Federal Grand Jury
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Special Agent [REDACTED]
|
Witness juror |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Wolf Camera
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of charges against Epstein if all terms and conditions of the agreement are fulfilled, ... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | Indictment | A federal grand jury returned an indictment charging the defendant with violating Title 18, Unite... | the District | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of all charges against Epstein in the District if he timely fulfills all terms and cond... | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Suspension of federal Grand Jury investigation. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Investigation | A Federal Grand Jury investigation into offenses allegedly committed by Epstein. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Investigation | A Federal Grand Jury investigation into offenses. | Southern District of Florida | View |
| 2020-07-01 | N/A | Defendant indicted on six counts | Federal Court | View |
| 2020-06-29 | Legal proceeding | A federal grand jury in the Southern District of New York returned a sealed indictment charging t... | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2020-06-29 | N/A | Federal grand jury returned a sealed indictment charging Ghislaine Maxwell | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2020-06-29 | Legal proceeding | A federal grand jury returned a sealed indictment charging the defendant with multiple counts, in... | Southern District of New York | View |
EFTA00038796.pdf
This document is a Grand Jury Subpoena issued by the SDNY on January 19, 2021, commanding a redacted individual to testify on February 25, 2021. The investigation concerns alleged violations of federal laws regarding sex trafficking (1591), transportation for illegal sexual activity (2421-2423), conspiracy (371), and perjury (1623). The package includes a cover letter requesting non-disclosure of the subpoena and an Advice of Rights form.
EFTA00019173.pdf
An email chain from June 2010 involving the US Attorney's Office (USAFLS). The core of the document is a forwarded list of 17 pointed questions from an inquirer asking why Jeffrey Epstein received such lenient treatment, why federal trafficking charges were dropped, why Ghislaine Maxwell was not charged, and questioning the involvement of the US Attorney General (USAG) in stopping the investigation. Internal commentary from the USAFLS notes they likely cannot answer the questions.
EFTA00011351.pdf
An email thread from March 10, 2020, between First Bank's legal requirements department and an Assistant US Attorney regarding a Federal Grand Jury Subpoena (Case #19353) related to Jeffrey Epstein. First Bank provides a list of accounts and notes they are working on document production for the case.
EFTA00009550.pdf
This document is a transcript from a Federal Grand Jury session dated May 8, 2007, concerning 'Operation Leap Year'. It details the sworn testimony of an FBI agent involved in the investigation, discussing attempts to interview and subpoena an individual (referred to as Miss [REDACTED]) who frequented Jeffrey Epstein's house. The testimony reveals that Mr. Epstein paid for the attorney (Jim Eisenberg) representing this individual, who only agreed to an interview after being granted 6001 immunity.
EFTA00009512.pdf
This document is a transcript from a Federal Grand Jury proceeding on May 15, 2007, concerning 'Operation Leap Year'. A Special Agent from the FBI testifies about Jane Doe number 3 and Jane Doe number 4, detailing their interactions with Mr. Epstein, including sexual activity when they were minors, gifts, payments, and phone communications, and highlighting Mr. Epstein's apparent disregard for their age.
EFTA00009448.pdf
This document is a transcript from a Federal Grand Jury proceeding in West Palm Beach, Florida, dated February 27, 2007, concerning 'OPERATION LEAP YEAR'. An FBI agent testified, clarifying Jeffrey Epstein's age (51 or 52 during 2004-2005) and detailing how the investigation began with a March 2005 report to the Palm Beach police department about the alleged molestation of a 14-year-old stepdaughter by a male residing in Palm Beach.
EFTA00006093.pdf
This document is a legal certification from Ritz Camera Centers, Inc. (dba Wolf Camera) responding to Federal Grand Jury Subpoena OLY-77 in the Southern District of Florida. It verifies the authenticity of attached business records, which include a receipt from February 14, 2005, for camera filters totaling $46.84, and a Frequent Foto database record from July 8, 2006, linked to a customer with an Atlanta, GA address. The customer's identity is redacted.
EFTA00005718.pdf
This document contains a file folder cover and a Grand Jury Subpoena issued by US Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman (SDNY) on July 5, 2019. The subpoena commands an individual residing in Astoria, NY (name redacted) to testify before a Grand Jury on July 24, 2019, regarding violations of federal sex trafficking and conspiracy laws (18 U.S.C. §§ 1591, 2421, 2422, 2423, 371). The document includes an advice of rights and a heavily redacted page containing a NY DMV photo service URL.
DOJ-OGR-00000089.tif
This document outlines the terms of an agreement concerning Jeffrey Epstein's prosecution. It states that the US Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, R. Alexander Acosta, will defer federal prosecution in favor of the State of Florida, provided Epstein adheres to the agreement's conditions. If Epstein violates the agreement, the US Attorney may initiate prosecution, but if he fulfills all conditions, all charges against him in the Southern District of Florida will be dismissed.
DOJ-OGR-00023342.tif
This document outlines an agreement to defer federal prosecution of Epstein in the Southern District of Florida, contingent on his compliance with specific conditions and actions with the State Attorney's Office. The agreement, authorized by R. Alexander Acosta, states that federal prosecution will be deferred in favor of state prosecution, and if Epstein fulfills all terms, federal charges will be dismissed; however, if he violates the agreement, federal prosecution may be initiated.
DOJ-OGR-00014861.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Epstein was strictly limited to the Southern District of Florida. It cites the United States Attorney's Manual and the specific language of the agreement, authorized by U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, to demonstrate that there was no intention to bind other federal districts from prosecuting Epstein. The document emphasizes that the agreement's scope is explicitly confined to 'this District' and defers to prosecution by the State of Florida.
DOJ-OGR-00008591.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) detailing overt acts for Counts Three and Five of an indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell. It lists specific allegations of sexual abuse and recruitment involving minors named Jane and Carolyn between 1994 and 2004 in New York and Florida. The document is heavily edited with strike-throughs, notably removing allegations related to victims named Annie and Kate, and adjusting the age of victims from 17 to 18.
DOJ-OGR-00001619.jpg
This document is page 9 of a government filing (Document 22) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on July 13, 2020. The text argues that the defendant is a significant flight risk, citing her demonstrated skill at living in hiding and her steps to conceal herself after Jeffrey Epstein's indictment. The government contends that her decision to remain in the US previously does not mitigate the risk now that she faces a six-count indictment and the reality of a potential lengthy prison sentence.
DOJ-OGR-00000948.jpg
This document provides the background for a federal indictment returned on June 29, 2020, charging the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell) with conspiracy, enticing minors for illegal sex acts, and perjury. It describes a scheme operating between 1994 and 1997 in New York, Florida, and New Mexico, where the defendant allegedly groomed underage girls to be sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein. The text details specific grooming tactics used, such as befriending victims and taking them on shopping trips to normalize the abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00000330.jpg
This legal document is a filing arguing against granting bail to a defendant accused of a years-long scheme of sexually abusing dozens of underage girls. The prosecution contends that the defendant's proposed bail package is inadequate, he is a flight risk due to his wealth and private jet, and he poses a danger to the community. The document details the allegations, including that the defendant paid victims and victim-recruiters in cash in locations like New York and Palm Beach, and urges the Court to order him detained pending trial.
DOJ-OGR-00000315.jpg
This legal document argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Jeffrey Epstein, authorized by U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, was limited in scope. It contends the NPA only barred federal prosecution for specific offenses within the Southern District of Florida and did not prevent the United States from bringing other federal criminal charges against him elsewhere. The document quotes the agreement to support its claim that the federal government's ability to prosecute Epstein was not fully relinquished.
DOJ-OGR-00000292.jpg
This document is a page from a legal agreement detailing a deferred prosecution deal for Epstein. Under the authority of U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, federal prosecution in the Southern District of Florida for sex trafficking offenses will be deferred in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida. The agreement stipulates that if Epstein violates its terms, federal prosecution can be initiated, but if he complies, all charges related to the joint FBI and U.S. Attorney's Office investigation will be dismissed.
DOJ-OGR-00000012.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (dated Sept 17, 2024) arguing that Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was legally limited only to the Southern District of Florida (SDFL) and not binding on other federal districts. It cites the US Attorney's Manual and the specific text of the NPA authorized by R. Alexander Acosta to support the claim that the agreement contained limiting language regarding its scope. The text emphasizes that the negotiation history does not support an inference that the agreement was intended to apply nationwide.
DOJ-OGR-00020797.jpg
This page is part of a legal agreement detailing the terms under which the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, R. Alexander Acosta, agrees to defer federal prosecution of Epstein. The deferral is in favor of prosecution by the State of Florida, contingent upon Epstein's compliance with the agreement's conditions. The document also outlines the procedure for initiating federal prosecution, including a notice period, should Epstein violate the terms.
DOJ-OGR-00021858.jpg
This page from a legal filing (stamped 2024 but discussing historical legal arguments) analyzes the scope of Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It argues that the NPA and the actions of the USAO-SDFL (under R. Alexander Acosta) were limited to the Southern District of Florida and were not intended to bind other federal districts, citing the United States Attorney's Manual. A footnote quotes the specific language of the NPA where federal prosecution is deferred in favor of state prosecution.
DOJ-OGR-00021805.jpg
This page from a legal filing argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Epstein was strictly limited in scope to the Southern District of Florida. It cites the agreement's text, the negotiation history, and the U.S. Attorney's Manual to support the claim that the NPA was not intended to bind other districts from prosecuting Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00021509.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal agreement (the Non-Prosecution Agreement) between the United States and Jeffrey Epstein. It outlines sentencing dates (2007/2008), stipulations regarding 'gain time' in prison, and a confidentiality clause attempting to keep the agreement out of the public record. Crucially, it contains the controversial immunity clause stating the U.S. will not prosecute any potential co-conspirators (names redacted) and agrees to suspend the federal Grand Jury investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00002976.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) does not immunize the defendant, Maxwell, from prosecution. The argument is based on two points: the NPA's scope is strictly limited to specific federal crimes committed between 2001 and 2007, and the mere mention of "co-conspirator" does not automatically include Maxwell within the agreement's protections.
DOJ-OGR-00004665.jpg
This document is the introductory page of a transcript regarding the sworn testimony of a Special Agent before a Federal Grand Jury in West Palm Beach, Florida, on March 18, 2008. The document identifies the location, date, and court reporting service involved, though the names of the agent and the reporter are redacted. It is marked confidential and appears to be part of a larger filing from 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00004653.jpg
This document is page 5 of a Non-Prosecution Agreement/Plea Agreement between the United States and Jeffrey Epstein. It outlines sentencing deadlines (late 2007/early 2008), attempts to keep the agreement out of the public record, and crucially grants immunity from federal criminal charges to four named potential co-conspirators: Sarah Kellen, Adriana Ross, Lesley Groff, and Nadia Marcinkova. It also suspends pending federal Grand Jury investigations and subpoenas conditional on Epstein's compliance.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity