David Schoen
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Legal representative |
14
Very Strong
|
23 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Submitter recipient |
11
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Submission |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Document production |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
IG (Inspector General)
|
Friend |
9
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Client |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Friend |
7
|
3 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Production submission |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Submission of evidence |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Paul G. Cassell
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Submission involvement |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey E. (Epstein)
|
Correspondents |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Unknown |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
LexisNexis
|
Subscriber user |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein Case
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Investigative subject witness |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Document custodian subject of inquiry |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Investigation target witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Document producer |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
OLC
|
Adversarial critical |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
The IG
|
Friend |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sean Hannity
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Investigation subject provider |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
House Oversight Committee
|
Subject of investigation provider of documents |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Meeting between David Schoen and Lefkowitz regarding a prospective client. | Unknown | View |
| 2019-03-22 | N/A | Email sent regarding a Tea Party Pac article. | Internet | View |
| 2019-02-28 | N/A | David Schoen conducted a LexisNexis search for legal materials regarding 'cvra and sixth amendment'. | Unknown | View |
| 2019-02-28 | N/A | David Schoen performed a LexisNexis search for legal articles regarding the Crime Victims' Rights... | N/A | View |
| 2019-02-28 | N/A | Legal research conducted by David Schoen. | N/A | View |
| 2016-06-01 | N/A | Proposed meeting between Jeffrey Epstein and David Schoen. | Unknown | View |
| 2007-01-01 | N/A | Publication of Law Review Article | Utah | View |
| 2005-01-01 | N/A | Publication of BYU Law Review article | Unknown | View |
| 2002-01-01 | N/A | State v. Casey court case | Utah | View |
| 2001-01-01 | N/A | United States v. Fortier decision | Tenth Circuit | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017642.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article, likely authored by Paul Cassell, discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to integrate victim rights. It details the author's submission of twenty-eight changes to the Advisory Committee in 2005 and the subsequent limited adoption of these changes by a subcommittee chaired by Judge James Jones. The document bears the name of attorney David Schoen and a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017641.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article detailing the legislative history of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It describes the transition from seeking a constitutional amendment to passing a federal statute in 2004, highlighting the roles of Senators Kyl and Feinstein and President Bush. The document appears to be a file produced to the House Oversight Committee, bearing the name of attorney David Schoen, suggesting its relevance to legal arguments concerning victims' rights violations, likely in the context of the Epstein investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017640.jpg
This document is Page 5 of 78 from a legal filing, specifically an excerpt from a 2007 Utah Law Review article detailing the legislative history of the Crime Victims' Rights amendment between 1996 and 1999. It outlines the efforts of Senators Kyl and Feinstein to pass a constitutional amendment ensuring rights for crime victims, noting failures in the 104th and 105th Congresses despite support from the Justice Department and President Clinton. The document bears the name of David Schoen (Epstein's attorney) and a House Oversight Bates stamp, suggesting it was submitted as evidence regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) in the context of the Epstein investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017639.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article (likely authored by Paul Cassell) analyzing the history of federal victims' rights legislation. It details the failure of the 1990 Victims' Rights and Restitution Act, attributing its ineffectiveness to poor codification (Title 42 vs Title 18) and its omission from West Publishing's legal guides, citing the Oklahoma City bombing case as a key example. The document bears a House Oversight Bates stamp and the name of David Schoen, Jeffrey Epstein's attorney, suggesting it was part of a legal production regarding the CVRA, a statute central to the controversy surrounding Epstein's non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017638.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article titled 'The Crime Victims' Rights Movement.' It details the history of the movement, specifically the 1982 President's Task Force on Victims of Crime, which recommended that victims be notified of proceedings and allowed to submit impact statements. The document bears the name of David Schoen (an attorney known for representing Jeffrey Epstein) and a House Oversight Bates stamp, indicating it was submitted as evidence or research in a congressional inquiry, likely regarding the violation of victims' rights in the Epstein case.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017636.jpg
This document is the first page of a 2007 Utah Law Review article by Paul G. Cassell regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues that proposed amendments to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure are insufficient to protect victims. The document was likely produced by attorney David Schoen (whose name appears in the footer) to the House Oversight Committee, as indicated by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017636'. This is relevant to the Epstein case as the CVRA was the central statute invoked regarding the failure to notify victims of Epstein's non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017635.jpg
This document is a printout from a LexisNexis legal research session conducted by David Schoen on February 28, 2019. The search focused on 'cvra and sixth amendment,' referencing the Crime Victims' Rights Act, and retrieved a 2007 law review article about integrating victims into federal criminal procedure. The document is marked with the Bates number HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017635.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017634.jpg
This is the final page (31 of 31) of a document, specifically an excerpt from the Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology (Vol 104, 2014). It contains a copyright notice for Northwestern University School of Law and the phrase 'End of Document'. The name 'DAVID SCHOEN' appears at the bottom, along with the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017634'.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017633.jpg
This document is a page from a legal article (Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) arguing that the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) applies to the pre-charging phase of criminal investigations. It criticizes the Department of Justice's restrictive interpretation of the law and cites various state statutes (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan) as evidence of a legal trend toward early victim notification. The document bears the name of attorney David Schoen and a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp, suggesting it was used as evidence or legal argument in a congressional investigation, likely regarding the handling of the Epstein case and the failure to notify victims.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017631.jpg
This document is a page from a legal publication (Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) submitted to the House Oversight Committee by attorney David Schoen. It analyzes state laws (specifically Hawaii, Colorado, Missouri, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Idaho) regarding crime victims' rights to notification and consultation prior to the filing of formal charges or plea agreements. The text serves as legal precedent or comparative analysis, likely relevant to arguments concerning the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) in the context of the Epstein case.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017629.jpg
This document is a page from a legal journal article (likely by David Schoen, produced to House Oversight) analyzing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and the Victim Rights and Restitution Act (VRRA). It specifically critiques the Department of Justice's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, noting that on June 7, 2007—months before the non-prosecution agreement—Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafana sent a letter to Jane Doe #1 confirming the investigation and asserting she had specific rights, including the right to confer with prosecutors. The text argues this proves the DOJ initially believed CVRA rights applied pre-charging, only to reverse its position later during litigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017628.jpg
This document contains page 25 of a legal article (Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) stamped with a House Oversight Bates number. It analyzes the Department of Justice's policies regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and the Victims' Rights and Restitution Act (VRRA), specifically debating when victim rights attach (pre-charging vs. post-charging). It cites correspondence between Senator Kyl and the DOJ (Ronald Weich) and references FBI statistics from Fiscal Year 2011 regarding victim services.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017627.jpg
This document is a page from a legal article (likely the Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) submitted as evidence to the House Oversight Committee. It analyzes the timeline of the Epstein investigation between 2006 and 2007, detailing how the Palm Beach Police referred the case to the FBI, who then referred it to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. The text argues that under proper application of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), victims should have been notified and allowed to confer with prosecutors regarding the nonprosecution agreement eventually reached with Epstein.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017626.jpg
This document is a page from a legal analysis (likely a law journal article or brief) submitted to the House Oversight Committee, indicated by the Bates stamp. It discusses the legal definition of a 'target' of investigation by the DOJ and argues for a parallel definition for 'victims' under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). Section B specifically applies this legal test to the Jeffrey Epstein case, stating as fact that he sexually abused over thirty minor girls between 2001 and 2007.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017625.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (likely submitted by David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee) citing a law review article (104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology). It presents a legal argument regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically arguing that victims' rights should 'attach' during the investigative phase before formal charges are filed. It critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) opposition to this view and cites the case *United States v. Rubin* (2008) to define the logical limits of when these rights begin.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017624.jpg
This document is a page from a legal analysis (likely a law review article or legal brief authored or submitted by David Schoen) criticizing the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The text argues that the OLC incorrectly limits the definition of 'prosecution' under the Sixth Amendment, thereby restricting when victims can assert their rights. The document was produced as evidence for the House Oversight Committee.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017623.jpg
This document is page 20 of a legal text (likely a law journal article from the Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) submitted as evidence in a House Oversight investigation, bearing the footer 'DAVID SCHOEN'. The text heavily critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically the OLC's 'contorted position' that victim rights only attach after formal charges are filed. It argues that this interpretation renders the statutory words 'detection' and 'investigation' meaningless and conflicts with standard definitions of when a prosecution begins.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017622.jpg
This document is page 19 of a legal text (likely a law review article or legal memorandum by David Schoen) produced to the House Oversight Committee. It critiques an Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memo, arguing that the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) should apply before criminal charges are filed to prevent 'secondary victimization.' The text specifically cites the 'Epstein case' (Does v. United States, S.D. Fla. 2011) as a legal precedent where the court ruled that the CVRA contemplates pre-charge application.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017621.jpg
This document is a page from a legal article (Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) stamped by the House Oversight Committee and bearing David Schoen's name. It analyzes the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically arguing against the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) narrow interpretation that victim rights only attach after charges are filed. It contends that victims should have rights during plea negotiations and pre-charging stages, citing Department of Justice guidelines and the statutory purpose.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017620.jpg
This document is a page from a legal journal article (Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) likely submitted as evidence to the House Oversight Committee. It critiques the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), arguing that the OLC ignored Senator Kyl's intent that victim rights apply before charges are filed. The text specifically cites the 'Epstein case' as a notable example where the OLC's interpretation allowed a non-prosecution agreement to nullify victims' rights to be heard.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017619.jpg
This document is a page from a legal text (likely a law journal or brief submitted by David Schoen) analyzing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues against the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) narrow interpretation that victims' rights only attach after charges are filed, citing a 2011 letter from Senator Jon Kyl to Attorney General Eric Holder where Kyl clarifies that rights were intended to exist pre-indictment. The text criticizes the OLC for deceptively quoting legislative history to support their position.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017618.jpg
This document is a page from a legal article (104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology) submitted to the House Oversight Committee, likely by attorney David Schoen. It presents a legal argument criticizing the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) memorandum for interpreting the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) too narrowly, specifically arguing that victim rights should extend to the pre-charging phase. The text cites various statutes (VRRA) and case law to support the claim that victims have rights to protection and conference with the government before formal charges are filed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017617.jpg
This document is page 14 of a legal filing or journal article (104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology) submitted to the House Oversight Committee by David Schoen. It argues against the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) restrictive interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically regarding whether victim rights attach before formal charges are filed. The text analyzes and distinguishes prior case law (Turner, Paletz, Skinner), arguing that these cases do not preclude CVRA rights during the investigation phase.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017616.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing authored by David Schoen (likely representing victims in the Epstein case), produced to the House Oversight Committee. It presents a legal argument contrasting the Victims' Rights and Restitution Act (VRRA) with the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), arguing that the Justice Department is obligated to recognize and inform victims as soon as an investigation opens, not just after formal charges are filed. It criticizes a 2011 Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum that attempted to limit these protections for victims of uncharged conduct.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017615.jpg
This document is a page from a legal text (likely a law journal article or brief by David Schoen) submitted to the House Oversight Committee. It critiques a 2011 Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memorandum which argued that Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) rights only attach after formal criminal proceedings are initiated. The text argues this position is 'unpersuasive' and 'disingenuous' because the DOJ routinely identifies victims earlier, such as during grand jury investigations or under the VRRA of 1990.
From Fox News - Jeffrey Epstein, registered sex offender,...
Schoen informs Epstein that Fox News is re-running an old piece about his civil settlement.
From Fox News - Jeffrey Epstein, registered sex offender,...
Schoen shares a Fox News article about a civil settlement, criticizes the article's framing of the NPA (Non-Prosecution Agreement), expresses a desire for 'true facts' about accusers to be published, and wishes Epstein 'Good Shabbos'.
From Fox News - Jeffrey Epstein, registered sex offender,...
Schoen informs Epstein that Fox News is re-running an old piece about his civil settlement.
From Fox News...
I know it was an old piece but Fox is running it again today. [Includes text of Fox News article about Epstein lawsuit settlement]
Re: From Fox News - Jeffrey Epstein, registered sex offen...
no worry how are you
Re: From Fox News...
Yup
From Fox News - Federal judge overseeing key lawsuit rela...
Sharing a Fox News article about the death of a federal judge involved in the Epstein lawsuit.
From Fox News - Federal judge overseeing key lawsuit rela...
Forwarded a Fox News article snippet and link about the death of a federal judge overseeing an Epstein lawsuit.
Mueller’s Star Witness Against Trump Once Arrested For Ch...
Schoen shares a link to a 'nut site' article that alleges the recipient is a Mueller informant, noting the political contradictions involving Acosta and Trump.
Re: Shared Article from AOL: Report: Trump aide helped se...
yes, every outlet needs a sex story
Shared Article from AOL...
Discusses media coverage, Dershowitz, and Lefkowitz. Claims the article is wrong about victims being silenced.
Re: Hello
Asks if something is 'overblown' and questions why 'stryok' is treated differently than mob prosecutors who despised targets like Gotti.
No Subject
Discusses his obsession with fighting prosecutorial/FBI misconduct, mentions an article tying Jeffrey E. to #metoo and Trump, hopes Jeffrey E.'s cases are behind him, and expresses regret for not having helped.
No Subject
A short message asking 'judge jeannie?'.
No Subject
The main body of text at the top of the document. David Schoen critiques Jeannie Rhee and Greg Andres, opines on Russian election interference, and mentions his friendship with the IG.
No Subject
Discusses his obsession with fighting prosecutorial/FBI misconduct, mentions an article tying Jeffrey E. to #metoo and Trump, hopes Jeffrey E.'s cases are behind him, and expresses regret for not having helped.
No Subject
A short message asking 'judge jeannie?'.
No Subject
The main body of text at the top of the document. David Schoen critiques Jeannie Rhee and Greg Andres, opines on Russian election interference, and mentions his friendship with the IG.
Re: Hello
Asks if something is 'overblown' and questions why 'stryok' is treated differently than mob prosecutors who despised targets like Gotti.
Hello (inferred from reply)
A detailed critique of the Mueller investigation team, accusing members Andrew Weissmann, Jeannie Rhee, and Greg Andres of past prosecutorial misconduct, withholding evidence, and having strong political biases (pro-Clinton, anti-Trump). The author expresses his obsession with fighting FBI and prosecutorial misconduct.
Re: Hello
A reply questioning if the bias described by Schoen is 'overblown'. Compares the situation to mob prosecutors having strong feelings for their targets like Gotti and asks why 'stryok' (Peter Strzok) is considered different.
Re: Hello
A lengthy criticism of the Mueller team's composition, accusing members like Andrew Weissmann, Jeannie Rhee, and Greg Andres of past misconduct, unethical behavior, and extreme political bias. The author also expresses his general obsession with fighting prosecutorial misconduct.
Re: Hello
A brief reply questioning if the criticism is 'overblown' and comparing the prosecutors to those who targeted 'gotti', asking why 'stryok' is different.
Re: Hello
A lengthy criticism of the Mueller team's composition, accusing members like Andrew Weissmann, Jeannie Rhee, and Greg Andres of past misconduct, unethical behavior, and extreme political bias. The author also expresses his general obsession with fighting prosecutorial misconduct.
Re: Hello
A brief reply questioning if the criticism is 'overblown' and comparing the prosecutors to those who targeted 'gotti', asking why 'stryok' is different.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity