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-00032956.jpg
A car rental agreement for Jeffrey Epstein dated approximately October 3, 2005. The document lists his address at 358 El Brillo Way, Palm Beach, FL. It includes his initials 'J.E.' declining certain insurance coverages and confirming he had not been at the airport in the last 24 hours. The document contains standard Florida rental statutes and a handwritten 'I accept' alongside a signature.
DOJ-OGR-00032939.jpg
This document is a printed email from September 30, 2005, sent by Mike O'Neil (likely of the Trilateral Commission) to Cecilia Steen's email address, but addressed to Jeffrey Epstein. O'Neil is following up to see if Epstein will attend the 2005 North American regional meeting in Montreal scheduled for November 4-6, noting that they had not yet received a response. The document bears Department of Justice release stamps from 2017.
DOJ-OGR-00032930.jpg
This document contains a handwritten message slip where the sender's name has been redacted. The message states that the individual cannot come at 7pm 'tomorrow' because of soccer. The document includes Department of Justice footer markings indicating it was part of Public Records Request No. 17-295, processed on July 26, 2017.
DOJ-OGR-00032926.jpg
A handwritten note, likely from a message pad, instructing the recipient to 'rerent the car' (specifically a Blue Dodge Neon) from Dollar Rent A Car because the contract expires on February 2nd. The phone number listed ((561) 686-3300) corresponds to the Palm Beach area code. The document contains Jeffrey Epstein's name printed at the bottom and includes DOJ FOIA processing footers.
DOJ-OGR-00032835.jpg
This document is an evidence file folder or cover sheet containing handwritten notes listing contents as '#2 3 MESSAGE BOOKS' with sub-items 'BK-1', 'BK-2', and 'BK-3'. The document includes a footer indicating it was processed for a Public Records Request on July 26, 2017, by the DOJ.
DOJ-OGR-00032830.jpg
This document is page 2 of a printout from Myspace.com, specifically an 'image view' page dated November 14, 2005. It contains a small thumbnail image (possibly an interior), standard website footer links, and a URL referencing 'friendID=172831'. The document bears DOJ Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00032830 and indicates it was processed for a Public Records Request on 07/26/17.
DOJ-OGR-00032828.jpg
This document is page 2 of a printout from Myspace.com, dated November 14, 2005. It appears to be the footer section of a 'view image' page for a specific user (FriendID 172831). The page contains standard website footer links (About, FAQ, Terms, etc.) and copyright information. It includes FOIA processing marks from 2017 and a DOJ Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00025447.jpg
This document is an email chain from August 12, 2019, concerning a request to reconstruct '292 data' for Inmate Epstein (76318-054). The original request from a redacted sender to Sonya Thompson is forwarded by her with a humorous comment, and then acknowledged by Michael Carvajal. The exchange suggests a professional, likely governmental, context, as indicated by the DOJ document code.
DOJ-OGR-00014459.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (summation by Ms. Moe) in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The prosecutor argues that Maxwell knowingly transported a minor named 'Jane' (whom she met at a summer camp) across state lines for sexual abuse, emphasizing Maxwell's knowledge of Jane's age (under 17). It also references testimony from a victim named 'Kate' regarding an incident where Maxwell instructed her to wear a schoolgirl outfit for Epstein, establishing Maxwell's knowledge of Epstein's preferences.
DOJ-OGR-00014441.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (summation by Ms. Moe) filed on August 10, 2022. It details the testimony of Juan Alessi, who described driving Ghislaine Maxwell near Mar-a-Lago when she spotted Virginia Roberts and ordered the car to stop to recruit her. The prosecutor connects this event to a victim named Carolyn, noting that Carolyn met Maxwell through Virginia Roberts.
DOJ-OGR-00014422.jpg
This document is a page from the government's summation (by Ms. Moe) in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It details the grooming and abuse of a victim referred to as 'Jane,' beginning when she was an 8th grader in 1994 at a summer camp and continuing in Palm Beach. The text describes Maxwell acting as an 'older sister figure' to facilitate abuse and Epstein using scholarship offers as a cover story for Jane's mother before physically abusing Jane in a pool house.
DOJ-OGR-00005280.jpg
This document is Page 4 of 40 from a court filing (Document 365) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 22, 2021. It contains preliminary instructions for prospective jurors regarding a questionnaire, emphasizing the legal requirement to provide truthful answers under oath. The text explicitly prohibits jurors from discussing the case with anyone, using social media (citing Facebook and Twitter) to communicate about it, or conducting independent research.
DOJ-OGR-00005267.jpg
This is the second and final page of a legal document (Document 360) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on October 19, 2021. The document was signed in New York, New York by United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan. A Department of Justice Bates number is present at the bottom of the page.
DOJ-OGR-00005240.jpg
This is the final page (page 4) of a legal filing by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The Government argues against the defense's schedule regarding 'sensitive issues' and requests the Court maintain the October 18, 2021, deadline for Rule 412 motions (regarding admissibility of victim sexual history), or set a final deadline of October 25, 2021. The document is signed by Assistant US Attorneys Moe, Pomerantz, and Rohrbach under US Attorney Damian Williams.
DOJ-OGR-00005218.jpg
This document is page 13 of a legal filing (Document 342) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 13, 2021. It presents legal arguments regarding jury selection (voir dire), specifically arguing that defense attorneys should be allowed to question jurors directly due to the case's complexity and the high risk of prejudice from extensive pretrial publicity. The text cites legal precedents (United States v. Ible, United States v. Davis, Silverthorne v. United States) to support the necessity of thorough examination to ensure impartial jurors.
DOJ-OGR-00005188.jpg
This document is a handwritten page from a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) containing legal arguments regarding statutes of limitations and definitions of sexual abuse. The author critiques the Fifth Circuit's interpretation of 18 USC statutes (specifically §3283, §3509, and §2251), arguing that procedural rules and statutes of limitations are not comparable and citing various case law precedents to support the argument. It concludes with a note about Biden's 1990 Senate bill S. 1965.
DOJ-OGR-00005185.jpg
This document is a handwritten page from a legal filing in the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed in October 2021. The text contains legal arguments regarding statutory interpretation, specifically concerning definitions of 'sexual abuse' and 'exploitation,' and argues for the application of 'repose' (statute of limitations) based on Supreme Court precedents like *Lockhart*, *Toussie*, and *McElvain*. It criticizes the Fifth Circuit's interpretation of these statutes.
DOJ-OGR-00005180.jpg
This document is a single handwritten page (page 2 of 22) from a court filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 12, 2021. It contains a statement asserting that an individual named Diehl's request to intervene will not prejudice the case and that Diehl has no further interest in the matter. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00005177.jpg
This is the final page (page 9 of the internal document, page 22 of the filing) of a legal protocol regarding a compensation program (likely the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program). It outlines privacy protections for claimants, explicitly stating they are not bound by confidentiality regarding their own claims. It also mandates the Program Administrator to provide monthly aggregate reports on paid claims to the Probate Court and Attorney General of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
DOJ-OGR-00002870.jpg
This page is from a Government court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated March 29, 2021. It details the discovery schedule, specifically noting the provision of evidence related to 'Minor Victim-4' and the intent to produce statements from over 250 non-testifying witnesses related to the Epstein investigation by April 12, 2021. It also confirms the trial is scheduled to proceed on July 12, 2021, and discusses potential motions regarding the 'S2 Indictment.'
DOJ-OGR-00033122.jpg
This document is a blank Errata Sheet provided by Consor & Associates for a deposition taken on February 20, 2008, in the case 'State v. Jeffrey Epstein.' The name of the deponent is redacted. The form allows the witness to make corrections to their testimony under penalty of perjury; however, this specific page lists no corrections.
DOJ-OGR-00033106.jpg
This document is a page from a deposition transcript processed by Consor & Associates. Attorney Mr. Tein questions a witness about the credibility of their parents, specifically establishing that the witness's father served two years in federal prison for financial fraud and stealing from a financial institution. Opposing counsel, Mr. Leopold, repeatedly objects to the line of questioning, leading to an accusation of witness coaching from Mr. Tein.
DOJ-OGR-00025374.jpg
This document is a placeholder page from a DOJ production indicating a mail attachment. The specific attachment is a PDF file named 'JeffreyEpsteinRequest.pdf'. The page contains various numbering systems (Page 1152, Page 2980) and a DOJ Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00023348.jpg
This document is page 7 of 7 of a Non-Prosecution Agreement involving Jeffrey Epstein. It contains the signatures executing the agreement, specifically signed by Assistant U.S. Attorney A. Marie Villafaña on September 27, 2007, and Epstein's counsel Gerald Lefcourt on September 24, 2007. The text certifies that Epstein has read, understood, and agreed to comply with the conditions of the agreement.
DOJ-OGR-00008809.jpg
This document is an 'Appearance of Counsel' filed in the Southern District of New York on January 5, 2022, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Attorney Todd A. Spodek of Spodek Law Group, P.C. formally notifies the court that he is representing 'Jury Number 50,' rather than the defendant or prosecution. This filing occurred post-trial.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity