Mark Filip
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Kenneth W. Starr
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
OPR
|
Investigator witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
John Roth
|
Professional reporting |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Michael Mukasey
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alice Fisher
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Starr and Whitley
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alexander Acosta
|
Doj hierarchy |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Subject official |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
John Roth
|
Professional supervisory |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Live Nation
|
Monitor |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Interviews | OPR conducted more than 60 interviews of witnesses. | N/A | View |
| 2008-05-27 | N/A | Fax transmission from Kenneth Starr to Mark Filip confirmed as 'TRANSMISSION OK'. | Los Angeles to Washington D... | View |
| 2008-05-19 | N/A | Submission of legal letter requesting cessation of federal investigation. | N/A | View |
| 2008-05-19 | N/A | Submission of initial request for review to Deputy AG Filip. | Washington, DC | View |
| 2008-05-19 | N/A | Submission of legal letter requesting meeting and cessation of federal investigation. | N/A | View |
| 2008-05-19 | N/A | Fax transmission successfully completed (TX Report #1855) | Los Angeles, CA to Washingt... | View |
| 2008-05-19 | Communication | Starr and Whitley co-authored a letter to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip asking for a review ... | N/A | View |
036.pdf
This document is a transcript of a bail hearing for Jeffrey Epstein held on July 15, 2019, in the SDNY. The government argued for detention based on flight risk (citing wealth, foreign ties, and a fake passport found in a safe) and danger to the community, while the defense argued for release on house arrest, citing his 14-year record of appearing for court and lack of recent convictions. Two victims, Annie Farmer and Courtney Wild, spoke in court opposing bail.
EFTA00032341.pdf
This document is a 'Public Policy Law360' email newsletter dated February 19, 2020. It summarizes various legal and political news stories, including an emergency meeting of federal judges regarding political interference in the Roger Stone case, the Boy Scouts of America bankruptcy filing due to sex abuse claims, and President Trump's pardons of Rod Blagojevich and Bernard Kerik. The document mentions the law firm 'Epstein Becker Green', which likely triggered its inclusion in an Epstein-related search, but it does not appear to contain information regarding Jeffrey Epstein's criminal activities.
EFTA00009116.pdf
This document is a transcript of a deposition or interview with R. Alexander Acosta, conducted by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) regarding the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida. The transcript covers discussions about the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), victim notification issues, internal Department of Justice communications, and interactions with Epstein's defense team, including Ken Starr and Jay Lefkowitz. Acosta defends his office's decisions, emphasizing the goal of securing sex offender registration and restitution, while addressing criticisms regarding the perceived leniency and lack of transparency with victims.
DOJ-OGR-00021491.jpg
This document is a page from a Department of Justice report detailing the sources of information for an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) investigation into the Jeffrey Epstein case. OPR gathered records from U.S. Attorney's Offices in Florida and Georgia, as well as public records from Florida law enforcement agencies. The investigation also involved extensive interviews with subjects, and over 60 witnesses, including former high-ranking DOJ officials like Mark Filip and Alice Fisher, and communications with attorneys for Epstein's victims.
DOJ-OGR-00021419.jpg
This page from a DOJ OPR report details the conflict and confusion regarding victim notification in the Epstein case. It highlights discrepancies between USAO officials (Sloman, Acosta) and DOJ Criminal Division (Mandelker) regarding who decided to defer victim notification to state authorities. It also includes excerpts from Epstein's lawyer, Lefkowitz, aggressively arguing that federal victims had no standing in the state case and should not be contacted by the FBI or informed of 'fictitious rights.'
DOJ-OGR-00021309.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a DOJ OPR report detailing the internal review of the Jeffrey Epstein case in 2008. It describes how Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip and prosecutor John Roth reviewed defense appeals (initiated by Ken Starr) regarding the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), with Filip ultimately dismissing the defense's arguments as 'ludicrous' and refusing to meet with Epstein. The text also highlights prosecutor Marie Villafaña's sarcastic and angry reaction to learning that State Attorney Barry Krischer had secretly negotiated a light 90-day jail sentence for Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00021308.jpg
This legal document details communications from May 2008 regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case, where his defense team, including Starr and Whitley, petitioned the Deputy Attorney General for a review. They argued the federal prosecution was unwarranted, irregular, and politically motivated due to Epstein's "close personal association" with former President Bill Clinton. In response, a Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General instructed the U.S. Attorney's Office to postpone a June 2, 2008 plea deadline pending the completion of this high-level review.
DOJ-OGR-00021304.jpg
This document page outlines the Department of Justice hierarchy in early 2008 and details a specific period of review by the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS). It recounts a February 21, 2008 conversation where CEOS Chief Andrew Oosterbaan told attorney Lefkowitz that CEOS could take a 'fresh and objective look' at the case rather than partnering with the USAO, provided that would help the process move forward.
DOJ-OGR-00021202.jpg
This document, a page from a legal filing, outlines the organizational structure of federal law enforcement in the Southern District of Florida during a specific period. It identifies key leadership at the Department of Justice, including Attorney General Michael Mukasey, and details the jurisdiction, staffing, and office locations of the U.S. Attorney's Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the region. The text also notes that the FBI's West Palm Beach office handled the 'Epstein investigation'.
DOJ-OGR-00003310.jpg
This document page details the legal maneuvering in May 2008 regarding the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. It describes how Epstein's lawyers (Starr and Whitley) petitioned the Deputy Attorney General to review the case, arguing that federal involvement was unwarranted and politically motivated due to Epstein's 'close ties' to former President Bill Clinton. The page also notes that the USAO, under instruction from the Deputy AG's office, postponed a June 2 deadline for Epstein's plea agreement to allow for this high-level review.
DOJ-OGR-00023142.jpg
This document is page 104 of a DOJ report detailing the organizational structure of the Criminal Division and the Office of the Deputy Attorney General in early 2008. It describes a specific interaction on February 21, 2008, where CEOS Chief Andrew Oosterbaan communicated with defense attorney Lefkowitz, offering to have CEOS take a 'fresh and objective look' at the case rather than partnering directly with the USAO. This conversation occurred shortly after a CEOS Trial Attorney had met with victims.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019232.jpg
A fax transmission report and cover sheet dated May 19, 2008, sent by Kenneth W. Starr of Kirkland & Ellis LLP to the Honorable Mark Filip at the Office of the Deputy Attorney General (DOJ). The transmission consisted of 9 pages and was successfully sent. The document is marked with the Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019232.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019231.jpg
This is the final page (page 8) of a letter dated May 19, 2008, sent by attorneys Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley to the Honorable Mark Filip. The attorneys are requesting that the Department of Justice discontinue federal involvement in the case (implied to be Epstein's) to allow the State to handle it, arguing issues of federalism and prosecutorial selectivity. They also request a meeting with Filip to discuss these matters.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019230.jpg
This document is page 7 of a letter addressed to Honorable Mark Filip, dated May 19, 2008. It details allegations that Assistant U.S. Attorney David Weinstein leaked confidential information regarding the Epstein case and plea negotiations to New York Times reporter Landon Thomas. The text criticizes the U.S. Attorney's Office, specifically First Assistant Sloman and U.S. Attorney Acosta, for their handling of these leaks and the subsequent internal review.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019229.jpg
This document is page 6 of a letter to the Honorable Mark Filip, dated May 19, 2008, detailing complaints about the conduct of federal prosecutors in the Jeffrey Epstein case. The text alleges that prosecutors made unprecedented financial demands, including a requirement for Epstein to pay $150,000 to alleged victims (most of whom were later found to be adults, not minors) and to fund a specific civil attorney chosen by the prosecution. It further alleges a conflict of interest where an Assistant U.S. Attorney recommended a civil lawyer connected to their boyfriend, and notes that First Assistant Sloman's former law partner, Mr. Herman, began filing civil suits against Epstein.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019228.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal letter addressed to the Honorable Mark Filip on May 19, 2008, arguing against the federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. The text utilizes testimony from redacted witnesses to claim that no interstate commerce laws were violated, that the women lied about their ages (claiming to be 18), that no coercion or force was used, and that encounters were often non-sexual massages. It also critiques the conduct of federal prosecutors and the terms of the deferred prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019227.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal memorandum dated May 19, 2008, addressed to Honorable Mark Filip. It argues against the federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, asserting that his conduct was 'purely local,' 'consensual,' and did not meet the thresholds for federal statutes regarding human trafficking (§ 1591), internet predation (§ 2422), or sex tourism (§ 2423). The text critiques a CEOS review and U.S. Attorney Acosta's potential use of discretion, claiming that federal involvement would be an unprecedented overreach into state jurisdiction.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019224.jpg
Attorneys Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley write to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip requesting a review of federal involvement in the Jeffrey Epstein case, which they characterize as a 'quintessentially state matter.' They criticize a previous 'limited' review conducted by CEOS at the request of U.S. Attorney Alex Acosta, alleging it ignored professional misconduct by federal prosecutors and failed to assess the Deferred Prosecution Agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019223.jpg
This document is a fax transmission report and cover sheet dated May 27, 2008. It confirms the successful transmission of a 3-page document from Kenneth W. Starr of Kirkland & Ellis LLP to the Honorable Mark Filip at the Office of the Deputy Attorney General (DOJ). The document contains standard legal confidentiality warnings and bears the Bates stamp HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019223.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019222.jpg
This document is page 2 of a letter from attorneys Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley to Mark Filip, dated May 27, 2008, advocating for Jeffrey Epstein. The attorneys argue that the prosecution is politically motivated due to Epstein's association with Bill Clinton and complain about arbitrary deadlines imposed by Mr. Sloman and the USAO. They request a tolling of the July 8, 2008 deadline and an independent review of the case, claiming Epstein is being forced to demand a more severe punishment than the State Attorney deemed appropriate.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019221.jpg
This document is a legal letter dated May 27, 2008, from Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip, supplementing a request for an independent review of the federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein. The letter argues that the prosecution is an unprecedented extension of federal law against a figure with 'close ties to former President Clinton' and complains that Assistant U.S. Attorney Jeffrey Sloman imposed an arbitrary June 2 deadline to force compliance with a Non-Prosecution Agreement, thereby attempting to bypass the requested review. The lawyers also allege misconduct, including leaks to the New York Times and conflicts of interest involving Sloman's former law partner filing civil suits against Epstein.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012134.jpg
This document is a letter dated June 19, 2008, from Kenneth W. Starr of Kirkland & Ellis LLP to John Roth, Esq. Starr argues that federal prosecutors (USAO/SDFL) improperly interfered in Epstein's state sentencing negotiations by insisting on a harsher sentence (18 months prison + 1 year house arrest) despite claims by Mr. Sloman that they would defer to the State. Starr alleges a 'critical appearance of impropriety' regarding the federal motivation for prosecuting Epstein and requests an oral presentation to review the matter.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025360.jpg
This is page 8 (the signature page) of a legal letter dated May 19, 2008, addressed to Mark Filip. Attorneys Kenneth Starr and Joe Whitley request that the recipient review the case and discontinue federal involvement, arguing that the matter should be closed by the State and that current federal attempts involve an overreach of statutes. They request a meeting to discuss these issues of federalism and selectivity. The letter mentions U.S. Attorney Acosta.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025359.jpg
This document is page 7 of a letter to Mark Filip dated May 19, 2008, detailing allegations of prosecutorial misconduct in the Jeffrey Epstein case. It describes Assistant U.S. Attorney David Weinstein leaking confidential plea negotiation details and prosecution theories to New York Times reporter Landon Thomas, while First Assistant Sloman denied the specificity of these leaks. The text criticizes the USAO for potential political and financial motivations and mentions a review by CEOS regarding U.S. Attorney Acosta's discretion in the prosecution.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_025358.jpg
This document is page 6 of a letter to the Honorable Mark Filip, dated May 19, 2008, likely from Jeffrey Epstein's legal defense team. It outlines complaints against federal prosecutors, alleging they made unprecedented financial demands ($150,000 per alleged victim), attempted to control the selection of civil attorneys for the victims, and engaged in conflicts of interest involving an Assistant U.S. Attorney. The text also highlights a connection between a civil attorney suing Epstein (Mr. Herman) and a First Assistant prosecutor (Sloman), noting they were former law partners.
Consultation with Mandelker
Claimed Acosta consulted with Mandelker regarding deferring notification to the State Attorney.
Fax Transmittal
Transmission of a 3-page document (including cover). The specific message body is blank.
Supplement to prior submission regarding Jeffrey Epstein
Requesting independent review of federal prosecution and complaining about USAO tactics.
Fax Transmittal
9-page fax transmission sent from Kirkland & Ellis to the DOJ Deputy Attorney General. Transmission took 4 minutes and 56 seconds.
Arguments against federal involvement
Page 3 of a letter arguing that the case is a state matter (solicitation) rather than federal, and complaining about USAO conduct.
Legal defense/complaint regarding prosecutor conduct
Page 6 of a letter detailing alleged misconduct and unusual demands by federal prosecutors regarding Epstein.
Prosecutorial Misconduct Allegations
Details allegations of improper demands by federal prosecutors regarding payments to victims and selection of civil counsel.
Prior submission
Initial urgent request for independent review.
Legal arguments against federal prosecution of Jeffrey Ep...
Arguments regarding the inapplicability of federal statutes 18 U.S.C. §§ 1591, 2422(b), and 2423(b) to Epstein's case.
Defense arguments regarding Epstein prosecution
Argues against federal prosecution based on witness testimony regarding age, consent, and lack of interstate commerce.
Request to discontinue federal involvement
Defense attorneys request that the recipient review the matter, discontinue federal involvement in favor of State prosecution, and request a meeting to discuss 'issues of federalism'.
Request for review of federal involvement in Jeffrey Epst...
Attorneys for Epstein request a review of federal involvement in the case, alleging professional misconduct by prosecutors and citing a limited review by CEOS.
Arguments against federal prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein
Page 2 of a letter arguing that federal prosecution is unwarranted, criticizing the USAO Miami's conduct, and discussing the results of a CEOS review.
Request for review of federal involvement in Jeffrey Epst...
Attorneys for Epstein request a review of federal involvement in the case, alleging professional misconduct by prosecutors and citing a limited review by CEOS.
Legal arguments against federal prosecution of Epstein
Page 4 of a letter arguing that federal statutes (1591, 2422, 2423) do not apply to Epstein's conduct and that state prosecution is sufficient.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity