Department of Justice (DOJ)
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Congress
|
Unknown |
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-00015490.jpg
This document consists of four 'Important Message' slips from March 20th and 21st, 2003, which appear to be from a professional setting like an office or residence. The messages, taken by staff members named Evelyne and Michael, are for recipients identified as Miss Maxwell, Sarah, JE, and Mr. Foutein. The content of the messages, from redacted callers, concerns an arrival, uncertainty about the time of a massage appointment, and a person running late.
DOJ-OGR-00015488.jpg
This document contains four 'Important Message' slips from a spiral-bound notebook, recording phone calls for Jeffrey Epstein (referred to as 'JE' or 'Mr Epstein'). The messages date from 2003 (March and possibly October). Notable callers include Les Wexner and 'Tony', along with two redacted individuals. The messages were taken by an assistant named Evelyne, indicating requests for return calls.
DOJ-OGR-00015422.jpg
This document is Page 4 of a FedEx invoice dated December 13, 2002 (Invoice Number 4-487-30791). It is a 'FedEx Ground Reference Chart' that provides definitions for service codes, zone locations (including Hawaii, Alaska, and Canada), and other charge codes (such as fuel surcharges and hazardous materials), rather than detailing specific transactions.
DOJ-OGR-00015384.jpg
This document is page 2 of 6 of a FedEx invoice dated November 25, 2002. It contains a blank 'Adjustment Request' form and an address change form for Account Number 1144-2081-6. The document is marked 'CONFIDENTIAL' and bears Bates stamps indicating it is part of evidence files for the SDNY (likely Ghislaine Maxwell case) and DOJ.
DOJ-OGR-00015291.jpg
This document is a 'Find Report' from Shoppers Travel, Inc., marked as a Defendant's Exhibit in a criminal case (SDNY). It lists financial transactions (invoices) from July 2005 to December 2006, detailing amounts billed to various individuals including Ghislaine Maxwell, Sarah Kellen, and others associated with the Epstein case. Several names are redacted by the DOJ.
DOJ-OGR-00015285.jpg
This document is a transmittal letter dated March 26, 2021, from the UK HM Land Registry to Avonhurst Legal Services LLP, fulfilling a request for historical property documents. The document includes a fee debit of £3.00 and is stamped by Notary Public Keith E. Rooney. Crucially, faint background text (a ghost image of the enclosed historical document) reveals the name 'Ghislaine Noelle Marion Maxwell' and an address at 60 Stanhope Mews East, linking the request to the Epstein associate.
DOJ-OGR-00015234.jpg
This document is page 23 of a Curriculum Vitae (CV) or bibliography belonging to Elizabeth F. Loftus, identified by the header 'LOFTUS-046'. It lists academic publications from 2002 and 2003, focusing heavily on false memories, eyewitness testimony, and the intersection of psychology and law. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp (DOJ-OGR-00015234), suggesting it was included in discovery materials or a government report.
DOJ-OGR-00015212.jpg
This document is the first page of the Curriculum Vitae for Elizabeth F. Loftus, a Distinguished Professor at UC Irvine. It outlines her education, teaching experience, and honorary degrees. The document is stamped as a Defendant's Exhibit (EL-1) for the case 20 Cr. 330 (AJN), which corresponds to the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, indicating Loftus was utilized as an expert witness for the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00015209.jpg
This document is a page from a Student Information System (SIS) record for an unidentified student within the Palm Beach County School District. It lists administrative details such as an original enrollment date of August 27, 1990, and indicates the student transferred from another school in the same district. The document was printed or accessed on July 19, 2021, and bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00015204.jpg
This document is a student enrollment record from the Palm Beach school system, dated July 19, 2021, and marked as a defendant's exhibit in a legal case. It details the academic history of a student, whose name is redacted by the DOJ, from the 1989-1990 school year through the 2001-2002 school year. The record shows the student's attendance, enrollment dates, and withdrawal dates at various elementary, middle, high schools, and adult education centers within the district.
DOJ-OGR-00015186.jpg
This document is a signature page from a legal stipulation dated December 6, 2021, in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. It confirms that 'Defendant's Trial Exhibit B' is agreed to be received in evidence. The document is signed by Maxwell's defense team (Everdell, Menninger, Pagliuca, Sternheim) and the prosecution team from the Southern District of New York (Comey, Moe, Pomerantz, Rohrbach).
DOJ-OGR-00015179.jpg
A handwritten note, likely a diary entry, from a young person expressing excitement about a trip. A wealthy 'Boss' bought the author tickets to visit a female acquaintance ('her') whom the author hasn't seen in a year. The author explicitly mentions the man is 'very wealthy' and expresses hope that he might pay for their college education.
DOJ-OGR-00015171.jpg
This document is page 1 of 2 of the 'Attestations/Signature Page' for the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program (Epstein VCP). It is a legal form requiring a wet signature and notarization, wherein the claimant certifies the truthfulness of their claim under penalty of perjury and authorizes the Administrator (Jordana H. Feldman) to process the claim and resolve liens (Medicare/Medicaid). The document includes warnings against fraud and establishes confidentiality protocols.
DOJ-OGR-00015168.jpg
This document is a legal stipulation from the trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated December 17, 2021. It records an agreement between the prosecution (SDNY) and the defense to admit specific exhibits (MG-12, MG-1, 610-A, and A-5) into evidence. The document bears signatures from both the Assistant United States Attorneys and Maxwell's defense counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00015167.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal stipulation agreeing to the authenticity of various exhibits. It validates HM Land Registry records detailing the ownership history of two London properties (69 Stanhope Mews East and 44 Kinnerton Street) involving Ghislaine Maxwell, Anthony John Jetts, and the O'Neills between 1986 and 1997. It also stipulates the authenticity of a transcript from a deposition of Ghislaine Maxwell taken on April 9, 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00015155.jpg
This document is a legal filing (Page 23 of 31) arguing against a Government motion to unseal grand jury materials in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. The text highlights procedural irregularities, noting that the motion was filed solely by the Deputy Attorney General (DAG) without the support of the local U.S. Attorney's Office or the trial team familiar with the case. It further criticizes the Government for failing to notify Epstein and Maxwell's victims in advance and for demonstrating a lack of familiarity with the trial record.
DOJ-OGR-00015152.jpg
This document is page 20 of a legal filing (Doc 809) in the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues against unsealing grand jury materials, claiming the Government has not met the 'special circumstances' burden. The text extensively cites the precedent 'In re Biaggi,' arguing that unsealing is only justified to correct misleading public characterizations, and suggests the Government's current motion is a 'diversion' rather than true transparency.
DOJ-OGR-00002400.jpg
This document is the final page (18 of 18) of a Protective Order filed on August 4, 2020, in case 1:19-cr-00333-AJN (associated with the Ghislaine Maxwell prosecution). It stipulates that the order does not restrict the use of confidential information during the actual trial and that the Court reserves the right to modify the order. The document bears a Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00002400.
DOJ-OGR-00002389(1).jpg
This is page 12 of a legal filing (Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS, Giuffre v. Maxwell) filed on March 4, 2016. It outlines the procedures for challenging 'Confidential' or 'Highly Confidential' designations of discovery material. It specifies that failing to challenge a designation immediately does not waive the right to do so later, and outlines a process requiring written notice and potential court hearings to resolve disputes over these designations.
DOJ-OGR-00002386(1).jpg
This document is page 3 (labeled page 4 in the header filing) of a Protective Order from Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS (Giuffre v. Maxwell). It outlines specific categories of individuals permitted to access 'Protected Material' or 'Confidential Information,' including attorneys, court personnel, and expert witnesses. The document includes track changes (red text) adding a clause allowing access to individuals who originally authored or previously received the protected materials.
DOJ-OGR-00002381.jpg
This document is the signature page of a legal filing dated March 4, 2016, associated with Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS (Virginia Giuffre v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It is submitted by the law firm Boies, Schiller & Flexner LLP, specifically signed by Sigrid McCawley, and lists contact information for attorneys David Boies and Ellen Brockman. The document bears a DOJ Bates stamp (DOJ-OGR-00002381).
DOJ-OGR-00002374.jpg
This document is page 3 (or 4) of a Protective Order filed in Case 1:15-cv-07433-RWS (Giuffre v. Maxwell). It outlines the legal procedures for handling 'CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION,' specifically requiring counsel to obtain written acknowledgments from third parties before disclosure and establishing that designating documents as confidential asserts a good faith basis regarding privacy harm.
DOJ-OGR-00002363.jpg
This document is page 16 of a legal filing (Document 134) in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on February 4, 2021. The text presents a legal argument requesting the suppression of evidence obtained from a redacted source (likely civil depositions) and the dismissal of Counts Five and Six. The argument focuses on the sanctity of protective orders in civil litigation, asserting that the depositions intrusively probed Maxwell's sexual practices, preferences, and partners in what began as a defamation case.
DOJ-OGR-00002346.jpg
This is a Notice of Motion filed on February 4, 2021 (dated January 25, 2021) in the Southern District of New York regarding the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense is moving to suppress evidence obtained from a specific government subpoena (the target of which is redacted) and to dismiss Counts Five and Six of the indictment, citing Due Process violations. The defense also requested oral arguments for this motion.
DOJ-OGR-00002323.jpg
This document is page 3 (Table of Authorities) of a legal filing (Document 126) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on January 25, 2021. It lists legal precedents (cases) and statutes cited in the brief, including Supreme Court cases like Duren v. Missouri and Second Circuit cases like United States v. Jackman. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00002323.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity