Southern District of Florida
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA
|
Employment |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Northern District of Georgia
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Northern District of Georgia prosecutors
|
Proxy |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Southern District of New York Prosecutors
|
No communication |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
SDNY
|
Professional distancing |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Southern District of New York
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Southern District of New York
|
Jurisdictional dispute |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Southern District of New York
|
Jurisdictional separation |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
|
Collaboration |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Non-prosecution agreement and investigation in Florida where victims' rights were violated. | Florida | View |
| 2007-09-24 | N/A | Execution of the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). | Unknown | View |
| 2007-01-01 | Legal agreement | The Defendant entered into a non-prosecution agreement (“NPA”) with the Southern District of Flor... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2006-01-01 | N/A | Period covered by the OPR report regarding the Southern District of Florida's handling of the Jef... | Southern District of Florida | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021178.jpg
This document outlines the procedural history of Jeffrey Epstein's 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), detailing his guilty plea to state charges of procuring minors for prostitution and the subsequent sentence of 18 months in jail. It highlights the nine-month delay caused by Epstein's legal team attempting to renegotiate terms with senior DOJ officials, culminating in the Deputy Attorney General's refusal to intervene on June 23, 2008. The text also describes the immediate legal fallout, specifically a July 7, 2008 emergency petition filed by a victim ('Jane Doe') alleging violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act because victims were not consulted about the deal.
DOJ-OGR-00003281.jpg
This document, part of a legal case filed in 2021, details communications and negotiations from September 2007 concerning a potential plea deal for Mr. Epstein. It highlights discussions among various legal professionals regarding charges, sexual offender registration, and the scope of a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). A key aspect is the USAO's agreement, as part of a draft NPA, not to criminally charge Epstein's female assistants, employees of his corporate entity, and 'potential co-conspirators' in an ongoing federal investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00003219.jpg
This document details a May 2006 meeting where the Palm Beach Police Department (PBPD) presented the Epstein case to federal authorities (FBI and USAO/Villafaña) due to concerns that the State Attorney (Krischer) was bowing to pressure from Epstein's legal team. The report outlines obstruction tactics used by Epstein's defense, including hiring PIs to trail police, orchestrating conflicts of interest to remove aggressive prosecutors, and potentially obtaining tips about search warrants. It also discusses the legal strategy for federal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. §§ 2422 and 2423, citing flight logs listing anonymous 'females' as potential evidence of interstate trafficking.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019393.jpg
This document is a Subpoena to Testify Before a Grand Jury issued by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on October 6, 2006. It commands an unnamed recipient to appear at the West Palm Beach courthouse and coordinate with a redacted FBI Special Agent. The document contains significant redactions protecting the identities of the recipient, the agent, and the prosecutor under FOIA exemptions.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019391.jpg
This FBI document from October 17, 2006, details the coordination between the New York and Miami FBI field offices regarding the Jeffrey Epstein investigation, specifically classified under 'WSTA- Child Prostitution'. It confirms that a Grand Jury subpoena issued by the Southern District of Florida on October 6, 2006, was successfully served on October 16, 2006. The document references the transfer of the subpoena copy via Federal Express between agents, though the specific target of the subpoena and the narrative details of the service are redacted.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018945.jpg
An FBI internal document dated October 17, 2006, from Squad C-20 to the Miami field office regarding the Jeffrey Epstein investigation (WSTA- Child Prostitution). It details the service of a Grand Jury subpoena, Appearance Notice, and Certification of Business Records on October 16, 2006, issued by the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031417.jpg
This document is page 3 of a printed Washington Post article dated February 6, 2019, bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp. It contains a statement from Epstein's attorney, Martin G. Weinberg, defending the non-prosecution agreement/plea deal as 'fairly negotiated' and reviewed by senior DOJ officials, while asserting Epstein fulfilled all legal obligations for over 10 years.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022021.jpg
This document contains a scan of page 212 and a facing page from a book (likely James Patterson's work on Epstein) labeled 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022021'. It features the signature block of R. Alexander Acosta, Former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, concluding a statement about case assessments, followed by a section divider titled 'PART VI Aftermath'.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026477.jpg
This document is an email thread from June 23, 2018, ending with a message from Jeffrey Epstein ('Jeffrey E.') to Steve Bannon. The thread originated with the sharing of an op-ed titled 'Mueller’s Fruit of the Poisonous Tree' by David Rivkin and Elizabeth Price Foley, to which Bannon initially replied 'Big deal.' Epstein responded with a high-importance email discussing the 'southern district,' 'money laundering,' and the opinion that 'flippers will dictate' the outcome.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_018020.jpg
This document is a Letter to the Editor of the New York Times dated March 4, 2019, written by Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys to defend the 2007 plea deal overseen by then-US Attorney Alexander Acosta. The letter argues that the plea deal was necessary due to a lack of evidence for federal crimes (such as sex trafficking or coercion) and claims the agreement achieved significant objectives including restitution and sex offender registration. The document includes court filing stamps indicating it was later used as an exhibit in a 2019 civil case.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010578.jpg
This document page details the terms of a 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement between Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office, which included immunity for co-conspirators like Nadia Marcinkova. It also highlights that victims E.W. and L.M. were misled by the FBI regarding the status of the investigation after a plea deal had already been reached.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010553.jpg
This document appears to be a page (212) from a book or report, specifically the start of 'Part VI: Aftermath'. It contains the end of a letter or statement signed by R. Alexander Acosta, Former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010552.jpg
This document is page 212 from a book authored by James Patterson, likely 'Filthy Rich', which has been included in House Oversight Committee records (Bates stamp 010552). It features a statement signed by former U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta defending the prosecutorial decisions made in the Epstein case, arguing that critics were not privy to the specific evidence and trial assessments made at the time.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010547.jpg
This document consists of pages 206 and 207 from the book 'Filthy Rich', stamped by the House Oversight Committee. It details the conflict between Palm Beach Police and the State Attorney in 2006 regarding the charges against Jeffrey Epstein for soliciting underage females. The text explains how the State Attorney reduced charges to avoid jail time, prompting local police to request a federal investigation, and notes a 2007 meeting between federal prosecutors and Epstein's lawyer, Roy Black.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015625.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal response filed by Bradley Edwards and Paul Cassell in a lawsuit against Alan Dershowitz. The text argues that Dershowitz cannot seal court records containing allegations that he sexually abused Jane Doe #3, particularly because he previously quoted those same allegations in his own counterclaim. It further alleges that Dershowitz, as Epstein's lawyer, negotiated a Non-Prosecution Agreement specifically to secure immunity for himself and other coconspirators regarding crimes committed in Florida.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015601.jpg
This document is a background section of a legal motion filed by attorneys Paul Cassell and Brad Edwards in a defamation case. It argues that the Defendant (contextually Alan Dershowitz) is abusing subpoena power to harass a non-party victim, Jane Doe No. 3 (Virginia Giuffre), following a defamation campaign where the Defendant called the attorneys 'unethical' on the Today Show. The motion seeks to quash the subpoena to protect Jane Doe No. 3 from further intimidation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015591.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing by Alan Dershowitz requesting a modification to a Confidentiality Order to allow his counsel to disclose testimony from Ms. Roberts (Virginia Giuffre) for his defense. It outlines the background of the defamation suit brought against Dershowitz by Roberts's lawyers (Edwards and Cassell) and details the procedural history of Roberts's attempts to quash subpoenas and seal deposition transcripts between 2015 and 2016. The document references the 'Federal Action' (Jane Doe v. USA) in the Southern District of Florida.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015535.jpg
This legal filing (Case 1:15-cv-07433) details Virginia Giuffre's interactions with the FBI in 2011 regarding Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell's sexual abuse while she was hiding in Australia. It outlines Maxwell's attempts to avoid deposition by falsely claiming a permanent move to London due to her mother's illness. The document also records Giuffre's establishment of the non-profit 'Victims Refuse Silence, Inc.' in late 2014 and her legal motion to join Jane Doe 1 in challenging Epstein's non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015012.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a House Oversight investigation file (stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015012) containing research notes or a draft report. It juxtaposes the operations of private military contractor Blackwater (Erik Prince) with the legal defense of Jeffrey Epstein, suggesting a theme of government complicity or utilization of 'assets' for illicit purposes. The text specifically alleges that Epstein's lenient sentence and non-prosecution agreement were related to 'government-sponsored sexual blackmail' and draws parallels between Erik Prince and Osama Bin Laden as intelligence assets.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013479.jpg
This document is a Certificate of Service filed on June 28, 2010, in the case of Doe v. Epstein (Case No. 08-CIV-80893). It certifies that defense counsel Robert D. Critton, Jr. electronically served a preceding document to plaintiff's counsel (Edwards and Cassell) and co-defense counsel (Goldberger). The document lists the contact information for the attorneys involved, though specific email addresses or contact details have been redacted.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013363.jpg
This document is an affidavit by attorney Bradley James Edwards detailing his representation of three victims (L.M., E.W., and Jane Doe) against Jeffrey Epstein in 2008. Edwards describes his interactions with AUSA Marie Villafaña, alleging that the U.S. Attorney's Office withheld critical information regarding a plea agreement that blocked federal prosecution, despite admitting they had evidence of Epstein molesting at least 40 minors. The affidavit outlines the timeline of the plea deal revelation in June and July 2008.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_029608.jpg
This document is a page from The Virgin Islands Daily News dated February 22, 2019. The main article reports on a ruling by U.S. District Judge Kenneth Marra, stating that federal prosecutors, including Alexander Acosta, violated federal law by concealing a plea agreement with Jeffrey Epstein from his underage victims in 2008. A sidebar article details USVI Governor Albert Bryan Jr.'s trip to Washington D.C. to meet with Trump administration officials.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014105.jpg
This document is page 22 of a legal response filed on March 24, 2015, in the case involving Alan Dershowitz. It details the Defendant's objections to Requests for Production #12 and #13, which seek evidence regarding claims that Jane Doe #3 lied about world leaders and that a Palm Beach County State Attorney dropped a case due to her lack of credibility. Dershowitz's defense emphasizes that his original declaration stated these claims were made 'on information and belief' and agrees to produce non-privileged documents in his possession.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021908.jpg
This document is a page from a rough draft transcript of a deposition or interview. The speaker discusses suspicions regarding flight logs provided by Bruce Rinehart, a former AUSA who went to work near and allegedly for Jeffrey Epstein. The speaker notes that the logs showed approximately ten flights involving Alan Dershowitz, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Epstein, and suggests the term 'one female' in the logs may have been a code word for an underage girl.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021828.jpg
This document is page 5 of a rough draft transcript from a deposition or hearing bearing a House Oversight Bates stamp. A former judge is being questioned about their current pro bono work through the University of Utah and their admission *pro hac vice* in the Southern District of Florida. The questioning focuses on the witness's past judicial conduct, specifically whether they ever struck pleadings for being impertinent or scandalous; the witness recalls referring attorneys to the Bar in two such instances rather than striking pleadings immediately.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity