Relationship Details

GOVERNMENT Legal representative Recipient

Connected Entities

Entity A
GOVERNMENT
Type: organization
Mentions: 2805
Also known as: Government of Australia, Government of the Republic of Cyprus, United States Government Accountability Office (GAO), Office of Government Relations, PRC Government, US Government (The Americans), Government Exhibit, Office of Government Information Services, Government / USA, Orban Government, Palestinian government, IRS Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division (IRS-TEGE), Hamas Government, Saudi Arabian government, Orange County, California (Government), Netanyahu government, British Government, American government, Pakistan Government/Military, Canadian Government, Australian government, Government of Ecuador, New Zealand Government, Government of the U.S. Virgin Islands, Gov't (Government), Government / DOJ, American Federation of Government Employees/Council of Prison Locals, United States of America (Government), US Government (implied by SDNY context)
Entity B
Recipient
Type: person
Mentions: 60
Also known as: Recipient (Redacted), Recipient (implied jeeitunes), Recipient (implied previous sender), Recipient (Client), Recipient (Unnamed in text), Recipient (Principal), Recipient (invited)

Evidence

The defendant is accused of falsely accusing both the Recipient and the Government

The defendant is accused of falsely accusing both the Recipient and the Government

The Recipient turned over materials to the Government as a result of a court-ordered modification of a protective order, suggesting the Recipient was compelled to provide information for an investigation.

The Recipient turned over materials to the Government as a result of a court order that the Government sought.

The Recipient turned over materials to the Government as a result of a court order that the Government sought.

The Government compelled the Recipient (via subpoena) to turn over materials after getting a court order.

Government issued grand jury subpoenas to the Recipient.

Source Documents (5)

DOJ-OGR-00019338.jpg

Unknown type • 749 KB
View

This legal document, dated August 21, 2020, is a submission from the Acting United States Attorney and Assistant United States Attorneys to Honorable Alison J. Nathan. It argues against the defendant's application to use criminal discovery materials in civil cases, asserting that the application lacks legal justification, attempts to circumvent a protective order, and is irrelevant to the civil litigation. The document suggests the defendant's intent is to falsely accuse the Government and another party.

DOJ-OGR-00019331.jpg

Unknown type • 655 KB
View

This legal document, part of a court filing, outlines a procedural history concerning sealed information from civil matters. The Government successfully modified a protective order in one court (Court-1) but not another (Court-2) to obtain materials for a grand jury investigation, which were then turned over by a 'Recipient'. The current court is now permitting the Defendant, who learned of this through discovery, to provide the sealed information back to Court-1 and Court-2 for their own determination of relevance.

DOJ-OGR-00019443.jpg

Unknown type • 655 KB
View

This legal document, part of a court filing from March 2, 2020, outlines a procedural history involving civil protective orders in a criminal case. In 2019, the Government successfully modified a protective order in one court (Court-1) to obtain materials from a 'Recipient' for a grand jury, while another court (Court-2) denied a similar request. The current court is now permitting the Defendant, who learned of this through discovery, to provide this sealed information to Court-1 and Court-2 so those courts can determine whether to unseal related materials.

DOJ-OGR-00019561.jpg

Legal document • 662 KB
View

This legal document, filed on August 2, 2020, details a procedural history where the U.S. Government, in February 2019, successfully modified a civil protective order in one court (Court-1) to obtain materials for a criminal grand jury investigation. The defendant in the criminal case later learned of this through discovery. The current court is now permitting the defendant to provide information under seal to the relevant courts (Court-1 and Court-2) so they can make their own determinations about the matter.

DOJ-OGR-00001749.jpg

Court Filing / Judicial Order • 703 KB
View

This document is page 3 of a court order filed on September 2, 2020, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The Court denies the Defendant's request to modify a protective order to disclose documents to judicial officers in other civil cases, citing a lack of good cause and noting that the relevant facts are already public. The text reveals that the Government previously issued grand jury subpoenas to an entity referred to as 'Recipient' regarding an investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and his co-conspirators.

Mutual Connections

Entities connected to both GOVERNMENT and Recipient

Jeffrey Epstein (person)
defendant (person)

GOVERNMENT's Other Relationships

Legal representative MAXWELL
Strength: 15/10 View
Legal representative Defense
Strength: 13/10 View
Legal representative defendant
Strength: 13/10 View
Legal representative Defense counsel
Strength: 12/10 View
Legal representative GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Strength: 12/10 View

Recipient's Other Relationships

Business associate sender
Strength: 22/10 View
Friend sender
Strength: 8/10 View
Business associate Assistant United States Attorney
Strength: 8/10 View
Business associate Sender (AUSA)
Strength: 7/10 View
Client sender
Strength: 7/10 View

Relationship Metadata

Type
Legal representative
Relationship Strength
11/10
Strong relationship with substantial evidence
Source Documents
5
Extracted
2025-11-20 14:21
Last Updated
2025-11-21 01:31

Entity Network Stats

GOVERNMENT 178 relationships
Recipient 92 relationships
Mutual connections 2

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein relationship