BOP
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Institutional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Detainee custodian |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Professional separate agencies |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
unnamed defendant
|
Custodial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Prosecution team
|
Separate entities |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
correctional officers
|
Employer regulator |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
THOMAS
|
Employee |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
THOMAS
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Kathleen Hawks Sawyer
|
Acting commissioner |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
|
Organizational |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
DOJ JMD Budget Staff
|
Oversight |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Prosecution Team
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
OIG
|
Oversight audit |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
ALS
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
DOJ
|
Departmental |
1
|
1 | |
|
location
USANYS
|
Governmental |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
U.S. Attorney's Office
|
Governmental administrative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
USAO
|
Professional strained |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
United States Attorney's office
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Times of India
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GAO
|
Oversight |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Contractor (Unnamed)
|
Service provider |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Custodial adversarial |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
OIG
|
Oversight auditing |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Custodian inmate |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Mistreatment | Ms. Maxwell is allegedly being subjected to harsh prison conditions, including constant flashligh... | prison | View |
| N/A | Policy change | The BOP suspended all in-person visits, including legal visits, due to the spread of COVID-19. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Investigation | A separate investigation conducted by the BOP. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Investigation | An internal BOP investigation into the circumstances surrounding Epstein’s suicide. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Investigation | The BOP investigated the defendant's complaints of physical abuse and concluded they were unfounded. | MDC | View |
| N/A | Detention/imprisonment | Ms. Maxwell is being held in custody under poor conditions, including being kept up at night, giv... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Death in custody | Jeffrey Epstein died while under the supervision of the BOP. | N/A | View |
| 2025-11-17 | N/A | Routine purging of inmate emails per BOP policy | MDC | View |
| 2025-01-01 | N/A | BOP expects to receive updated analysis on the impact of staffing on inmate programming. | N/A | View |
| 2024-10-01 | N/A | Automated Staffing Tool (AST) went live officially. | System-wide | View |
| 2024-10-01 | N/A | Automated Staffing Tool (AST) officially went live for all FBOP professions. | Nationwide | View |
| 2024-06-01 | N/A | New monthly Security Camera Report became effective. | All facilities | View |
| 2024-01-01 | N/A | FBOP received nationwide Direct Hire Authority (DHA) approval. | Nationwide | View |
| 2024-01-01 | N/A | Anticipated full implementation of staffing tool covering all regions and disciplines. | All BOP Regions | View |
| 2023-06-26 | N/A | OIG Final Report released regarding Jeffrey Epstein's custody and supervision. | New York, New York | View |
| 2023-01-01 | N/A | BOP released Incentives Playbook. | N/A | View |
| 2022-01-01 | N/A | Contractor completed assessment and developed automated staffing tool prototype; finalized risk a... | N/A | View |
| 2021-11-23 | N/A | Multiple FOIA requests filed by ABC, CNN, and MuckRack. | N/A | View |
| 2021-08-19 | Court order | Judge Nathan ordered the Government to confer with BOP and MDC Legal and respond to the defendant... | N/A | View |
| 2021-07-02 | N/A | Production of Epstein materials to the Times (FOIA release) | New York | View |
| 2021-06-25 | N/A | Deadline for BOP to produce documents in Epstein FOIA | N/A | View |
| 2021-05-14 | N/A | Judge Nathan issues order regarding MDC sleep disruption and security protocols for Maxwell. | SDNY Court | View |
| 2021-02-02 | N/A | Judge Nathan denies BOP's request to vacate the Jan 15, 2021 Order regarding MDC Laptop Access. | Court | View |
| 2021-01-15 | N/A | Email correspondence regarding FOIA case 20-cv-833 (Times v. BOP) | N/A | View |
| 2021-01-01 | N/A | BOP reported hiring a contractor to assist in calculating staffing levels. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00022069.jpg
This document is page 7 of a government legal filing (Document 35) from April 24, 2020, in the case against Michael Thomas and Tova Noel (the guards on duty when Jeffrey Epstein died). The prosecution argues against Thomas's motion to compel the production of BOP records and a DOJ-OIG draft report, stating these materials are irrelevant, not in the prosecution's possession, or privileged. The document also restates the facts of the November 19, 2019 indictment charging the defendants with conspiracy and making false records.
DOJ-OGR-00022042.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues for a broad interpretation of the prosecution's 'Brady obligations.' It asserts that the government must disclose not only admissible favorable evidence but any information that could lead to such evidence, resolving any doubts in favor of disclosure to the defense. The document cites several legal precedents, including Safavian and Paxson, to support the claim that the pretrial standard is simply whether evidence is favorable, not whether it would change the trial's outcome.
DOJ-OGR-00022037.jpg
This document is page 14 of a legal defense filing (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) dated April 9, 2020, regarding charges against prison guards Michael Thomas and Tova Noel. The defense argues that while Thomas is charged with falsifying logs, other supervisors who approved these logs were not charged, and points to severe staffing shortages in the SHU. The filing seeks disclosure of the Inspector General's report, arguing it is material to the defense to prove systemic failures beyond the defendants' actions.
DOJ-OGR-00022036.jpg
This document is a legal filing on behalf of a defendant, Mr. Thomas, arguing for the disclosure of evidence related to his criminal charges. The defense contends that rampant staffing shortages and mismanagement by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) at the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) forced the defendant to engage in the alleged conduct. To support this claim, the filing references an attached memorandum from a union meeting that occurred just three days before Jeffrey Epstein's death at the same facility in August 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00022034.jpg
This document is a legal motion filed on April 9, 2020, in a criminal case on behalf of Defendant Thomas. The defense requests the court to compel the prosecution to turn over various documents and reports, arguing they contain exculpatory evidence under Rule 16 and Brady-Giglio. The motion claims the defendant's alleged criminal conduct was a result of widespread practices and policies within the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and that the government has unfairly refused to disclose this relevant information.
DOJ-OGR-00022033.jpg
This legal document is a motion filed on behalf of defendant Michael Thomas, requesting the court to authorize the disclosure of investigative and disciplinary records from the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). The defense seeks information about a similar incident in 2005 or 2006, where officers received lenient punishment, arguing this is relevant to Mr. Thomas's state of mind ('mens rea') for the charges he faces related to an incident on August 10, 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00022032.jpg
This document is page 9 of a legal filing (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) dated April 9, 2020, concerning defendant Michael Thomas (one of the guards charged in the Epstein case). The defense argues for the full disclosure of the Inspector General's report, suggesting that systemic failures within the Bureau of Prisons (BOP)—such as 3,300 vacancies and overworked staff—contributed to Epstein's death on August 10, 2019, rather than solely the actions of the defendant. It references testimony by Acting Commissioner Kathleen Hawks Sawyer regarding these staffing issues.
DOJ-OGR-00021912.jpg
This page from a legal filing (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) details the mandatory procedures for inmate counts at the MCC. It explains the process of filling out 'count slips,' the verification process by the Control Center to 'clear' a count, the protocol for a 'bed book count' if errors occur, and the BOP requirement for officers in the SHU to conduct 'rounds' every 30 minutes.
DOJ-OGR-00021911.jpg
This document is Page 4 of a federal court filing (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT) dated November 19, 2019. It details the physical security layout of the Special Housing Unit (SHU) at the MCC, describing tiers, cells, and locking mechanisms. It explicitly outlines the Bureau of Prisons' requirements for 'institutional counts' to ensure inmates are alive, specifying the exact count schedule for weekdays (4 p.m., 10 p.m., 12 a.m., 3 a.m., 5 a.m.) and the duties of the two officers required to perform them.
DOJ-OGR-00021644.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 22-1426) regarding the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell. During the proceeding, Maxwell's attorney, Ms. Sternheim, requests that Maxwell be designated to the BOP women's facility in Danbury and enrolled in the FIT (Female Integrated Treatment) program to address trauma. The Court agrees to make this recommendation and subsequently grants the government's motion, presented by Ms. Moe, to dismiss Counts Seven and Eight.
DOJ-OGR-00019541.jpg
This document is page 8 of a Protective Order filed on August 20, 2020, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It outlines strict protocols for the Defendant's review of discovery materials, mandating supervision by Defense Counsel or BOP officials, and establishes rules for handling 'Highly Confidential Information' produced by the Government.
DOJ-OGR-00019529.jpg
This document is page 8 of a legal filing (Protective Order) from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on July 28, 2020. It outlines strict protocols for the handling of 'Highly Confidential Information' during the discovery process, specifically dictating that the Defendant may only review materials in the presence of counsel or via BOP officials, and establishing rules for showing materials to potential defense witnesses without providing them copies.
DOJ-OGR-00019510.jpg
This document is page 9 of a protective order filed on July 27, 2020, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It establishes strict protocols for the handling of discovery materials, stating that the Defendant may only review them in the presence of counsel or via BOP officials. It further defines 'Highly Confidential Information' and restricts Potential Defense Witnesses to viewing materials via read-only platforms without receiving physical copies.
DOJ-OGR-00019470.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket report for Case 20-3061, detailing filings and orders between August 20, 2020, and September 8, 2020. It records various legal actions including sealed documents, letter motions regarding protective orders and redactions, and memorandum opinions denying defendant Ghislaine Maxwell's requests regarding discovery and confinement conditions. The document also notes the filing of a Notice of Appeal by Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00019310.jpg
This is page 8 of a court order (Protective Order) filed on July 30, 2020, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The text outlines strict protocols for the Defendant's review of discovery materials, mandating the presence of counsel or BOP officials. It also establishes rules for showing materials to potential witnesses without providing them copies and begins defining 'Highly Confidential Information' produced by the Government.
DOJ-OGR-00019257.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet (Page 19 of 19) from September 2020 detailing procedural events in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It records Judge Alison J. Nathan's denial of Maxwell's requests to be released into the general prison population, to obtain victim identities immediately, and to modify a protective order to use discovery materials in civil cases. The document concludes with Maxwell filing a Notice of Appeal regarding these denials and the transmission of the record to the U.S. Court of Appeals.
DOJ-OGR-00019836.jpg
This legal document, dated April 1, 2021, argues that Ms. Maxwell is being subjected to unconstitutional and inappropriate treatment by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). The author claims this treatment, which includes sleep deprivation, inedible food, and unnecessary suicide watch, is a direct result of the death of Epstein and is preventing Ms. Maxwell from adequately preparing for her trial. The charges against her are noted to be from 1994-1997 and involve three anonymous accusers.
DOJ-OGR-00019806.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket (Case 21-58) detailing legal proceedings involving Ghislaine Maxwell between August 18, 2020, and September 8, 2020. It lists various filings including letters, motions, and orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding discovery, protective orders, and conditions of confinement, as well as a Notice of Appeal filed by Maxwell. The entries document the denial of certain motions by the defendant and the scheduling of future disclosures and status updates.
DOJ-OGR-00019782.jpg
This is a page from the docket of a court case involving the USA and defendant Ghislaine Maxwell, covering filings from August 20, 2020, to September 8, 2020. It lists various legal actions including attorney appearances, sealed documents, letter motions regarding protective orders and redactions, and two Memorandum Opinions and Orders by Judge Alison J. Nathan denying certain requests by the defendant. The document also notes a Notice of Appeal filed by Maxwell regarding one of the Memorandum Opinions.
DOJ-OGR-00019756.jpg
This page from a court docket in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell lists legal filings and orders between August 20 and September 8, 2020. Key entries include memoranda and orders by Judge Alison J. Nathan denying defense motions regarding victim disclosure and prison conditions, as well as a notice of appeal filed by Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00019704.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket for Case 21-58, detailing legal proceedings between August and September 2020 regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. It lists various filings including attorney appearances, sealed documents, letters concerning protective orders and redactions, and a Notice of Appeal. Notably, it includes a Memorandum Opinion and Order denying the defendant's requests for victim identity disclosure and release into general population.
DOJ-OGR-00010587.jpg
This legal document is a filing by the Government arguing against a lenient sentence for a defendant. The Government refutes the defendant's claims of abuse and poor health during her confinement at the MDC, citing BOP records and courtroom observations of her being 'perfectly healthy'. The Government requests that the Court impose the maximum allowable fine of $750,000, arguing it is warranted given the defendant is a 'multi-millionaire' whose wealth may have come from a co-conspirator.
DOJ-OGR-00010584.jpg
This document is a Government filing addressing Ghislaine Maxwell's complaints regarding her confinement conditions at the MDC. It refutes claims about discovery access, clarifying that she was provided a laptop and ample attorney visits. It also addresses email deletions (attributing them to BOP policy or Maxwell's own actions), legal mail delivery, and justifies nighttime flashlight checks as standard safety procedures for all inmates.
DOJ-OGR-00010582.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Government on June 22, 2022, argues against the defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell's) complaints regarding her confinement conditions at the MDC. The prosecution asserts that her claims of abuse are unfounded, as determined by a BOP investigation, and are part of a pattern of dishonesty aimed at garnering public sympathy, citing a November 2021 Daily Mail article as a previous example of this tactic.
DOJ-OGR-00010476.jpg
This legal document, part of case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE filed on June 15, 2022, argues that the pre-sentence detention conditions of Ms. Maxwell at the MDC constitute cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment. The filing claims her treatment is significantly harsher than that of the general prison population and was implemented under specific directives from then-Attorney General William Barr, who was intent on avoiding a repeat of the incident involving Epstein in BOP custody. The document asserts this disparate and punitive treatment was condoned by MDC supervisors and wardens.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity