holds that such agreements are generally limited to the specific district in which they are made.
DOJ-OGR-00021853.jpg
This legal document page outlines the terms of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Epstein, in which the United States agreed not to prosecute potential co-conspirators, specifically naming Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Lesley Groff, and Nadia Marcinkova. The document then introduces the indictment against Maxwell, detailing the multiple federal charges she faced, including conspiracy, enticement of a minor, and sex trafficking.
DOJ-OGR-00021836.jpg
This legal document, dated November 1, 2024, presents an argument for an en banc review to potentially overrule or limit the 'Annabi' canon of construction for plea agreements. The text discusses the jurisdictional authority of U.S. Attorneys' offices, citing the U.S. Attorneys' Manual and the Judiciary Act of 1789 to argue about the scope of immunity and the government's obligation to be explicit about its limitations. The argument is framed in the context of a past case involving interviews with Epstein's lawyers.
DOJ-OGR-00021833.jpg
This legal document page outlines the timeline of legal actions involving Epstein and Maxwell following Epstein's 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It details Epstein's 2019 indictment and death, followed by Maxwell's indictment and a subsequent superseding indictment by the SDNY in 2021. The core of the text describes Maxwell's unsuccessful motion to dismiss her indictment by leveraging the language of Epstein's NPA, a motion which the District Court denied.
DOJ-OGR-00021820.jpg
This document is a legal ruling from an appellate court, dated September 17, 2024, which affirms the conviction of Maxwell. The court rejects several grounds for appeal, including that Epstein's prior non-prosecution agreement should have barred her prosecution and that her indictment was outside the statute of limitations. The ruling upholds the District Court's judgment of conviction from June 29, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00021817.jpg
This legal document, part of an appeal, addresses Ghislaine Maxwell's claims that her trial was unfair and her sentence unreasonable. The court rejects her argument that evidence of her conduct in New Mexico was prejudicial, noting the evidence was disclosed weeks before trial. The document also affirms that her 240-month sentence, which included a leadership enhancement, was procedurally reasonable.
DOJ-OGR-00021805.jpg
This page from a legal filing argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Epstein was strictly limited in scope to the Southern District of Florida. It cites the agreement's text, the negotiation history, and the U.S. Attorney's Manual to support the claim that the NPA was not intended to bind other districts from prosecuting Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00021804.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) made with Epstein does not prevent the prosecution of Maxwell by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY). The document asserts that the NPA's scope was explicitly limited to the Southern District of Florida and did not bind other districts. It cites legal precedents, such as United States v. Annabi, to support the conclusion that Maxwell's prosecution can proceed.
DOJ-OGR-00021803.jpg
This document is a page from a court opinion regarding Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal. The court addresses Maxwell's argument that a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between Jeffrey Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL) immunized her from prosecution. The court rejects this claim, holding that the NPA made by the Florida office does not legally bind the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY), which brought the charges against her.
DOJ-OGR-00021775.jpg
This legal document, part of an appeal for Ms. Maxwell, argues that there is insufficient evidence to prove she supervised Sarah Kellen in any criminal capacity. It cites testimony from witnesses Kimberly Espinoza and Carolyn, who state that Kellen's employment with Epstein began after Maxwell and Epstein had already separated. The document concludes by requesting that Ms. Maxwell's convictions be reversed or the case be remanded to the District Court.
DOJ-OGR-00021769.jpg
This legal document argues that the defendant, Maxwell, was denied a fair trial because the court failed to explore potential bias in a seated juror (Juror 50). The filing draws an analogy to the case of Nieves, asserting that the court's refusal to investigate the juror's background related to child sexual abuse—a central theme in Maxwell's case due to her association with Epstein—deprived the defense of the opportunity to challenge the juror for cause. The document contends this failure is particularly significant given the pervasive community bias against those accused of sex trafficking.
| 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 |
Complaint
Epstein filed a complaint which Edwards alleges was done without probable cause for the purpose of extortion.
Decision not to prosecute
Epstein personally met with Capt. Elmer Gudger and advised him that he no longer wished to prosecute Juan Alessi for burglary and theft.
Recruitment
Epstein told Dobbs 'You can bring girls.'
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.
Recruiting other girls
Epstein encouraged girls to find other girls interested in performing massages for him.
Socializing
Copperfield called Epstein frequently and left messages indicating they socialized together.
No Subject
Email communication regarding Eva being in Paris and flying back, suggesting a close relationship with Epstein.
Job offer
Epstein called Maria and offered her a job at his mansion in New York City.
Future contact
If a girl had not been to his home before, Epstein asked for her phone number to contact her in the future.
Maria's artistic career
Burt Fields or Eileen Guggenheim spoke to Epstein about Maria to help advance her artistic career.
Important Message
A message from 'Epstein' for Vanessa Grigoriadis of NY Magazine, to be delivered at 5:10 P.M. The message itself is simply 'Epstein'.
Unwanted touching
During the second massage, JS told Epstein she didn't want to be touched after he attempted to touch her breasts.
No Subject
A shipment from Epstein’s address in New York to Minor Victim-4, reflected in Federal Express records.
No Subject
A shipment from Epstein’s address in New York to Minor Victim-4, reflected in Federal Express records.
No Subject
A photograph was sent to Epstein with a note saying 'Thanks for rocking my world'.
Unknown
Epstein was on the phone at the beginning of the massage session with ML.
Future contact for work
Epstein told ML to leave her telephone number with his assistant so she could be contacted for work again.
Second thoughts about public figure status
Epstein called Carter to say he was having second thoughts about being a public figure.
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.
Ongoing communication
The witness, Kate, describes her communications with Epstein during her twenties and early thirties as having a 'friendly' tone. She continued communicating because she did not want to admit what had happened to her and was fearful of disengaging.
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.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity