COURT
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-26 | N/A | Multiple court rulings and filings occurred on the Wednesday preceding the newsletter date. | Various Courts (New York, S... | View |
| 2007-01-01 | N/A | U.S. Tax Court decision in Californians Helping to Alleviate Medical Problems, Inc. v. Commission... | United States | View |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031533.jpg
This document appears to be a narrative account or manuscript draft (referencing 'Chapter 1') detailing the onset of the 2015 Baylor University sexual assault scandal. It describes the rape trial of player Sam Ukwuachu and a critical Texas Monthly article alleging a 'rape culture' under Coach Art Briles. The text reflects on the success of the football program and the new stadium immediately prior to the scandal breaking. Note: While the user prompt references Jeffrey Epstein, this specific document pertains entirely to the Baylor University investigation, though it bears a House Oversight stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026005.jpg
This document is an email chain from August 12, 2016, between Jeffrey Epstein (using the alias jeevacation@gmail.com) and attorney Reid Weingarten. Epstein forwarded a news article detailing a federal jury verdict where Emirates NBD was found not guilty of fraud in a $540 million lawsuit brought by InfoSpan. Weingarten responded to the news with 'This is a big deal,' suggesting the legal precedent or the parties involved were significant to their interests.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026656.jpg
This document is a printout of a BuzzFeed News article describing the arraignment of protesters arrested during the 2017 presidential inauguration in Washington, D.C. While the text does not mention Jeffrey Epstein, it highlights the involvement of high-profile attorney Kathryn Ruemmler (former White House Counsel), who appeared in court to represent a journalist employed by Vocativ. Ruemmler is a known figure in Epstein-related investigations due to her later inclusion in Epstein's schedules, likely explaining why this document appears in a 'House Oversight' file dump.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017617.jpg
This document is page 14 of a legal filing or journal article (104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology) submitted to the House Oversight Committee by David Schoen. It argues against the Office of Legal Counsel's (OLC) restrictive interpretation of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically regarding whether victim rights attach before formal charges are filed. The text analyzes and distinguishes prior case law (Turner, Paletz, Skinner), arguing that these cases do not preclude CVRA rights during the investigation phase.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017614.jpg
This document is a page from a legal analysis (likely a law journal article) produced to the House Oversight Committee by David Schoen. It discusses the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and specifically analyzes case law determining that victim rights attach before formal charges are filed. It prominently cites 'Does v. United States' (the Epstein case) in the Southern District of Florida, noting that the court rejected the government's dismissal attempts and acknowledged that victims might be entitled to invalidate Epstein's nonprosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017606.jpg
This document is a page from a legal analysis or journal article (Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) included in a House Oversight production, likely submitted by attorney David Schoen. It argues for the application of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) during the investigation phase, before formal charges are filed, critiquing the DOJ/OLC position to the contrary. The text specifically cites the "Jeffrey Epstein sex abuse case" as a primary example of why victim participation is necessary before charges are filed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017598.jpg
This document appears to be a narrative statement or correspondence submitted to the House Oversight Committee by Grace Nadine McGuire. It details allegations of a conspiracy involving IBM executives (Palmisano, Skoog), her former employers (the Gunthers), and her own mother to sabotage her pregnancy in 2007 and destroy her credibility through legal battles in 2011. The text quotes extensively from two specific lawsuits: 'McGuire v. John and Avery Gunther' (DC Superior Court) and 'McGuire v. IBM' (US District Court of Virginia).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017296.jpg
This document appears to be a page (209) from a manuscript or memoir, likely by Alan Dershowitz, recounting a legal appeal for a Hare Krishna leader ('Swami') in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. The author details how prosecutors used prejudicial evidence regarding homosexuality and child molestation in the original trial, and how he successfully argued for a reversal of the conviction based on this prejudice, following advice from his cousin-in-law, Morris Rosen. The document bears a House Oversight stamp, suggesting it was produced as part of a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017147.jpg
The author reflects on the profound influence of Judge David Bazelon, emphasizing his role in raising enduring legal questions and shaping the author's critical view of the judiciary. The text compares this experience with the author's subsequent clerkship under Justice Arthur Goldberg during a historically tumultuous period involving the Kennedy assassination, noting that while the Supreme Court work was more high-profile, the time with Bazelon was more educationally significant.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023373.jpg
This document is a page from a 2012 legal opinion (printed via Westlaw in 2019) regarding the consolidated multi-district litigation (MDL 1570) surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. It outlines the plaintiffs' claims under the Anti-Terrorism Act against banks, charities, and states accused of funding al-Qaeda, and details the procedural history including the transfer of cases to the Southern District of New York and the succession of judges presiding over the matter. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp but does not explicitly name Jeffrey Epstein on this specific page.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015718.jpg
This document discusses the nature of measurement, contrasting absolute measurements like distance with relative concepts like intelligence (IQ). It references the US Supreme Court case Atkins v. Virginia and highlights cultural differences in cognitive abilities, particularly the visio-spatial memory of Aboriginal Australians.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015023.jpg
This document appears to be part of a larger correspondence or 'whistleblower' narrative submitted to House Oversight. It details allegations by Nadine McGuire regarding a conspiracy involving IBM, the NSF, and her own family (the Gunthers and her mother), claiming they colluded to sabotage her pregnancy in 2007 and destroy her credibility. The text mixes legal citations from 2011 lawsuits with geopolitical commentary linking 9/11, DHS, and the election of Emmanuel Macron (dating the writing to post-2017).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013265.jpg
This document is page 349 of a bibliography or reference section from an academic publication, likely a book or dissertation on cognitive science, neuroscience, or artificial intelligence. It lists citations alphabetically from 'Per81' to 'Sch02', covering topics such as reinforcement learning, memory, and neural networks. The document bears the stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_013265', indicating it is part of a document production for a US House Oversight Committee investigation, though the specific connection to the investigation's subject (implied to be Epstein/Maxwell by the user prompt) is not visible in the text of this specific page.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024719.jpg
This document is page 83 of a 2017 report by Ackrell Capital regarding the U.S. legal landscape for cannabis. It details the application of Section 280E of the tax code to cannabis businesses and discusses the Patent Act, listing several specific cannabis-related patents issued by the USPTO (including one held by the U.S. federal government) despite the drug's federal illegality. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp, but contains no direct text references to Jeffrey Epstein or his associates on this specific page.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014081.jpg
This document is a page from a legal journal article (Vol. 104), likely authored by Paul Cassell ('CASSELL ET AL.'), discussing the legal precedent for crime victims' rights attaching before formal charges are filed. It analyzes statutes and case law from states including South Carolina, Illinois, Iowa, and Michigan, arguing that victims are entitled to notification and consultation during the investigation phase. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, suggesting it was part of the congressional investigation into the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, specifically regarding the failure to notify victims of the non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014058.jpg
This document appears to be page 79 of a 2014 legal analysis or law review article, included in a House Oversight Committee production (likely related to the Epstein investigation regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act). The text analyzes the 'Paletz' and 'Skinner' cases to argue that CVRA rights should apply during investigations, not just after conviction or charging. It critiques the Department of Justice's position by citing the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, which found that limiting CVRA rights only to post-charging scenarios is inconsistent with the statute.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014042.jpg
This document is page 63 of a 2014 legal academic publication discussing Crime Victims' Rights. It argues for victim participation during criminal investigations, explicitly citing the 'Jeffrey Epstein sex abuse case' as a primary example of why victims need rights before charges are filed. The text also provides historical context regarding the victims' rights movement, referencing the Warren Court and President Reagan's Task Force on Victims of Crime.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014214.jpg
A scanned page from a contact directory containing names, phone numbers, and addresses organized in columns. The document lists various individuals and services, including entries for Ghislaine Maxwell, Harrods, drivers, and massage services in the UK. It appears to be a page from a larger contact book, indicated by page number 88 and legal discovery stamps.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity