Relationship Details

USAO-SDNY Professional USAO-SDFL

Connected Entities

Entity A
USAO-SDNY
Type: organization
Mentions: 132
Also known as: United States Attorney's Office, Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY)
Entity B
USAO-SDFL
Type: organization
Mentions: 151

Evidence

The document argues that the actions of one U.S. Attorney's office (USAO-SDFL) in making an NPA with Epstein did not bind another office (USAO-SDNY), highlighting a lack of inter-district authority.

The document questions whether the NPA made by USAO-SDFL with Epstein was binding on USAO-SDNY, which had not been notified or approved it.

The document indicates a lack of communication or agreement between the two U.S. Attorney's Offices regarding Epstein's NPA, with USAO-SDNY not being notified or approving the agreement made by USAO-SDFL.

The document indicates a lack of communication or agreement between the two U.S. Attorney's Offices regarding Epstein's NPA, with USAO-SDNY not being notified or approving the agreement made by USAO-SDFL.

Source Documents (3)

DOJ-OGR-00021889.jpg

Unknown type • 684 KB
View

This legal document page discusses the jurisdictional limits of U.S. Attorneys' offices in the context of Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). It states that the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY) was not notified of the NPA made by the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL), and that the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division denied any involvement. The text argues, based on the Judiciary Act of 1789, that a U.S. Attorney's authority is confined to their specific district and does not bind other districts.

DOJ-OGR-00000013.jpg

Unknown type • 684 KB
View

This legal document argues that the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY) was not bound by the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) made between Epstein and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL). It cites the Judiciary Act of 1789 to assert that the authority of a U.S. Attorney is limited to their specific district, a point reinforced by an Assistant Attorney General who stated she played no role in the agreement.

DOJ-OGR-00021859.jpg

Unknown type • 691 KB
View

This document excerpt discusses the jurisdictional scope of a U.S. Attorney's office, questioning whether the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) made with Epstein by the USAO-SDFL could bind other districts like the USAO-SDNY. It references the Judiciary Act of 1789 to argue that a U.S. Attorney's authority is limited to their specific district. The document also notes that the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division denied any role in reviewing or approving Epstein's NPA.

USAO-SDNY's Other Relationships

Legal representative Appellant
Strength: 6/10 View
Legal representative GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Strength: 6/10 View
Legal representative MAXWELL
Strength: 6/10 View
Legal representative EDNY
Strength: 5/10 View
Legal representative Ms. Maxwell
Strength: 5/10 View

USAO-SDFL's Other Relationships

Legal representative Epstein
Strength: 7/10 View
Professional Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division
Strength: 6/10 View
Professional governmental Main Justice
Strength: 5/10 View

Relationship Metadata

Type
Professional
Relationship Strength
8/10
Strong relationship with substantial evidence
Source Documents
3
Extracted
2025-11-20 14:23
Last Updated
2025-11-20 15:18

Entity Network Stats

USAO-SDNY 14 relationships
USAO-SDFL 4 relationships
Mutual connections 0

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein relationship