Nygard
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Doe No. 1
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Prince Andrew
|
Investigation subject |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-08-20 | Legal decision | A decision was made in the case Doe on behalf of Doe No. 1 v. Nygard. | S.D.N.Y. | View |
EFTA00037454.pdf
This document is a chain of internal emails from April 2020 discussing a Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT) request sent to the UK Home Office regarding Prince Andrew ('Material Witness PA') in connection with the Jeffrey Epstein and Peter Nygard investigations. The correspondence reveals internal communication gaps, as a high-ranking official complains about being unaware of the request and consequently giving incorrect information to the 'front office.' The emails also discuss a strategy of withholding public announcements until the witness declines a voluntary interview.
EFTA00032897.pdf
An email chain between redacted USANYS officials from February 11, 2021, discussing media inquiries (specifically from Bloomberg) regarding a Law360 article titled '3 Names To Watch As Biden Mulls Next SDNY Top Prosecutor'. The forwarded article discusses potential successors to U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss, explicitly mentioning her office's prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell as a significant recent high-profile case. The article profiles candidates Damian Williams, Katherine Goldstein, and Anjan Sahni.
EFTA00032872.pdf
This document is an email chain between USANYS employees discussing and forwarding a Law360 article dated February 10, 2021. The article discusses the Biden administration's process for selecting the next U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, mentioning current U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss's high-profile cases against Ghislaine Maxwell and Peter Nygard. The email correspondence also notes that Bloomberg has been making inquiries to the USANYS staff regarding this topic.
DOJ-OGR-00005400.jpg
This legal document argues that there is no absolute right for an accused person to know a witness's true name and address, citing various legal precedents and the Crime Victims' Rights Act. It emphasizes the strong public interest in protecting the identities of victims, particularly in sex abuse cases, to ensure their dignity, privacy, and safety, and to encourage future victims to report crimes. The document provides multiple examples of cases where courts have permitted victims, including minors, to testify using pseudonyms or partial names.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity