Southern District of Florida
LocationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00004607.jpg
This document is the conclusion section of an OPR report detailing an investigation into the USAO's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, specifically regarding the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) authorized by R. Alexander Acosta. The report confirms that the government violated the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) by concealing the NPA from victims and sending misleading letters. It identifies five former USAO attorneys (Acosta, Sloman, Menchel, Lourie, and Villafaña) as subjects of the investigation due to their involvement in the NPA negotiations.
DOJ-OGR-00023077.jpg
This document details prosecutor Acosta's explanation to the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) for pursuing a state-level, pre-indictment resolution in the Epstein case. Acosta cited the novelty of trafficking prosecutions at the time, issues with witnesses and evidence, and the belief that a state resolution offered more flexibility than a federal one. The document also includes statements from other legal professionals, Menchel and Villafaña, who described the general aversion of federal judges in the Southern District of Florida to binding plea agreements like Rule 11(c) pleas.
DOJ-OGR-00005567.jpg
This is page 13 of a legal filing (Document 383) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. The visible text discusses 'Minor Victim-4,' arguing that the defense's attempts to attack her credibility based on statements made to the USAO-SDFL are irrelevant to her privacy interests regarding her upcoming testimony. Large portions of the page are redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00005532.jpg
This document is Page 2 of 7 of the controversial Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between Jeffrey Epstein and the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (headed by R. Alexander Acosta). It outlines that federal prosecution will be deferred in favor of state prosecution if Epstein abides by specific conditions. Crucially, the final paragraph grants broad immunity, stating that after fulfilling terms, no federal prosecution will occur for offenses investigated by the FBI or the Federal Grand Jury.
DOJ-OGR-00005530.jpg
This document is a cover page for 'Composite Exhibit A,' identified as the 'Non-Prosecution Agreement and Addendum.' It bears a Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR-00005530' indicating it originated from a Department of Justice Office of Government Relations release. The header contains overlapping court filing stamps from the Southern District of Florida (FLSD), indicating the document was filed in multiple cases or refiled, with visible dates of 05/17/2019 and 10/29/2021.
DOJ-OGR-00002618.jpg
This document is page 6 of a 7-page legal agreement, filed on February 4, 2008, between Epstein and the United States. In this section, Epstein formally waives his constitutional rights to a speedy trial (Sixth Amendment) and to an indictment by a grand jury (Fifth Amendment). This waiver is a condition for the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida to defer his prosecution, with the understanding that any breach of the agreement by Epstein would allow the government to prosecute him for any federal offenses.
DOJ-OGR-00005718.jpg
This document is Page 6 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) arguing against the admissibility of a specific document compilation. The text details how former Epstein employee Alfredo Rodriguez attempted to sell 97 pages of evidence to lawyer Brad Edwards in 2009, leading to an FBI sting operation where Rodriguez sold the documents to an undercover officer for $50,000. The filing argues these documents are unauthenticated hearsay, lack relevance to the current indictment, and should be excluded.
DOJ-OGR-00002725.jpg
This legal document, filed on February 4, 2021, is a request for the production of documents related to defense motions in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It seeks all communications concerning the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Jeffrey Epstein, including those between various government agencies and Epstein's lawyers. The request also demands communications from meetings in 2016 and 2018 where attorneys for Epstein's victims urged the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) to launch a criminal investigation into both Epstein and Maxwell.
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_018948.jpg
An Appearance Notice from the U.S. Department of Justice, Southern District of Florida, under U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta. The document instructs a subpoena recipient that they may avoid appearing personally before a Federal Grand Jury if they voluntarily turn over requested business records to a redacted FBI Special Agent in West Palm Beach prior to October 20, 2006.
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_016497.jpg
This document is page 10 of a legal motion filed by 'The Post' (a media organization) in a New York court. The motion requests the unsealing of appellate briefs related to Jeffrey Epstein's sex-offender registration (SORA) proceedings, with victim names redacted. It details procedural history, including the withdrawal of a previous motion from December 21 to resolve disputes over notifying Florida prosecutors, and notes the Manhattan Assistant District Attorney Friedman Agnifilo's stance on the unsealing.
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_017614.jpg
This document is a page from a legal analysis (likely a law journal article) produced to the House Oversight Committee by David Schoen. It discusses the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and specifically analyzes case law determining that victim rights attach before formal charges are filed. It prominently cites 'Does v. United States' (the Epstein case) in the Southern District of Florida, noting that the court rejected the government's dismissal attempts and acknowledged that victims might be entitled to invalidate Epstein's nonprosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017600.jpg
This document, marked as a House Oversight record, draws parallels between private military contractor Erik Prince (Blackwater) and Osama Bin Laden as intelligence assets. It details the controversial legal defense of Jeffrey Epstein by Ken Starr and others, specifically highlighting the sweeping immunity granted by the Southern District of Florida non-prosecution agreement. The text explicitly suggests Epstein's light sentence is best explained by the use of children for 'government-sponsored sexual blackmail.'
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_010603.jpg
This document page (38) details legal maneuvers between Jeffrey Epstein and attorney Bradley Edwards. It establishes that the U.S. Attorney's Office cleared Edwards of involvement in Scott Rothstein's Ponzi scheme, identifying him instead as a victim. It further describes Epstein's failed attempt to file a Florida Bar complaint against Edwards and highlights Epstein's repeated invocation of the Fifth Amendment during a March 2010 deposition regarding his claims against Edwards.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010602.jpg
This document, likely a legal filing or committee report, details how attorney Scott Rothstein operated a Ponzi scheme at his firm RRA between 2005 and 2009, falsely selling settlement agreements to investors. It clarifies that attorney Bradley J. Edwards, who prosecuted cases against Jeffrey Epstein, was briefly employed by RRA but had no knowledge that Rothstein was using the Epstein cases to lure investors into the fraud.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010583.jpg
This page from a legal filing details the judicial orders prohibiting Jeffrey Epstein from contacting his victims following his 2008 guilty plea. It outlines specific no-contact orders issued by Judge Deborah Dale Pucillo and the federal court. Furthermore, it documents two civil lawsuits filed by attorney Brad Edwards against Epstein in August and September 2008 on behalf of victims 'Jane Doe' and 'E.W.,' alleging sexual assault and a RICO conspiracy.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010582.jpg
This document, page 17 of a legal filing marked with House Oversight bates stamps, details the legal proceedings surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's 2008 plea deal. It outlines his guilty plea to state charges in Palm Beach County on June 30, 2008, and the controversial Non-Prosecution Agreement with the Federal Government that shielded him from federal charges while acknowledging potential compensation for approximately 34 victims. The text also references an attorney named Edwards filing a motion regarding a CVRA (Crime Victims' Rights Act) action and a victim (Jane Doe) appearing on television to criticize the leniency of the plea.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_010581.jpg
This page from a House Oversight report details the timeline between June 27 and July 11, 2008, regarding the violation of victims' rights (CVRA) in the Jeffrey Epstein case. It highlights that AUSA Villafaña failed to inform victims' attorney Edwards that Epstein's state plea would preclude federal prosecution. Consequently, victims E.W. and L.M. only discovered the plea deal was finalized during a hearing on July 11, 2008, after Edwards had filed a federal action to enforce their rights.
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_010576.jpg
This document, likely an affidavit by attorney Bradley Edwards from the House Oversight production, details Epstein's obstruction of justice and evidence collection by the Palm Beach Police. It describes an incident where Epstein diverted his private plane to the US Virgin Islands to prevent the FBI from serving a subpoena to Nadia Marcinkova, while simultaneously harassing her and Sarah Kellen to ensure their silence. It also details the Palm Beach Police investigation in late 2005, including a trash pull that revealed Epstein purchased books on sexual slavery and training (e.g., 'SlaveCraft' and 'Training with Miss Abernathy') via Amazon.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity