Department of Justice (DOJ)
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Congress
|
Advisory lobbying |
9
Strong
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
|
Inter agency collaboration |
9
Strong
|
2 | |
|
organization
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
|
Interagency collaboration |
8
Strong
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
|
Interagency collaboration |
8
Strong
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
|
Inter agency collaboration |
7
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
|
Inter agency disagreement and deference |
7
|
1 | |
|
organization
Congress
|
Advisory legislative commentary |
7
|
1 | |
|
organization
United States Government
|
Advisory policy recommendation |
7
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
|
Inter agency jurisdictional dispute collaboration |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
|
Inter agency policy disagreement and cooperation |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
Congress
|
Adversarial collaborative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Attorney General
|
Hierarchical |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
Congress
|
Adversarial collaborative |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
|
Inter agency coordination and jurisdictional negotiation |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Human Trafficking Task Forces
|
Funder and trainer |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Proposed legislation (Mann Act expansion, Sections 222, 223)
|
Unknown |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of State
|
Inter agency disagreement |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Non-government organizations (NGOs)
|
Potential conflict of interest |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
HHS and DHS
|
Collaborative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
FBI, DOL, DHS
|
Inter agency collaboration jurisdiction |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
DHS/FBI/DOL
|
Inter agency coordination |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
|
Inter agency collaboration jurisdiction |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
US States
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
National Advocacy Center, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Human Trafficking Task Forces
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | DOJ analysis and opposition to subsection (d)(5) of a proposed Act, specifically the term 'shall ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ opposition to subsection (d)(6) which would create a guardian ad litem program, citing confli... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ recommendation to strike the 2% cap on funding for training and technical assistance under 22... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ recommendation to amend Section 203 of the 2005 version of an Act to ensure DOJ and DHS are i... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ recommends adding 'endeavor to' after 'shall' in subsection (c)(3)(A)(ii) to avoid creati... | Not applicable | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ analysis and response to proposed legislative changes in Sections 202 and 203 of a bill relat... | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | The Department of Justice's analysis and recommendations on proposed legislative changes in Secti... | Not applicable | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ opposes extending continued presence for trafficking victims for the duration of a civil ... | Not applicable | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ opposes language in Section 202(a) that would legislate the existence of the 'Trafficking... | Not applicable | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ opposes the 120-day deadline in Section 202(f) as unreasonable. | Not applicable | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ opposes language in Section 203 that would remove the Attorney General's role in determin... | Not applicable | View |
| N/A | N/A | Annual conferences where human trafficking laws are discussed. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Annual conferences where human trafficking laws concerning minor victims are discussed. | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Conferences where human trafficking laws are discussed. | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ training on human trafficking, including discussion on using various criminal statutes. | National Advocacy Center an... | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ training on using various criminal statutes in human trafficking cases. | Annual conferences, the Nat... | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ expresses opposition to expanding the Mann Act to federalize criminal prosecution of pand... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ opposes a proposed subsection (g) that would expand sex tourism offenses to include illic... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ states its belief that the addition of 18 U.S.C. § 2423A is unnecessary. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ opposes the expansion of jurisdiction over offenses involving non-Americans committed out... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | The DOJ criticizes Section 223, which relates to 'pimping' an alien, for removing a requirement f... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ analysis of and opposition to proposed legislative changes in Sections 205, 211, and 213 of a... | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | The Department of Justice's analysis and statement of opposition/deference regarding proposed leg... | Not applicable | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ opposition to proposed changes in Section 205 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, specifi... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | DOJ opposition to proposed changes in Section 205 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, specifi... | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00000324.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal letter filed on July 11, 2019, in Case 1:19-cr-00490 (USA v. Epstein). The US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York is requesting Judge Richard M. Berman to adjourn a bail hearing to a later date to allow the Court time to review the Government's reply. The letter is signed by Assistant US Attorneys Rossmiller, Moe, and Comey, and copied to defense counsel Weinberg and Weingarten.
DOJ-OGR-00000302.jpg
This document is a signature page for an Addendum to a Non-Prosecution Agreement involving Jeffrey Epstein. It contains a handwritten signature and date (10/29/07) by Gerald Lefcourt, Epstein's counsel. The text certifies that Epstein understands the clarifications to the agreement and agrees to comply, although Epstein's own signature line is blank on this specific page. The document was later filed in court in 2016 and 2019 as indicated by the headers.
DOJ-OGR-00000299.jpg
This document is the signature page (Page 7 of 7) of a Non-Prosecution Agreement involving Jeffrey Epstein. It features the signature of his attorney, Lilly Ann Sanchez, dated September 24, 2007. The document lists other key legal figures including U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta and defense attorney Gerald Lefcourt, certifying that Epstein understands and agrees to the conditions of the agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00000297.jpg
This document is the signature page (Page 7 of 7) of a Non-Prosecution Agreement involving Jeffrey Epstein. It features Epstein's signature dated September 24, 2007, alongside signature blocks for U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, A. Marie Villafaña, and Epstein's defense team, Gerald Lefcourt and Lilly Ann Sanchez. The text certifies that Epstein has read, understood, and agreed to comply with the conditions of the agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00000283.jpg
This document is page 10 of a legal filing (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) dated July 11, 2019, arguing for Jeffrey Epstein's pretrial release. Defense counsel argues that home confinement with 24-hour private armed guards—paid for by Epstein—is the 'least restrictive' condition to assure his appearance, citing precedents like Bernie Madoff and Marc Dreier. The filing addresses the Judge's potential concerns about wealthy defendants 'buying their way out' of jail, arguing that denying this option based on wealth raises equal protection concerns.
DOJ-OGR-00000270.jpg
This document is page 13 of a legal filing (Indictment) dated July 2, 2019, for Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (the Jeffrey Epstein case). It outlines the 'Substitute Asset Provision,' stating the government's intent to seize other property from the defendant if the primary forfeitable assets are missing, transferred, or devalued. The document is signed by the Grand Jury Foreperson and U.S. Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman.
DOJ-OGR-00000268.jpg
This document is Page 11 of a 2019 federal indictment (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) against Jeffrey Epstein. It details overt acts committed by 'Employee-2' and 'Employee-3' in 2004 and 2005, specifically phone calls made to 'Minor Victim-3' to schedule paid sex acts with Epstein. The page also introduces 'Count Two: Sex Trafficking,' charging Epstein with recruiting and enticing minors for commercial sex acts between 2002 and 2005.
DOJ-OGR-00000263.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court filing (likely the 2019 indictment) against Jeffrey Epstein. It details the operation of his sex trafficking network at his Palm Beach residence, describing how he traveled by private jet from New York and how specific employees (Employee-1, 2, and 3) facilitated the abuse by scheduling encounters and escorting victims. It explicitly describes the nature of the sexual acts and the 'massage' ruse used to victimize minors.
DOJ-OGR-00000021.jpg
This document is page 20 of an appellate court opinion (likely 2nd Circuit) dated September 17, 2024, affirming a District Court's denial of Ghislaine Maxwell's motion. Maxwell argued that testimony regarding sexual abuse in New Mexico constituted a 'constructive amendment' or 'prejudicial variance' violating the Fifth Amendment because it differed from the indictment charges. The court rejected this argument and affirmed the lower court's ruling.
DOJ-OGR-00000015.jpg
This document is page 14 of a legal opinion (likely from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals) affirming a District Court's decision to deny Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to dismiss charges based on timeliness. The court rejects Maxwell's arguments regarding the statute of limitations and the applicability of the 2003 amendment to 18 U.S.C. § 3283, ruling that the offenses involving sexual abuse of minors fall within the extended statute of limitations. The document cites legal precedents including Weingarten v. United States and United States v. Sampson.
DOJ-OGR-00000006.jpg
This document page is from an appellate court decision affirming the conviction and sentence of Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines the background of the case, stating that from 1994 to 2004, Maxwell groomed women and girls to facilitate Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse. It also briefly mentions Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with the Southern District of Florida, where he agreed to plead guilty to solicitation of prostitution.
DOJ-OGR-00000002.jpg
This is the title page of a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the case United States v. Maxwell (Case No. 22-1426-cr). The document indicates that Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal was argued on March 12, 2024, and decided on September 17, 2024, by judges Cabranes, Wesley, and Lohier.
DOJ-OGR-00030427.jpg
This is a page from a Motion for a Protective Order filed on February 5, 2008, by attorney Theodore J. Leopold on behalf of a 'Jane Doe' victim. The motion alleges that Jeffrey Epstein and his agents have been harassing the victim at her workplace, including an incident where a man falsely posed as an attorney to contact her. The document argues these actions are 'insult to injury' for an emotionally scarred girl and requests a court order prohibiting further harassment.
DOJ-OGR-00030423.jpg
This document is a DDA (Demand Deposit Account) statement inquiry dated January 18, 2005. It details a 'Household Account' jointly held by Ghislaine Maxwell and Alfredo Rodriguez. The statement shows a series of checks cashed between January 12 and January 13, 2005, totaling several thousand dollars, and indicates a closing balance of $4,268.51.
DOJ-OGR-00030416.jpg
The document is a photocopy of a personal check dated December 8, 2004, drawn on Colonial Bank in Palm Beach, Florida. The check is from Alfredo Rodriguez (spelled phonetically in the header but signed Rodriguez) for $1,000.00 payable to 'CASA' with the memo line specifying it is 'For: J.E.' (Jeffrey Epstein). The document was processed as part of a DOJ public records request released in 2017.
DOJ-OGR-00030414.jpg
A copy of a Colonial Bank check dated December 3, 2004, drawn on the account of Jeffrey E. Epstein for $2,000.00. The check is made payable to 'CASH' and is signed by 'A. Rodriguez' (likely Alfredo Rodriguez). The document is part of a 2017 DOJ public records release.
DOJ-OGR-00030410.jpg
This document is the final page (10 of 10) of a printed MySpace profile for the user 'iloveanirishboi'. It contains standard MySpace copyright text, the specific URL with friendID 6573975, and administrative metadata including a Public Records Request number and a DOJ Bates stamp. The main body of this specific page is blank.
DOJ-OGR-00030400.jpg
This document is a printout of a MySpace profile page captured on April 4, 2006. It displays basic profile statistics including an education level of 'High school' and an income of '$250,000 and Higher'. The document includes two thumbnail photos of females and is part of a Department of Justice public records release (Request No. 17-295), stamped DOJ-OGR-00030400. The profile owner's name is redacted, but the URL identifies the user ID as 60688973.
DOJ-OGR-00030394.jpg
This document is a scanned image of an envelope sent by the law firm Herman & Mermelstein, P.A. to Lanna Leigh Belohlavek, Esq. at the State Attorney's Office in West Palm Beach, Florida. The postage meter indicates the item was mailed on March 31, 2008, with a cost of $0.41. The document includes footer information indicating it is part of a 2017 Public Records Request (No. 17-295) and bears the Bates number DOJ-OGR-00030394.
DOJ-OGR-00030393.jpg
This document is a Certificate of Service dated March 31, 2008. It certifies that legal documents were served via facsimile and U.S. mail to attorneys Jack A. Goldberger and Lanna Leigh Belohlavek (of the State Attorney's Office) in West Palm Beach, Florida. The document is page 40 of a larger release (114 pages) related to Public Records Request No. 17-295.
DOJ-OGR-00030383.jpg
This document appears to be page 30 of 114 from a Public Records Request (No. 17-295) dated July 26, 2017. The text outlines legal statutes (likely Florida law given the specific statute numbers) regarding the penalties for failing to provide information (specifically instant message names) and the requirement for the sheriff's office to update sexual offender information within two working days.
DOJ-OGR-00030382.jpg
This page contains excerpted text from legal statutes (specifically Florida Statutes sections 794 and 800) regarding the definition of sexual offenses and the strict registration requirements for sexual offenders. It details the obligation to report personal data, including physical addresses, email addresses, instant message names, vehicle/vessel details, and higher education enrollment to the Sheriff's office or relevant department. The document was produced as part of a DOJ Public Records Request on July 26, 2017.
DOJ-OGR-00030379.jpg
This document is page 26 of 114 from a Public Records Request (No. 17-295) released on July 26, 2017. It contains the text of Florida statutes (specifically subsections 7 through 10) regulating the registration requirements for sexual offenders who intend to move out of state or change residence. The text outlines the legal obligation to report to the sheriff, the classification of non-compliance as a felony, and provides immunity from civil liability for government agencies and employees acting in good faith regarding these regulations.
DOJ-OGR-00021099.jpg
This document is a page from a 2023 legal filing reviewing the historical handling of the Epstein case. It highlights that the investigation was national in scope, involving coordination between the Southern District of Florida and New York, and notes that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was specifically modified to broaden immunity for co-conspirators beyond just Florida. Crucially, it mentions investigators knew Epstein used hidden cameras in his NY home to record sexual encounters and that AUSA Villafana sought to investigate Epstein's assistants in New York.
DOJ-OGR-00021096.jpg
This document is a page from a legal brief filed on February 28, 2023. It argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was intended to have a broad scope, providing global immunity to Epstein and his co-conspirators beyond a specific district. It cites a 2007 email from prosecutor Villafana to defense attorney Lefkowitz, explicitly stating a preference not to highlight other crimes and other chargeable persons to the judge.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity