This document is a calendar entry for a Webex meeting scheduled for May 4, 2020, titled 'Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein'. The organizer and attendees are redacted. The document contains standard Webex connection details and a legal disclaimer regarding attorney-client privilege and recording consent.
This document is an email dated April 30, 2020, containing a Webex meeting invitation. The subject of the meeting is a 'Request for Information Relating to Jeffrey Epstein'. The sender and recipient of the email have been redacted.
This document is an email chain from March 2021 between officials at the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (SDNY). They are coordinating to assemble a comprehensive list of all Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests the office has ever received regarding Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The discussion reveals limitations in their internal tracking database, specifically regarding requests made to the FBI that resulted in litigation defended by the SDNY, and identifies a missing record involving the media outlet Radar Online.
This document is a chain of email correspondence between Miami attorney Joe Nascimento and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) spanning July 2019 to May 2021. The correspondence begins when Nascimento's client is served a grand jury subpoena regarding the Epstein case on July 6, 2019. The emails detail the scheduling of various meetings in West Palm Beach and video conferences to discuss the client's cooperation and proffer agreements, continuing through the period of Ghislaine Maxwell's arrest in July 2020.
This document is a calendar entry and Webex meeting invitation for an event scheduled on July 6, 2020. The meeting appears to be hosted by the United States Attorney's Office (USAO) based on the Webex URL. The specific event title, organizer, and attendees have been redacted, although the meeting is classified as 'X-PERSONAL' and was created on July 5, 2020.
This document is an email chain from July 2020 between attorney Jack Scarola and likely FBI/prosecutors arranging a WebEx interview for a witness/victim in the Epstein case. Scarola provides a summary 'proffer' or list of the witness's interactions, stating she saw Epstein over 100 times, met Ghislaine Maxwell ~10 times (including seeing nude photos of her), and was transported by Epstein's drivers ~50 times. The emails confirm the logistical details for the interview to take place on July 17, 2020, at Scarola's office.
This document is a heavily redacted email header dated October 26, 2020, with the subject 'RE: Wednesday's WebEx'. The sender and primary recipients are redacted, but a Bcc address 'USAHUB-USAJournal111' is visible, suggesting internal corporate journaling or compliance archiving. The document appears to be part of a discovery production, indicated by the Bates number EFTA00023257.
This document is an email dated July 19, 2021, from an Assistant United States Attorney (SDNY) to a redacted recipient. The email serves to inform the recipient that a specific individual (redacted) is being subpoenaed to testify as a witness in a trial scheduled to begin November 29, 2021 (coinciding with the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). The prosecutor requests a virtual WebEx meeting in late July and an in-person preparation meeting in August.
This document is a calendar invitation for a Webex meeting scheduled for March 10, 2021, titled 'Epstein/Maxwell FOIA'. The meeting was organized by an individual from the USANYS (United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York) and sent to a redacted attendee, likely concerning Freedom of Information Act requests related to the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases.
This document is an email invitation for a Webex meeting dated March 10, 2021, between employees of the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS). The subject of the meeting is 'Epstein/Maxwell FOIA', indicating a discussion regarding Freedom of Information Act requests related to the case.
This document is a calendar invitation for a Webex meeting titled 'Epstein/Maxwell FOIA' scheduled for March 10, 2021. The meeting was organized by a redacted individual from the USANYS (United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York) and included several redacted attendees, likely to discuss Freedom of Information Act requests related to the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases.
An email thread from August 2021 between Ghislaine Maxwell's attorney, Bobbi Sternheim, and likely MDC or prosecution officials. Sternheim reports a security breach where third parties accessed a Zoom room during privileged attorney-client communication and requests a return to WebEx. The respondent denies a breach occurred, attributing the issue to an internal miscommunication where a secure line was already in use.
This document is a calendar invitation for a Webex meeting titled 'Epstein Trust Discussion' scheduled for July 6, 2020, nearly a year after Jeffrey Epstein's death. The meeting was classified as 'X-PERSONAL' and organized by a redacted individual for redacted attendees. The document includes technical details for joining the meeting via Webex, though most access codes and phone numbers are obscured.
This document is an email invitation for a Webex meeting titled 'Epstein Trust Discussion' scheduled for July 2, 2020. The meeting appears to be related to the administration or legal matters of the Epstein Trust following Jeffrey Epstein's death. The participants (sender and recipient) and specific access details are redacted.
This document is an email dated June 28, 2020, sent by a supervisor to the 'Epstein team' of prosecutors. The email congratulates the team on securing an indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell, explicitly acknowledging the difficulties of the case such as the statute of limitations and the need to secure trust from victim witnesses. The sender proposes a virtual celebration via WEBEX due to the inability to gather in person.
Notes from a November 2021 WebEx interview with a former employee of Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach residence. The witness describes answering the door for frequent female visitors (2-4 per day) who were described as 'school girls' or high school age, wearing casual clothing like school uniforms or sweatpants. The witness notes hearing them discuss school and soccer, and states they were not professional masseuses.
This document is a legal letter filed on December 18, 2021, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense requests permission for a witness, Mr. Hamilton, to testify remotely from London via WebEx because he has tested positive for COVID-19 and cannot travel. The defense argues that precluding his testimony would violate Maxwell's constitutional rights to present a defense and confront accusers, specifically mentioning the need to expose the bias of an accuser named Kate.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument about a witness who has contracted COVID. An attorney, Ms. Sternheim, requests that the witness be allowed to testify remotely via WebEx, while the opposing government counsel, Mr. Rohrbach, insists on the need for cross-examination and demands proof of the positive COVID test. The Court intervenes to clarify whether this proof has already been provided in a letter.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion about allowing a witness to testify remotely via WebEx. Counsel argues the witness is unavailable due to a positive COVID test, referencing the case United States v. Al-Fawwaz. The court accepts the reason for unavailability and anticipates permitting the remote testimony.
This document appears to be a page from a reference guide or book (resembling 'The 4-Hour Workweek' style advice) regarding international travel logistics. It lists resources for finding housing abroad (Craigslist, Interhome, Rentvillas) and tools for remote computer access and backups (GoToMyPC, WebEx, DropBox, etc.). The document is stamped with a House Oversight footer, indicating it was part of a larger document production.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity