| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Andrew Oosterbaan
|
Professional collaborative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein Defense Counsel
|
Professional adversarial |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | OPR Interview of Maria Villafaña | Unknown | View |
This document is page 47 of a government filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (2021). It argues that the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was not intended to protect Maxwell. Citing an OPR report and an interview with former prosecutor Maria Villafaña, the text states that while prosecutors knew of a 'socialite' friend of Epstein (Maxwell), they had no evidence against her in 2007 and intended the immunity provision to apply only to four specific female assistants.
This document is page 38 of a legal filing in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The government argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) signed by the USAO-SDFL with Jeffrey Epstein did not bind other districts. It cites the November 2020 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report, noting that while USAO-SDFL prosecutor Maria Villafaña consulted with DOJ Child Exploitation Chief Andrew Oosterbaan, this does not support the defendant's claim of a wider immunity promise.
Line prosecutor sent a draft of the Non-Prosecution Agreement to the CEOS Chief.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity