Probation Office
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
United States Attorney's Office
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-06-21 | Legal filing | Deadline for the Probation Office to complete the revised Presentence Investigation Report (PSR). | N/A | View |
| 2022-06-14 | Legal deadline | Proposed advanced deadline, which the Probation Office does not object to. | N/A | View |
| 2022-05-24 | Legal filing | Deadline for the Probation Office to complete the draft Presentence Investigation Report (PSR). | N/A | View |
| 2022-04-26 | N/A | Order setting schedule for PSR disclosure and sentencing submissions | SDNY | View |
EFTA00024356.pdf
This document is a highly significant email thread from August 10, 2019, chronicling the immediate aftermath of Jeffrey Epstein's death. The correspondence involves the US Marshals Service (USMS), the US Attorney's Office (USAO), and the Bureau of Prisons (BOP)/MCC New York. The thread reveals significant confusion and frustration within the USAO, as officials complain that the BOP issued press releases about Epstein's death before providing basic facts to the prosecutors, leaving them unable to inform Epstein's defense counsel or family. The timeline moves from an initial report of an 'apparent suicide attempt' at 7:52 AM to confirmation that he 'passed away' by 8:46 AM.
EFTA00024354.pdf
This document contains a chain of emails from August 10, 2019, documenting the immediate aftermath of Jeffrey Epstein's death. The correspondence reveals significant confusion and frustration within the U.S. Attorney's Office and among other officials, who were learning details about the suicide attempt and subsequent death from public press releases rather than official BOP channels. The emails trace the timeline from the initial report of transport to the hospital, to the confirmation that he had 'passed away,' and the subsequent scramble to notify his legal counsel and family.
DOJ-OGR-00000106.tif
This document outlines standard conditions of supervision, likely for a probationer or individual on supervised release. It details requirements such as DNA collection, compliance with the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, participation in domestic violence programs, and reporting procedures to the probation office and court.
DOJ-OGR-00000783.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from July 16-23, 2019, detailing the proceedings of United States v. Jeffrey Epstein (Case 19-2221). It documents the denial of Epstein's bail during a hearing on July 18, 2019, presided over by Judge Richard M. Berman, attended by FBI and NYPD representatives. Following the remand order, Epstein's defense team filed a Notice of Appeal on July 22, 2019, along with a sealed document placed in the vault.
DOJ-OGR-00020719.jpg
This document is a court docket report for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell covering March 15 to April 26, 2022. Major events include the denial of Maxwell's motion for a new trial following allegations regarding Juror 50's non-disclosure of prior abuse, which the court deemed not deliberate. The docket also details administrative corrections regarding judge assignment, the scheduling of the sentencing for June 28, 2022, and the establishment of deadlines for the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR).
DOJ-OGR-00020573.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet (Case 22-1426) containing entries from April 2022 regarding USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Key entries include the denial of Maxwell's motions for a new trial (Rule 33) and acquittal (Rule 29), confirmation that Juror 50 was found credible, and the scheduling of her sentencing for June 28, 2022. The document explicitly references Maxwell's role as a coconspirator with Jeffrey Epstein in a decade-long agreement to groom and sexually abuse underage girls.
DOJ-OGR-00020472.jpg
This document is a page from the docket of the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, showing entries from April 2022. It details the denial of a motion for a new trial involving Juror 50, scheduling orders for sentencing, and an Opinion & Order denying a Rule 29 motion while granting a motion regarding multiplicitous counts. The document establishes that judgment of conviction will be entered on Counts Three, Four, and Six.
DOJ-OGR-00010560.jpg
This document is a page from a Government sentencing filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) arguing for a 'Four-Point Leadership Enhancement' under sentencing guidelines. It asserts that the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell) was a leader of an 'otherwise extensive' criminal conspiracy involving Jeffrey Epstein, spanning the UK, Virgin Islands, and three states. The text cites testimony from victims (Carolyn, Virginia) and staff (Juan Alessi, pilots) to demonstrate the scale of the operation and the defendant's role in recruiting victims and managing Epstein's properties.
DOJ-OGR-00010713.jpg
This document is a legal declaration by Robert Y. Lewis, the attorney for victims Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein, filed in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Lewis outlines his communications with the probation office between May 9 and May 31, 2022, to arrange the submission of Victim Impact Statements for Maxwell's upcoming sentencing. The declaration supports a motion for his clients to speak at the sentencing.
DOJ-OGR-00010694.jpg
This page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) argues for the right of victims named Sarah and Elizabeth to read their Victim Impact Statements at Ghislaine Maxwell's sentencing. It details the severe psychological and physical trauma suffered by both victims, including suicide attempts and hospitalizations, resulting from the 'Epstein/Maxwell trap.' The document cites the Crime Victim’s Rights Act (CVRA) and relevant case law to support the victims' right to be heard.
DOJ-OGR-00010588.jpg
This document is a page from a government sentencing memorandum filed on June 22, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It argues for a significant financial penalty, highlighting that the defendant's wealth—derived largely from $23 million transferred by Jeffrey Epstein and the sale of a Manhattan townhouse—facilitated the abuse of victims and was concealed from Pretrial Services. The text asserts that her dishonesty regarding her assets is an aggravating factor warranting an above-Guidelines fine.
DOJ-OGR-00010579.jpg
This document is a page from the Government's sentencing memorandum in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on June 22, 2022. The text accuses the defendant of lying to the Court about her guilt, refusing to disclose details about her marriage to the Probation Office, and drastically altering her reported net worth from $22 million (during bail hearings) to almost nothing (during sentencing). The Government argues that Maxwell accepts no responsibility and instead falsely portrays herself as a victim of various entities, including her father, Epstein, and the government.
DOJ-OGR-00010552.jpg
This document is a page from a government legal filing arguing for a harsher prison sentence for a defendant. The prosecution contends that the sentencing calculation should include two additional victims, Virginia Roberts and Melissa, which would increase the offense level from 40 to 42. This change would raise the recommended sentencing range from 292-365 months to 360-660 months' imprisonment, based on the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines.
DOJ-OGR-00010366.jpg
This is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on April 26, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York. The order sets a new, advanced schedule for sentencing submissions from both the prosecution and defense, following a letter from the Government. The schedule outlines several deadlines in May and June 2022, culminating in the final sentencing hearing on June 28, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00010365.jpg
This is page 2 of a legal document filed on April 25, 2022, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The document, submitted by United States Attorney Damian Williams and his assistants for the Southern District of New York, states that the Probation Office has no objection to advancing a deadline to June 14, 2022, provided that the parties submit comments on the draft Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) by June 1, 2022. Defense Counsel was copied on the filing.
DOJ-OGR-00010364.jpg
This is a letter dated April 25, 2022, from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The Government requests that the court order the Probation Office to complete its revised Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) earlier than the currently scheduled date of June 21, 2022. The letter argues that the current schedule, which has the revised PSR due on the same day as the defendant's sentencing submission, does not allow the parties sufficient time to incorporate the report's findings into their own submissions before the June 28 sentencing.
DOJ-OGR-00010194.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing by Zuckerman Spaeder LLP addressed to Judge William H. Pauley, III, regarding the sentencing of David Parse. It disputes the Probation Office's sentencing guidelines which calculated a tax loss of $1.5 billion and a prison range of 292-365 months. The document includes a significant footnote quoting a letter from Juror No. 1 (Catherine Conrad) to AUSA Okula, detailing her hesitation in convicting Parse on conspiracy charges.
DOJ-OGR-00009534.jpg
This document is a page from a 2013 legal filing (likely a sentencing memorandum) concerning the tax fraud case of United States v. Daugerdas et al. It details the conviction of David Parse for obstructing the IRS and mail fraud, noting he faces a statutory maximum of 23 years in prison. While this document is included in the unsealed bundle for the Giuffre v. Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cv-00330), the text specifically addresses the legal proceedings and sentencing guidelines of the Daugerdas tax shelter scheme, likely serving as a legal exhibit or precedent within the broader Maxwell litigation.
DOJ-OGR-00009515.jpg
This legal document, dated March 7, 2013, from the law firm Zuckerman Spaeder LLP to Judge William H. Pauley, III, argues for a lower sentencing guideline for a client. It contests the Probation Office's preliminary calculation, which suggests a 292-365 month sentence based on a $1.5 billion tax loss. To support its argument, the document cites a letter from a juror detailing the conviction of David Parse, suggesting his conviction was limited to "backdating" transactions and not a broader conspiracy.
DOJ-OGR-00004753.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a sentencing hearing on June 15, 2021, for a defendant named Ms. Days on her fourth felony narcotics offense. Her attorney, Mr. Donaldson, argues for a 60-month sentence, which is the statutory minimum and three months below the 63-month recommendation from the probation department. The guideline range for the offense was 63 to 78 months.
DOJ-OGR-00033157.jpg
This letter, dated December 3, 2009, is from Jeffrey Epstein's attorneys at ATTERBURY GOLDBERGER & WEISS, P.A. to Barbara Burns at the State Attorney's Office. It details Epstein's two pre-approved flights since his release from custody: a Cessna flight on August 27, 2009, and a helicopter trip on September 14, 2009, both with pilot Larry Visoski and passenger Nadia Marcinkova. The letter also strongly refutes allegations that Epstein violated his probation, claiming he has an 'unblemished record' and that the false allegations originated from the Scott Rothstein law firm.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017746.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing submitted by attorney David Schoen, appearing to be part of a House Oversight investigation. It contains an excerpt from a 2005 BYU Law Review article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32. The text argues that probation officers should be required to seek out victim information for presentence reports and quotes Senator Kyl to support the argument that victims have a broad right to be heard in person during sentencing.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity