Southern District
LocationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Eastern District
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Main Justice
|
Co negotiators |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Investigation | A criminal investigation into Epstein's co-conspirators by the Southern District. | Southern District | View |
| N/A | N/A | Negotiations with Main Justice and Southern District | Unknown | View |
DOJ-OGR-00000703.jpg
This document is a victim impact statement from 'Jane Doe 7' filed on September 3, 2019, addressed to Judge Richard M. Berman. The victim describes being unknowingly recruited by an agent and subsequently sexually assaulted by Jeffrey Epstein at his New York City mansion. She details the severe psychological aftermath, including becoming a recluse, suffering from shame and guilt, and struggling with suicidal thoughts.
DOJ-OGR-00000693.jpg
This document is a court transcript from September 3, 2019, featuring a victim impact statement from an unnamed speaker. The speaker describes her trauma and calls for Ghislaine Maxwell and Sarah Kellen to be held accountable for their roles in helping 'Jeffrey' (implied Epstein) perpetuate a system of abuse. The transcript concludes with Ms. McCawley introducing her client, Virginia Roberts Giuffre, as the next speaker.
DOJ-OGR-00000684.jpg
This document is a court transcript from September 3, 2019, containing a victim impact statement from Anouska De Georgiou. She recounts being introduced to Jeffrey Epstein as a hopeful teenager and subsequently being manipulated, coerced, and sexually abused by him for years. De Georgiou describes the lasting damage to her life and ability to form relationships, and expresses solidarity with all of Epstein's other victims.
DOJ-OGR-00000668.jpg
This document is page 30 of a court transcript from September 3, 2019, regarding Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (United States v. Jeffrey Epstein). Attorney Mr. Edwards addresses the court regarding his clients (victims) who wish to speak, establishing protocols for those who wish to remain anonymous ('Jane Doe'). Edwards also acknowledges presentations made by attorneys Weingarten and Weinberg, expressing professional respect for Weinberg despite the adversarial nature of the case, and references the 'tragic ending' (Epstein's death) in relation to potential civil rights violations.
DOJ-OGR-00000657.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated September 3, 2019. It captures a dialogue between a judge and an attorney, Mr. Weingarten, regarding the government's motion to dismiss an indictment. Mr. Weingarten clarifies that while his clients want the court to investigate the underlying events, they ultimately support the motion to dismiss the indictment itself.
DOJ-OGR-00000656.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding where an unnamed speaker argues for the court's supervision of an investigation into components of the Department of Justice. The speaker highlights the 'dreadful' and 'disgraceful' conditions of the local jail where Jeffrey Epstein was held, claiming they are worse than at Guantanamo. The core argument is that court oversight is necessary to maintain public confidence in the justice system and to uncover the truth about the situation.
DOJ-OGR-00000650.jpg
This document is a court transcript from September 3, 2019, in which a representative for the government addresses the court regarding the victims in the case. The speaker confirms that efforts were made to notify all known victims of the proceeding, in compliance with the Crimes Victims' Rights Act, and notes that both the U.S. Attorney's office and the FBI have been in contact with them. The government also commits to continuing to provide services to the victims even if the indictment is dismissed.
DOJ-OGR-00000640.jpg
This document is page 2 of a court transcript from a case filed on September 3, 2019 (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). It records the opening of the proceeding where the Judge asks for introductions. Government attorneys Maureen Comey and Alison Moe introduce themselves, noting the presence of FBI Special Agent Amanda Young and NYPD Detective Paul Byrne, while defense attorneys Reid Weingarten, Martin Weinberg, and Michael Miller (of Steptoe & Johnson) introduce themselves.
DOJ-OGR-00000617.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (the federal case against Jeffrey Epstein), filed on August 6, 2019. The transcript records a discussion between the Judge ('The Court') and defense attorney Mr. Weinberg regarding the scheduling of the trial. They agree to target September 2020 for the trial date, as Mr. Weinberg argues that 13 months is necessary to prepare for a case of this 'magnitude and scope.'
DOJ-OGR-00000616.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a court hearing on August 6, 2019, where Epstein's lawyer, Mr. Weinberg, requests a trial date of Labor Day 2020. Weinberg cites the need to review over a million pages of discovery and address complex constitutional issues related to Epstein's previous Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and double jeopardy protections. The text also notes Epstein's incarceration at the MCC and the defense's intent to file early motions to dismiss based on the NPA.
DOJ-OGR-00000614.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding filed on August 6, 2019. In it, a representative for the government, Ms. Moe, proposes a detailed schedule to the court for the defense to file discovery-related and pretrial motions, with corresponding deadlines for the government's responses. Ms. Moe concludes by requesting that the court schedule a trial for June of the following year.
DOJ-OGR-00000609.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 26, 2019, from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. The judge tentatively schedules a conference for the parties on July 31st and grants a motion from the government, represented by Ms. Moe, to exclude the intervening time under the Speedy Trial Act. The judge justifies the exclusion as necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice and ensure effective legal representation for all parties.
DOJ-OGR-00000606.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 26, 2019, in which a judge orally delivers a ruling concerning Mr. Epstein. The judge denies the defense's application for pretrial release and grants the government's application for continued remand, meaning Mr. Epstein will remain in custody. The judge states that a full written opinion will follow, which will address issues such as dangerousness, risk of flight, and the proposed bail package.
DOJ-OGR-00000580.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript dated July 24, 2019, detailing a discussion between a judge and several lawyers. The conversation covers an agreement between the U.S. Attorney and defense counsel regarding whether trustees or guards will be armed. Attorney Mr. Boies, representing a victim, interrupts to clarify that payments of $250,000 and $100,000 were made by the defendant at a time when a legal proceeding was pending, contradicting a prior statement by the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00000537.jpg
Page 27 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00490 (USA v. Epstein) filed on July 24, 2019. Defense counsel argues for the defendant's release, citing his compliance with past registration (since 2010), jail time, and probation, while asserting that the Southern District of New York was not 'detached' from the Florida non-prosecution agreement. The Judge (The Court) responds by discussing the 'rebuttable presumption' for detention in cases involving children or young people.
DOJ-OGR-00000536.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a legal proceeding transcript dated July 24, 2019, discussing a case involving federal interest and an indictment against Mr. Epstein. Mr. Weinberg, identified as Deputy Attorney General, explains his approval in May or June 2008 for a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and the federal government's involvement, including urging Florida to bring additional charges against Mr. Epstein. The discussion also touches upon the roles of Mr. Sloman and Mr. Filip within the Department of Justice and the scope of the U.S. Attorney's Office in New York.
DOJ-OGR-00000512.jpg
This document is page 2 of a court filing from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, filed on July 24, 2019. It is a continuation of the 'APPEARANCES' section, listing individuals present for the legal proceeding. Those listed include David Boies, Brad Edwards, and representatives from the NYPD, FBI, and U.S. Pretrial Services.
DOJ-OGR-00000424.jpg
This document is page 19 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, filed on July 16, 2019. Defense attorney Mr. Weingarten requests an adjournment of the detention hearing to the end of the week to prepare a written bail package, noting they had just met the client that day. The government attorney, Mr. Rossmiller, does not object, provided the defendant consents to detention in the interim under statute 3142(f).
DOJ-OGR-00000421.jpg
This document is page 16 of a court transcript filed on July 16, 2019, in case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. A defense attorney argues that the current indictment is an illegitimate 'do-over' of a previous investigation conducted in Florida regarding allegations from 2002-2005, which had been resolved via a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). The speaker contends that revisiting these facts undermines the integrity of plea deals with the United States and begins to argue the definition of sex trafficking.
DOJ-OGR-00000403.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on July 16, 2019. In it, a judge grants a joint request from the prosecution and defense to adjourn proceedings and exclude the time until Monday, July 15th, from speedy trial calculations. The judge justifies the decision as necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice and to allow both sides adequate time to prepare, specifically mentioning a 'written bail submission'.
DOJ-OGR-00021093.jpg
This page from a legal brief (Case 22-1426) argues points regarding the scope of plea agreements and Double Jeopardy. It analyzes the 'Abbamonte-Alessi rule' and the 'Annabi' precedent to determine if a plea agreement binding 'the Government' applies to other United States Attorney Offices (USAOs). The text argues that for charges to be distinct enough to bypass the rule, they must cover a new time period, noting that in the Annabi case, the conspiracy period was two years longer.
DOJ-OGR-00021041.jpg
A page from a court transcript (Case 22-1426, related to the Ghislaine Maxwell appeal) documenting a judge's ruling during sentencing. The judge finds the defendant engaged in a pattern of prohibited sexual conduct with a minor on at least two occasions. The judge overrules a defense objection that argued the sentencing enhancement should only apply if the defendant posed a continuing danger to the public, citing that the text of the Guidelines is unambiguous.
DOJ-OGR-00021036.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 28, 2023, in which an attorney, Mr. Everdell, argues that the explanatory commentary for a sentencing guideline concerning 'repeat and dangerous sex offenders' is authoritative guidance from the Sentencing Commission and should be considered by the court. The opposing counsel, Ms. Moe, when offered a chance to respond, declines to make a verbal argument and instead rests on her previously submitted written briefing.
DOJ-OGR-00021030.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Page 29, filed 02/28/2023) involving the sentencing or legal arguments in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues to the Judge that Maxwell qualifies for a sentencing enhancement as an 'organizer or leader' because trial evidence proved she supervised Sarah Kellen. The discussion centers on whether the criminal activity involved five participants or was 'otherwise extensive,' with the government asserting Maxwell's supervision of Kellen satisfies the legal requirements.
DOJ-OGR-00020912.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding (likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) involving the questioning (voir dire) of a potential juror. The text covers a sidebar conference where defense counsel (Ms. Sternheim) requests the Judge ask the juror if they read the case summary, specifically regarding the charges. The Judge then reads a portion of the indictment summary to the juror, stating that the defendant is charged with conspiring with and aiding Jeffrey Epstein to entice minors between 1994 and 2004.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity