Kirkland & Ellis
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jay
|
Employment |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ADA from Vance's office
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Potential employment |
2
|
2 | |
|
person
Jay
|
Professional |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Acosta
|
Employment negotiation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Employment negotiation |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Bill Barr
|
Employment |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Potential employment |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | SORA (Sex Offender Registration Act) Hearing presided by Judge Pickholz. | New York State Court (implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Acosta began discussing possible employment with Kirkland & Ellis and recused himself. | USAO | View |
| 2009-01-01 | N/A | Bill Barr joined law firm Kirkland & Ellis. | N/A | View |
| 2008-11-26 | N/A | USAO advised Department of Justice about Acosta's recusal from Epstein-related matters due to pot... | N/A | View |
| 2008-11-26 | N/A | Acosta recused from Epstein case due to employment talks with Kirkland & Ellis. | USAO | View |
| 2008-06-20 | N/A | Delivery of messenger packet containing supplemental submissions and documentation binders to Joh... | Washington, D.C. | View |
| 2008-06-19 | N/A | Date of the letter requesting a 'de novo' review. | N/A | View |
| 2008-01-01 | N/A | Kirkland & Ellis represented Epstein during Florida investigation. | Florida | View |
| 2007-12-11 | N/A | Request for de novo review of evidence underlying proposed indictment. | Internal Office | View |
014.pdf
This document contains a 2019 SDNY Court Order from Judge Richard Berman docketing two exhibits discussed at a bail hearing. The first exhibit is a transcript of a January 18, 2011, SORA (Sex Offender Registration Act) hearing in New York State Court, where Epstein was classified as a Level 3 sex offender despite arguments from both the Defense and the Prosecution regarding the specifics of his Florida plea deal and the lack of other indictments. The second exhibit is a financial Asset Summary dated June 30, 2019, detailing Epstein's net worth of approximately $559 million, including cash, equities, hedge funds, and properties in New York, New Mexico, Florida, Paris, and the US Virgin Islands.
046.pdf
This document is a court order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, dated June 7, 2009, in the case of Jane Doe 101 vs. Jeffrey Epstein (Case No. 9:09-CV-80591-KAM). The order grants a motion for the limited appearance of attorney Jay P. Lefkowitz, P.C. to represent Jeffrey Epstein and authorizes him to receive electronic filing notifications at jay.lefkowitz@kirkland.com.
025-02.pdf
This document is a court order (specifically Document 25-2 entered on 05/21/2009) from the Southern District of Florida in the case of Jane Doe 101 vs. Jeffrey Epstein. The order grants Jay P. Lefkowitz, P.C. permission to appear and participate in the action on behalf of the defendant, Jeffrey Epstein, and authorizes the receipt of electronic filings at the email address jay.lefkowitz@kirkland.com. The document appears to be a proposed order as the judge's signature lines are blank.
EFTA00032918.pdf
This document is a 'Year in Review' email newsletter from Law360 dated December 26, 2019, summarizing major trends, mergers, and judicial confirmations in the legal industry. It includes extensive lists of law firms, companies, and government agencies mentioned in their reporting. The document appears in this collection likely due to the inclusion of the law firm 'Epstein Becker Green' in the list of law firms, which is a keyword match for 'Epstein' but unrelated to Jeffrey Epstein personally.
EFTA00032906.pdf
This document is an 'Access to Justice' email newsletter from Law360 dated April 20, 2020. It aggregates various legal news stories, primarily focused on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the justice system, including court closures, remote hearings, and bankruptcy issues. It is relevant to the Epstein files because it contains a summary of a recent Eleventh Circuit ruling that the Crime Victims' Rights Act protections do not arise until after a formal criminal charge is filed, which is described as a blow to Epstein's victims.
EFTA00032738.pdf
This document is a Law360 email newsletter from June 17, 2021, summarizing various legal news stories in New York. A key item reports that Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys complained to a judge about prison conditions, specifically alleging that feces rained down in her cell and guards listened to privileged conversations. Other stories cover Greenberg Traurig lobbying for a bill aiding a Russian oligarch, various financial settlements, and legal industry news.
EFTA00030281.pdf
This document is a Law360 New York email newsletter dated July 15, 2019. The top stories focus on Jeffrey Epstein's legal battles, specifically highlighting that potential child pornography found in his home could derail his bail bid, and federal allegations that he paid $350,000 to influence witnesses. The newsletter also covers various other legal developments involving SunEdison, L'Oreal, Donald Trump's financial subpoenas, and various corporate lawsuits.
EFTA00020787.pdf
This document is an email dated August 23, 2019, circulated within the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS), containing the full text of a New York Times article by Katie Benner. The article details Attorney General William Barr's reaction to Jeffrey Epstein's death in federal custody, describing his anger at the Bureau of Prisons' incompetence and his subsequent actions to overhaul BOP leadership, including transferring the warden and appointing Kathleen Hawk Sawyer. It highlights the political pressure on Barr, conspiracy theories surrounding the death, and the unresolved questions regarding the failure of prison protocols such as regular checks and cellmate assignment.
EFTA00018654.pdf
This document is a 'Law360 White Collar' email newsletter from December 5, 2018. It details various legal news stories, including Jeffrey Epstein settling a dispute with an attorney representing his victims to avoid trial testimony. Other stories cover Michael Flynn's cooperation with the Mueller investigation, the Panama Papers indictments, and various fraud and securities cases.
EFTA00018398.pdf
An email from July 9, 2019, sent by a Public Affairs officer at the U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY), circulating a CNBC article. The article details Attorney General Bill Barr's decision not to recuse himself from the 2019 federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, distinguishing this from his recusal regarding the internal review of the earlier non-prosecution deal overseen by Alex Acosta, due to Barr's past employment with Kirkland & Ellis.
EFTA00013632.pdf
This document is an email chain from December 2007 between likely government prosecutors or officials discussing the Jeffrey Epstein case. The conversation covers the selection of a 'Special Master' (discussing candidates 'Bert' and 'Mr. Ocariz'), communications with Epstein's defense attorney 'Jay' (Lefkowitz) and the firm Kirkland & Ellis. The emails also detail a request for a 'de novo review' of evidence for a proposed indictment, specifically asking for FBI '302s' and state Grand Jury transcripts.
EFTA00013543.pdf
This document is a chain of internal emails from December 2007, likely among prosecutors, discussing strategy in the Epstein case. Key topics include a request for a 'de novo review' of evidence (including FBI 302s and Grand Jury transcripts) following correspondence from Epstein's defense firm Kirkland & Ellis. The emails also discuss the selection process for a 'Special Master' or similar role, debating candidates named Bert and Mr. Ocariz, and mention drafting a letter to Jay Lefkowitz.
EFTA00013537.pdf
An email chain between prosecutors or DOJ officials dated December 11, 2007. The correspondence discusses a 'de novo review' of evidence for a proposed indictment against Jeffrey Epstein, triggered by correspondence from the law firm Kirkland & Ellis. The emails mention gathering FBI 302 reports, State Grand Jury transcripts, and audio/video tapes of interviews, as well as a draft letter to 'Jay' (likely Jay Lefkowitz).
EFTA00013536.pdf
This document is an internal Department of Justice email dated December 11, 2007, BCC'd to US Attorney Alex Acosta. The sender, whose name is redacted, initiates a 'de novo review' of the evidence supporting the proposed indictment against Jeffrey Epstein, specifically in response to recent correspondence from Epstein's defense firm, Kirkland & Ellis. The email requests copies of FBI interview reports (302s), state Grand Jury transcripts, and other investigative materials.
EFTA00009229.pdf
This document is a transcript of an interview conducted by the Department of Justice's Office of Professional Responsibility with R. Alexander Acosta on October 18, 2019. The interview focuses on Acosta's tenure as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida and his office's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, specifically the decision to enter into a non-prosecution agreement in 2007. The transcript details discussions regarding the intake of the case, the assessment of evidence and legal issues including the petite policy, management decisions, and interactions with defense counsel.
EFTA00009116.pdf
This document is a transcript of a deposition or interview with R. Alexander Acosta, conducted by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. The transcript covers discussions about the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), victim notification issues, internal Department of Justice communications, and interactions with Epstein's defense team, including Ken Starr and Jay Lefkowitz. Acosta defends his office's decisions, emphasizing the goal of securing sex offender registration and restitution, while addressing criticisms regarding the perceived leniency and lack of transparency with victims.
EFTA00009016.pdf
This document is a transcript of a deposition or interview with former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta regarding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein and the non-prosecution agreement (NPA). The questioning covers the rationale for the state plea deal, the 2-year sentence, the "petite policy" considerations, interactions with defense counsel including Ken Starr, and specific terms of the NPA such as immunity for co-conspirators.
DOJ-OGR-00023190.tif
This document details ethical considerations and actions taken by various individuals involved in the Epstein case, particularly focusing on potential conflicts of interest for USAO staff. It highlights discussions and decisions made by Menchel, Sloman, Lourie, and Acosta regarding their relationships with Epstein's attorneys and their professional responsibilities. The document also mentions Acosta's recusal from the case due to potential employment with Kirkland & Ellis and a separate consultation regarding a possible professorship at Harvard while Dershowitz represented Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00023153.tif
This document details events in November 2008 concerning Jeffrey Epstein's work release, which USAO official Villafaña believed breached his non-prosecution agreement (NPA). Villafaña communicated her concerns to defense attorney Black and other officials, leading to a notice of NPA violation and the recusal of Acosta from the case. The document highlights the ongoing dispute regarding the terms of Epstein's incarceration and the perceived special treatment he received.
DOJ-OGR-00023137.tif
This document details interactions between Jeffrey Epstein's defense team and the USAO in late 2007, focusing on submissions, a key meeting in Miami on December 14, 2007, and the defense's threat to pursue a Department of Justice review. The discussions revolved around defense complaints, a proposed revised indictment, and a new argument by Epstein's attorneys regarding the applicability of the state charge he agreed to plead guilty to. The document also highlights the USAO's internal review processes and Acosta's communication with Assistant Attorney General Fisher regarding the case.
DOJ-OGR-00000548.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on July 24, 2019, in Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. The presiding judge discusses a previous SORA (Sex Offender Registration Act) hearing where Judge Pickholz was reportedly 'taken aback' because the defense (Kirkland & Ellis) and the prosecution (ADA from Vance's office) unusually joined together to argue for lowering the defendant's sex offender classification from level 3 to level 1, contrary to the state board's recommendation.
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-00021352.jpg
This document is a page from a DOJ OPR report analyzing potential conflicts of interest within the USAO regarding the Epstein case. It details interviews with officials Menchel, Sloman, Lourie, and Acosta, concluding that personal relationships with defense attorneys did not improperly influence the case. The text highlights Acosta's eventual recusal in late 2008 due to employment talks with Kirkland & Ellis, and a separate inquiry regarding his potential role at Harvard Law School given Alan Dershowitz's involvement.
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-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.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity