This document is a page from a rough draft of a legal transcript, likely a deposition involving House Oversight. A witness is questioned about their knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's interactions with academics in Florida and New York, and specifically whether they knew Epstein had an office at Harvard (which the witness denies). The page concludes with an attorney, Mr. Scarola, interrupting to note that the session must end at 4:30 PM per a prior agreement.
This document is page 111 of a rough draft deposition transcript, likely from a House Oversight investigation. The witness testifies about unsuccessful attempts to depose an individual (implied to be Alan Dershowitz) in 2009, 2011, and 2013. The witness characterizes Dershowitz and 'Epstein's organization' as having a pattern of evading information requests and using stall tactics, specifically citing an incident involving the Palm Beach Police Department.
This document is a page from a legal transcript (likely a deposition) dated October 2015. The speaker accuses Mr. Dershowitz of employing 'stall tactics' and concealing Jeffrey Epstein from the Palm Beach Police Department to prevent him from answering questions regarding the sexual abuse of girls. The speaker references a pattern of behavior spanning back to 2005/2006.
This document is a rough draft transcript page (likely from a House Oversight investigation) detailing a speaker's frustration with Mr. Dershowitz's failure to respond to legal requests in 2009, 2011, and 2013. The speaker establishes a 'pattern of Mr. Epstein's associates evading efforts' to provide information. It further describes how Dershowitz repeatedly rescheduled promised interviews between the Palm Beach Police Department and Jeffrey Epstein regarding sex abuse allegations.
This is a page from a rough draft deposition transcript (Bates HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_021907). A witness testifies that flight logs produced by Mr. Dershowitz to Detective Riccari of the Palm Beach Police Department were 'incomplete and inaccurate,' raising concerns that Dershowitz had 'sanitized' the logs. The witness further mentions receiving additional flight logs from an individual named Dave Rogers for comparison.
This document is page 83 of a rough draft deposition transcript. A witness testifies that pilot Dave Rogers produced flight logs during sex abuse litigation against Epstein. The witness notes that when these logs were compared to logs provided by Mr. Dershowitz to the Palm Beach Police Department, inconsistencies were found, arousing suspicion. The testimony is briefly interrupted by Mr. Scott, who reports receiving a call from Epstein's lawyer, Darrin Indyke, regarding technical phone issues.
This document, likely a news article excerpt found in House Oversight files, details the early stages of the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein starting in March 2005. It highlights the conflict between the Palm Beach Police, who sought arrest warrants based on victim testimony (including recruiter Haley Robson), and State Attorney Barry Krischer, who delayed proceedings. The text describes specific allegations of sexual acts with a 14-year-old and mentions Epstein's legal team (Lefcourt and Dershowitz) actively working to discredit accusers using MySpace data.
This document appears to be a profile or news article detailing the career of Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter, specifically focusing on his conflict with State Attorney Barry Krischer regarding the Epstein investigation. It highlights Reiter's letter urging Krischer to recuse himself, his subsequent referral of the Epstein case to the FBI, and provides biographical details of his career, including high-profile investigations involving the Kennedy family. The text establishes Reiter's reputation for professionalism and integrity among his peers.
This document contains the text of a New York Post article from September 2007 regarding the legal case against Jeffrey Epstein. It details allegations of soliciting minors, the involvement of key figures like Haley Robson and Sarah Kellen, police investigations, and statements from Epstein's legal team regarding a potential plea deal and police conduct.
This document contains the text of two Palm Beach Post editorials from 2008 regarding Jeffrey Epstein. The editorials criticize Epstein's legal maneuvering, the delayed justice for his solicitation charges involving underage girls, and the aggressive tactics of his high-profile legal defense team.
This document appears to be an editorial or article criticizing the State Attorney's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, specifically the failure to charge him with crimes against minors despite police evidence. It details evidence found by police (school transcripts, trash), instances proving the girls were students (missing appointments for soccer or class), and the defense tactics used by Alan Dershowitz to discredit victims via their MySpace activity. It also mentions witness intimidation by private investigators and questions why a lenient plea deal was offered.
This document is an email chain originating from a 2008 email by Michael Reiter to a contact named Margie, discussing leaks regarding the Epstein plea deal and criticizing the Palm Beach Daily News for their editorial silence. The email contains the text of a critical 2008 Palm Beach Post editorial regarding Epstein's sentence and mansion. In 2010, Jeffrey Epstein forwarded this historic email chain to his legal team, including Alan Dershowitz, Martin Weinberg, and Robert Critton Jr.
This document is an excerpt from a news profile describing Jeffrey Epstein shortly before his first incarceration (circa 2008). It covers his background from Coney Island to Wall Street, his mysterious business managing money for billionaires like Les Wexner with fees up to $100 million, and his eccentric personal habits (germ phobia, sweatsuits). It includes quotes from Epstein expressing anxiety about prison and admitting he is 'not blameless,' while noting he has hired a male masseur (a former UFC champion) to avoid future misconduct.
This document is a 2006 New York Times article (stamped by House Oversight) detailing the conflict between the Palm Beach Police and State Attorney Barry Krischer regarding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. The police sought arrest warrants based on interviews with victims like Ms. Robson, but the State Attorney delayed, opting for a grand jury after Epstein's legal team (including Alan Dershowitz) presented evidence attacking the accusers' credibility. Police Chief Reiter formally questioned the State Attorney's handling of the case, suggesting he disqualify himself.
This document, stamped by House Oversight, profiles Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter amidst the Epstein investigation. It details the conflict between Reiter and State Attorney Barry Krischer, with Reiter urging Krischer's disqualification and eventually referring the Epstein case to the FBI. The text also defends Reiter's professional reputation against attacks from the 'Epstein camp,' citing support from fellow police chiefs and his history of handling high-profile cases involving the Kennedy family.
This document contains the text of a Palm Beach Post editorial and column from August 10, 2006, discussing the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. It details allegations of witness intimidation by private investigators, a proposed plea deal for probation, and includes quotes from the State Attorney's spokesman admitting that wealth can buy a different standard of justice. The text also summarizes the police findings of unlawful sex acts with five underage girls and the defense attorney's claim that Epstein did not know they were minors.
This document is an editorial from the Palm Beach Post dated August 4, 2006, criticizing the prosecution's decision to only charge Jeffrey Epstein with solicitation rather than crimes against minors. It highlights evidence found by police, including school transcripts and trash searches, proving Epstein knew the victims' ages. The text also notes the defense strategy led by Alan Dershowitz to discredit the victims based on their social media activity.
This document contains an excerpt from a Palm Beach Post article dated August 14, 2006, discussing the legal battles surrounding Jeffrey Epstein and the conflict between his defense team and Palm Beach Police Chief Michael Reiter. It details allegations against Epstein involving minors, his lawyers' attempts to discredit Reiter by calling him a "nutcase" and bringing up his divorce, and Reiter's criticism of State Attorney Barry Krischer's handling of the case.
This document contains two transcripts of Palm Beach Post editorials from 2008 regarding the legal proceedings against Jeffrey Epstein. The texts detail the composition of his high-profile legal team, the filing of civil lawsuits alleging sexual abuse of minors (including specific details of abuse against a 14-year-old), and critical commentary on his plea deal and 18-month sentence in county jail rather than state prison. The document highlights evidence found by police, including school schedules in Epstein's trash, contradicting his defense that he did not know the girls' ages.
This document is a reprint of a Palm Beach Post editorial dated August 10, 2006, titled 'Massaging the system.' It heavily criticizes State Attorney Barry Krischer for referring the Jeffrey Epstein case to a grand jury rather than prosecuting directly, suggesting favoritism toward the wealthy defendant. The text details police findings, including payments to minors and physical evidence (school transcripts) found in Epstein's trash that contradicted his defense claims of ignorance regarding the victims' ages.
This document contains a Palm Beach Post article from August 14, 2006, detailing the conflict between Police Chief Michael Reiter and State Attorney Barry Krischer regarding the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. It highlights Reiter's push for harsher charges (sexual activity with minors) versus the State Attorney's lighter plea deal, and documents the personal attacks launched by Epstein's legal team against Chief Reiter.
This document, stemming from a House Oversight collection, appears to be an excerpt from a report or article comparing the U.S. Attorney's Office's strict handling of a defendant named McDaniel with their lenient handling of Jeffrey Epstein. It details how prosecutors Acosta and Villafaña negotiated a non-prosecution agreement with Epstein's lawyers (including Jay Lefkowitz) in 2007, suppressing a 53-page federal indictment and keeping victims uninformed to ensure the deal's success. The text highlights the 'Perversion of Justice' investigation which exposed these actions.
This document, likely part of a House Oversight report, contrasts the judicial criticism of the U.S. Attorney's Office for 'lack of candor' in a case involving a defendant named McDaniel with the actions of prosecutors Marie Villafaña and Alexander Acosta in the Jeffrey Epstein case. It details how prosecutors negotiated a non-prosecution agreement in September 2007 that granted immunity to co-conspirators and avoided federal sex trafficking charges. The text highlights an email from Villafaña to Epstein's lawyer, Jay Lefkowitz, explicitly stating her preference not to highlight other crimes or chargeable persons to the judge.
This document is a news article excerpt, marked as House Oversight Committee evidence, detailing the scrutiny surrounding Alexander Acosta and A. Marie Villafaña regarding the non-prosecution agreement they negotiated for Jeffrey Epstein. It highlights a federal judge's ruling that the deal violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act by intentionally withholding information from victims. The text also notes a DOJ probe launched in January into potential professional misconduct and mentions that the White House was reviewing Acosta's involvement.
This document, likely an excerpt from a report or article submitted to the House Oversight Committee, details the prosecutorial misconduct surrounding the Jeffrey Epstein case. It contrasts a previous case (McDaniel) where prosecutors were criticized for lack of candor with the Epstein negotiations in September 2007, where prosecutors Villafaña and Acosta actively worked to hide the scope of Epstein's crimes from the judge and the public. It highlights an email where Villafaña explicitly states she prefers not to highlight other crimes or potential co-defendants to the judge during sentencing.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity