OPR
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Investigation | OPR initiated an investigation into allegations that prosecutors in the USAO improperly resolved ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Interviews | OPR conducted more than 60 interviews of witnesses, including FBI agents, USAO staff, and Departm... | N/A | View |
| 2007-01-01 | Investigation | OPR investigated allegations that USAO prosecutors improperly resolved a federal investigation in... | Southern District of Florida | View |
EFTA00020454.pdf
This document is a 'Search Terms Report' generated on December 8, 2020, for the case 'US v Epstein'. It analyzes a dataset of 300,123 documents labeled as 'OPR Materials'. The report identifies that 5,462 documents contained hits for specific search terms (11,692 including attached 'Family' documents), though the actual search terms themselves are redacted throughout the report.
EFTA00019238.pdf
An email chain from July 2020 between the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) and the Office of the Deputy Attorney General (ODAG). The correspondence concerns coordinating document discovery for the recently charged Ghislaine Maxwell case, specifically revisiting materials related to the Southern District of Florida (SDFL) investigation and the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). The emails mention that the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) conducted a significant document collection the previous year.
EFTA00019182.pdf
An email dated February 6, 2019, from a Special Assistant to the U.S. Attorney at the SDNY to a redacted recipient. The subject is 'OPR' (likely Office of Professional Responsibility), and the content is a link to a Reuters article reporting that the Justice Department is conducting a professional misconduct probe into the Epstein case.
EFTA00018995.pdf
This document is an email chain between the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and the Southern District of Florida (SDFL) from August 2020, forwarded in March 2021. SDNY officials, supervising the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell, request access to scan and review boxes of evidence from the prior SDFL investigation into Jeffrey Epstein stored in West Palm Beach. The SDFL official confirms the materials are in a secure room and references a previous Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) inquiry involving the same documents.
EFTA00018568.pdf
This document is an email chain from August 2020 discussing technical difficulties with a large PDF file received by the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY). The file is a draft report from the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein matter by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida between 2006 and 2008. SDNY staff were attempting to make the 380+ page report text-searchable.
EFTA00018566.pdf
This document contains an email chain from August 2020 involving the Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS). OPR Counsel Laura Ingersoll transmitted a draft report regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein matter by the Southern District of Florida (2006-2008) to the Acting US Attorney for SDNY. Subsequent internal USANYS emails discuss sharing this draft report with the 'Maxwell team' for their review and comments.
EFTA00017958.pdf
This document is an email chain from November 2020 to February 2021 regarding the Office of Professional Responsibility's (OPR) final report on the Jeffrey Epstein matter. The chain begins with the transmittal of the report and a letter to the SDNY on November 12, 2020. Subsequent emails involve redacted officials scheduling a call in late January/early February 2021 to discuss the matter.
EFTA00016284.pdf
This document is an email chain from August 24, 2020, involving high-level U.S. Department of Justice officials, including the Associate Deputy Attorney General. The discussion concerns scheduling a call with the Victim/Witness (V/W) Coordinator working with Jeffrey Epstein's victims. The emails suggest the call is related to an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) meeting regarding the results of an investigation, likely concerning the DOJ's handling of the Epstein case.
EFTA00013718.pdf
An internal email dated December 17, 2007, from an unidentified sender to an unidentified recipient with the subject 'Any follow up re Epstein?'. The email discusses an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) investigation involving agents who allegedly failed to properly confer with and notify victims, describing the situation as a 'Catch-22'.
EFTA00013358.pdf
An email chain from November 2020 between USANYS officials discussing an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report regarding Jeffrey Epstein. The email includes an attachment titled 'epstein._executive_summary.pdf' and a link to a DOJ press release download. The sender notes that the attachment explains how OPR evaluates matters.
EFTA00013243.pdf
Internal email correspondence from October 2020 between USANYS officials regarding discovery obligations. The team discusses a conversation with an original FBI agent from the Florida Epstein investigation, deciding not to re-collect emails between him and a specific AUSA (as OPR already collected them), but confirming the agent will send emails involving victims or witnesses and other potentially discoverable documents.
EFTA00011501.pdf
Email correspondence from August 25, 2020, between the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and the Southern District of Florida (SDFL). The SDNY Public Corruption Unit chief contacts the SDFL Managing AUSA to arrange access to stored evidence boxes concerning the prior investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and co-conspirators, specifically to aid in the active prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell. The SDFL confirms the materials are in a secure room in West Palm Beach and discusses logistics for scanning them, referencing a previous OPR inquiry that accessed the same files.
EFTA00011495.pdf
This document is an email chain containing two messages. The earlier message, dated November 12, 2020, is from an individual at OPR (Office of Professional Responsibility) transmitting the final report on the Jeffrey Epstein matter. The later message, dated January 29, 2021, is a reply requesting a meeting early the following week to discuss the matter.
EFTA00011494.pdf
This document contains email metadata and headers dated January 29, 2021, originating from a Department of Justice address (@usa.doj.gov). The subject matter concerns the 'OPR Epstein Final Report'. The sender and recipients are redacted, though a Bcc is sent to a journaling address 'USAHUB-USAJournal111'.
EFTA00009937.pdf
This document is an email chain from August 6, 2020, within the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) and the DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR). OPR sent a draft report regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein matter by the USAO in the Southern District of Florida (2006-2008) to the Acting US Attorney for SDNY. USANYS officials then discussed and approved sharing this report with their internal 'Epstein team' to evaluate its facts and potential implications for the pending case against Ghislaine Maxwell.
EFTA00009860.pdf
This document is an email chain from August 2020 between the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) and the Southern District of Florida (SDFL). The SDNY team, specifically the Public Corruption Unit supervising the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell, contacted SDFL to arrange access to physical evidence files, CDs, and cassette tapes from the prior SDFL investigation into Jeffrey Epstein stored in West Palm Beach. The correspondence discusses logistics for scanning these documents, the location of the files (including those gathered for an OPR inquiry), and the impact of COVID-19 on local vendor services.
EFTA00001882.pdf
Evidence photograph (EFTA00001882) depicting a white desk setup with various electronic equipment. Items include an Apple MacBook, a large Apple monitor, Motorola walkie-talkies in charging cradles, a Panasonic landline phone, Celestron binoculars, and a printer. Several electronic components are labeled with white tape indicating their function or location, specifically 'KITCHEN', 'RF THEATER', and 'KITCHEN PRINTER'. A copy of the magazine 'Propriétés' (likely 'Propriétés Le Figaro' or similar luxury real estate publication) is also visible on the desk.
DOJ-OGR-00000253.tif
This document discusses legal arguments related to a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) concerning Epstein, highlighting the government's perceived misinterpretation of the agreement and the findings of an OPR investigation into its execution. It asserts that Maxwell has standing to enforce the NPA as a third-party beneficiary because she falls within the class of 'any potential co-conspirators of Epstein' that the agreement was designed to protect.
DOJ-OGR-00000252.tif
This document discusses the legal context surrounding the prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell and the plea agreement made by Epstein. It highlights the government's intent to protect Epstein's associates from federal prosecution through a broad 'including but not limited to' clause, and notes the government's concerns about the strength of its case and victims' willingness to proceed to trial, referencing the OPR report.
DOJ-OGR-00000192.tif
This document excerpt, labeled 129a and part of a DOJ report, details OPR's criticism of Acosta's decision to approve a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and a specific provision within it. The criticism stems from Acosta's alleged failure to consider the potential consequences of the provision and to whom it would apply. The document also includes a reference to Section IV of the Part.
DOJ-OGR-00000191.tif
This document is an excerpt from a legal or internal report, likely from the Department of Justice, numbered 128a and bearing the identifier DOJ-OGR-00000191. It discusses the Office of Professional Responsibility's (OPR) finding that a U.S. Attorney's Office's (USAO) agreement not to prosecute unidentified 'potential co-conspirators' did not violate a clear and unambiguous Department policy or constitute professional misconduct, despite witnesses' assertions that it amounted to prohibited 'transactional immunity'.
DOJ-OGR-00000190.tif
This document discusses the legal proceedings and agreements related to Epstein, detailing how his sentencing was handled and reduced. It highlights Acosta's role in approving the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and references an email exchange between the State Attorney and Villafaña regarding the resolution of the case. The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) concluded that the agreement allowed Epstein to resolve a federal investigation for an 18-month state sentence.
DOJ-OGR-00000121.tif
This document is an excerpt from a legal ruling or report, discussing the scope and binding nature of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) involving Epstein. It addresses the argument that the NPA might bind other judicial districts and concludes that it only binds the U.S. Attorney's office where it was signed, specifically stating it does not bind the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00000060.tif
This document excerpt discusses legal interpretations regarding a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) and the jurisdiction of United States Attorneys. It criticizes the Second Circuit's reliance on a selective reading of legal texts and highlights that the NPA was intended to resolve Epstein's state and federal criminal liability broadly, serving the interests of the United States and the State of Florida, not just a specific district.
DOJ-OGR-00022561.tif
This document details events related to the Epstein case, including a $10 million request to Ted Waitt to keep someone out of civil suits and the signing of a non-prosecution agreement by Epstein in 2007. It also mentions Villafana as the lead prosecutor and Brad Edwards filing the CVRA case.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity