DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Federal Bureau of Investigation
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Loftus
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Loftus
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Attorney General
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
BOP
|
Organizational |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeff Sessions
|
Leadership |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
OLC
|
Advisory |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Andrew FINKELMAN
|
Liaison |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Cassell (Author)
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Attorney General
|
Authority |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
[Redacted Traveler]
|
Employee |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler P.A.
|
Investigator |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
D. JOHN SAUER
|
Employee |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
SSA [Redacted]
|
Liaison |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
United States Attorney's office
|
Limits plea agreements to |
1
|
1 | |
|
location
USANYS
|
Professional investigative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
John Ashcroft
|
Leadership |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Southern District of Florida
|
Collaboration |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
NPA (Non-Prosecution Agreement)
|
Non involvement |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Andrew FINKELMAN
|
Professional liaison |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Lyeson Daniel
|
Employment alleged |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
William Barr
|
Professional |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Southern District of New York
|
Institutional independence |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Redacted Traveler
|
Employee |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Interview | The subject must agree to meet with and be interviewed by the USAO-SDNY, the Federal Bureau of In... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Consultation | Dr. Loftus consulted with various government agencies involved in the case. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Search warrants served on RRA offices; 40+ boxes obtained by DOJ | RRA Offices | View |
| N/A | N/A | Negotiation of the NPA (Non-Prosecution Agreement) | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Department of Justice seized 40+ boxes of documents from RRA offices | RRA Offices | View |
| N/A | Investigation | Investigative work conducted by the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Department of Justice sequestered about 13 boxes of documents related to the Epstein case from RR... | RRA Offices | View |
| N/A | Investigation | Investigative work conducted into the crimes of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Consultation | Witness Loftus consulted with various government agencies at different points in their career. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discussion of the Department of Justice's practice of limiting plea agreements to specific USAOs ... | N/A | View |
| 2025-07-25 | Legal notice | The Department of Justice sent a notice advising that the Court was seeking letters from victims ... | N/A | View |
| 2025-07-18 | Legal filing | The Department of Justice filed a motion to unseal grand jury transcripts in the case against Ghi... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2025-07-18 | N/A | Filing of United States' Motion to Unseal Grand Jury Transcripts | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2025-07-06 | Memorandum issuance | The [DOJ] and [FBI] issued a memorandum describing a review of investigative holdings relating to... | N/A | View |
| 2025-07-06 | N/A | Issuance of Memorandum regarding Epstein investigation review | Unknown | View |
| 2025-07-06 | Publication | The Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation issued a memorandum about their inv... | N/A | View |
| 2021-07-02 | N/A | Anticipated production of Epstein FOIA documents to The Times. | New York | View |
| 2021-04-16 | Legal filing | Filing of Document 204 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| 2020-01-01 | N/A | Release of OPR investigation report concerning Epstein investigation | Washington D.C. (implied) | View |
| 2020-01-01 | N/A | Release of DOJ OPR report on Epstein investigation. | Washington D.C. | View |
| 2019-08-14 | N/A | Legal hold distributed by counsel regarding inmate death. | N/A | View |
| 2019-03-05 | N/A | Just days before a Friday deadline, the Justice Department reassigned the Epstein victims' rights... | Atlanta | View |
| 2018-05-10 | N/A | Department of Justice agreed to brief House Intelligence Committee members. | Washington D.C. | View |
| 2018-01-01 | Publication revision | The U.S. Attorneys’ Manual (USAM) was revised and renamed the Justice Manual. | N/A | View |
| 2017-07-26 | Document production | This document is page 1 of a 95-page set produced in response to Public Records Request No. 17-295. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00010623.jpg
This document is page 32 of 68 from a court filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on June 24, 2022. The entire content of the page has been redacted, leaving only the header and the DOJ Bates number DOJ-OGR-00010623 visible.
DOJ-OGR-00010620.jpg
This document is page 29 of 68 from a court filing dated June 24, 2022, associated with Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The entire content of the page is redacted, leaving only the header and the DOJ footer stamp visible.
DOJ-OGR-00010616.jpg
This is the second page of a two-page legal document, part of a court filing (Document 672) in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on June 24, 2022. The document is from the law firm BSF and signed by Sigrid S. McCawley, but its substantive content is redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00010527.jpg
This document is page 2 of a court order from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on June 21, 2022. It establishes deadlines for filing objections and non-objected statements on June 24, 2022. Crucially, it orders the Government to confirm by noon on June 22, 2022, that victims have been notified of their rights under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA).
DOJ-OGR-00010515.jpg
This document is a cover page for 'Exhibit J' from a legal filing. It is page 69 of 77 of Document 663, filed on June 15, 2022, in case number 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The Bates number in the footer indicates it is a Department of Justice document.
DOJ-OGR-00010510.jpg
This document is a character reference letter written by Harriett Jagger to Judge Alison J. Nathan on May 5, 2022, in support of Ghislaine Maxwell. Jagger describes a 45-year friendship beginning at school when they were 15, characterizing Maxwell as kind, engaging, and supportive during Jagger's personal hardships, such as a marital separation. Despite acknowledging Maxwell's conviction, Jagger affirms her unchanged support and regular correspondence with Maxwell during her imprisonment.
DOJ-OGR-00010474.jpg
This document is page 28 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated June 15, 2022, arguing that Ghislaine Maxwell's pre-sentence detention conditions were discriminatory and harmful to her mental health. The text details symptoms of depression and trauma allegedly caused by confinement and claims that an MDC psychologist was overruled by directives from Washington, D.C. regarding placing Maxwell on suicide watch despite a lack of suicidal indicators. It also notes her isolation due to COVID restrictions and reliance on prison staff for information.
DOJ-OGR-00010466.jpg
This is page 20 of a defense sentencing memorandum filed on June 15, 2022, for Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues against the Probation Office's recommendation for a harsh sentence based on 'general deterrence,' claiming that sexual predators are rarely deterred and that deterring the wealthy is too broad a justification. The defense explicitly states that Jeffrey Epstein was the 'main offender' and requests a 'significantly below-guidelines sentence' for Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00010417.jpg
This document is the final signature page (page 2 of 2) of a court filing submitted on May 11, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It is submitted by United States Attorney Damian Williams and signed by Assistant United States Attorneys Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach from the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00010407.jpg
This document is page 41 of a legal filing (Doc 657) from April 2022 in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330). The court is rejecting the Defendant's arguments that pre-indictment delay caused a prejudicial loss of evidence, specifically noting the Defendant failed to explain the loss of government property records, proof of Epstein's residency, or flight manifests delivered by pilot Larry Visoski to Epstein's New York office. The court also dismisses arguments regarding deceased potential witnesses as vague assertions.
DOJ-OGR-00010383.jpg
This document is page 17 of a court order filed on April 29, 2022, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court is denying the Defendant's Rule 29 motion for acquittal regarding Counts Three, Four, and Six, noting that Counts One and Five were deemed multiplicitous and the jury found her not guilty on Count Two. The page specifically details the elements of Count Four, which involves the interstate transportation of a minor ('Jane') for illegal sexual activity between 1994 and 1997.
DOJ-OGR-00010382.jpg
This document is page 16 of a court order filed on April 29, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The page details the Court's denial of the Defendant's Rule 29 motion for a judgment of acquittal, citing various legal precedents regarding the sufficiency of evidence required to sustain a conviction. The text outlines the legal standard that evidence must be viewed in the light most favorable to the government.
DOJ-OGR-00010376.jpg
This page from a court order in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330) analyzes 'Korfant factors' to determine if separate conspiracy counts constitute double jeopardy. The court discusses Sarah Kellen's role, noting she was involved in the Count Five conspiracy (2001-2004) but received little attention during the trial compared to other conspirators. The document also highlights the complete temporal overlap between Count Five and Count Three (1994-2004) and the similarity of operations regarding the grooming and sexual abuse of minors.
DOJ-OGR-00010371.jpg
This document is page 5 of a court filing from April 29, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The text outlines applicable law regarding the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, specifically discussing 'multiplicity' in indictments and how to determine if conspiracy charges involve the same agreement. It cites various legal precedents including Brown v. Ohio, United States v. Jones, and a previous ruling in the Maxwell case itself.
DOJ-OGR-00010365.jpg
This is page 2 of a legal document filed on April 25, 2022, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The document, submitted by United States Attorney Damian Williams and his assistants for the Southern District of New York, states that the Probation Office has no objection to advancing a deadline to June 14, 2022, provided that the parties submit comments on the draft Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) by June 1, 2022. Defense Counsel was copied on the filing.
DOJ-OGR-00010355.jpg
This document is page 32 of a court order filed on April 1, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text discusses the legal standard for 'implied bias' in jurors, specifically rejecting the argument that a juror must be presumed biased solely because they have personal experiences similar to the issues litigated at trial (referencing sexual abuse, though the specific nature is implied by the case context). The court cites Second Circuit precedents (Torres, Brown, Garcia) to support the ruling that implied bias is an 'intentionally narrow category.'
DOJ-OGR-00010352.jpg
This document is page 29 of a court order filed on April 1, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text addresses the controversy surrounding 'Juror 50,' who failed to disclose his history of sexual abuse during jury selection. The Court argues that even if the abuse had been disclosed, it would not have been grounds for a 'for-cause' challenge, provided the juror could remain impartial. The document emphasizes that victims of crimes (like fraud or murder) are not automatically disqualified from serving on juries for similar cases. A footnote details statistics regarding prospective jurors who answered 'yes' to Question 48 about abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00010343.jpg
This document is page 20 of a court order filed on April 1, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text details the Court's analysis of 'Juror 50,' specifically addressing whether the juror deliberately concealed a history of sexual abuse by a stepbrother when answering questionnaire questions 48 and 49. The Court concludes that the juror's inconsistent answers were due to skimming the questionnaire and a personal definition of 'family' that excluded the stepbrother, ultimately finding the juror's explanations reasonable and credible.
DOJ-OGR-00010337.jpg
This document is page 14 of a court filing (Document 653) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on April 1, 2022. It outlines the legal standards for a 'McDonough inquiry' regarding potential juror misconduct, specifically discussing whether a juror deliberately concealed truth during voir dire. The text cites Federal Rule of Evidence 606(b)(1), emphasizing that jurors generally cannot testify about deliberations to impeach a verdict.
DOJ-OGR-00010335.jpg
This document is page 12 of a court filing (Document 653) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated April 1, 2022. It outlines the legal standards for granting a new trial under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33, specifically addressing juror nondisclosure during voir dire. The text cites the 'McDonough' standard, stating that a defendant must prove a juror failed to answer a material question honestly and that a correct answer would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause.
DOJ-OGR-00010323.jpg
This is the second page of a legal filing (Document 652) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on April 1, 2022. The document is an opposition by the US Government to a motion for a stay, arguing it is based only on the defendant's conjecture. It is signed by US Attorney Damian Williams and Assistant US Attorneys Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach.
DOJ-OGR-00010270.jpg
This document is page 4 of a 24-page legal filing, specifically Document 647 in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on March 11, 2022. The page appears to be part of a table of authorities, listing Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure 33 and 29. A Bates number in the footer, DOJ-OGR-00010270, suggests the document originated from or was processed by the Department of Justice.
DOJ-OGR-00010204.jpg
This document is the cover page for an Amended Sentencing Memorandum filed on March 18, 2013, by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York (Preet Bharara) regarding defendant David Parse. The case (S3 09 Cr. 581) involves multiple defendants including Paul Daugerdas, Donna Guerin, and Denis Field. The document also bears markings indicating it was later filed as Exhibit A-6074 in a 2020 civil case (1:20-cv-00338-AJN) on August 24, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00010157.jpg
This page is a placeholder within a larger court filing (Case 1:20-cv-00333-DAB), indicating that pages A-5874 through A-5902 have been intentionally left blank. The document bears the Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00010157.
DOJ-OGR-00010151.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a Curriculum Vitae or bibliography for Stephen Gillers, filed as an exhibit in a legal case (Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP). It lists publications authored by Gillers between February 1999 and April 2000, covering topics such as legal ethics, impeachment, Kenneth Starr, and professional responsibility. The document was produced by the DOJ (DOJ-OGR-00010151) and contains headers indicating it was filed in 2012 and re-filed in a 2020 case.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity