Relationship Details

This document is an email dated June 19, 2021, between personnel at the US Attorney's Office (USANYS) regarding the management of legal files. The sender requests a contractor to save attached PDF 'prep notes' related to testifying witnesses into specific '3500 folders' (referring to Jencks Act material) on the 'Epstein share drive' in preparation for the Maxwell trial.

This document is an email chain from October 13-14, 2020, discussing technical discovery tasks for the Ghislaine Maxwell case. The correspondence involves the transfer and database indexing of files, specifically 26,164 documents from the 'FBI Files from Florida Office' and boxes of files from the 'USAO-SDFL' (Southern District of Florida). The participants are coordinating the loading of these materials into a 'US v Epstein' Relativity database and physical delivery of drives to 1 St. Andrews (SDNY office).

This document is a digital calendar entry dated October 16, 2020, scheduling a 30-minute tentative meeting titled 'Maxwell - Discuss Images from Epstein Devices'. The entry includes metadata such as creation and modification timestamps, but the attendee information and dial-in details are redacted. The document appears to be part of an investigative or legal file (likely related to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) referencing evidence from Jeffrey Epstein's electronic devices.

This legal document, page 4 of a court filing, argues for the release of grand jury transcripts in the Epstein and Maxwell cases due to public interest and diminished privacy concerns following Epstein's death. The Department of Justice commits to redacting victim-identifying information before release. The document is submitted by Pamela J. Bondi, U.S. Attorney General, and Todd Blanche, Deputy Attorney General.

This legal document is a motion filed by the U.S. Attorney General's office, arguing that the Court should release grand jury transcripts from the Epstein and Maxwell cases. The motion contends that public interest, coupled with the diminished privacy interests following Epstein's death, justifies this release, despite Maxwell's case being pending before the Supreme Court.

This legal memorandum is submitted by the Government in response to court orders regarding motions to unseal grand jury transcripts in the cases of Epstein and Maxwell. The Government outlines the legal framework for such a release, citing a 'Circuit split' on the issue and precedent from the Second Circuit, while emphasizing its duty to protect victims. It also references a prior, unsuccessful attempt to unseal similar transcripts related to Epstein in the Southern District of Florida.

This document is a legal ruling from an appellate court, dated September 17, 2024, which affirms the conviction of Maxwell. The court rejects several grounds for appeal, including that Epstein's prior non-prosecution agreement should have barred her prosecution and that her indictment was outside the statute of limitations. The ruling upholds the District Court's judgment of conviction from June 29, 2022.

This document is a legal opinion from an appellate court, filed on October 20, 2022, which summarizes its reasons for affirming a lower District Court's judgment of conviction against Maxwell. The court found no error in the lower court's rulings, including that Epstein's non-prosecution agreement did not prevent Maxwell's prosecution and that her conviction and sentence were sound.

This page from a legal filing (likely an appellate opinion) rejects Ghislaine Maxwell's argument that Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) prevents her prosecution in the Southern District of New York (SDNY). The court cites *United States v. Annabi* to conclude that the NPA was expressly limited to the Southern District of Florida and did not bind other districts like SDNY. Footnotes discuss legal precedents regarding plea agreements and double jeopardy.

This document is page 28 of a legal appellate brief filed on February 28, 2023, arguing that all counts against Ghislaine Maxwell should be dismissed based on the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between the Government and Jeffrey Epstein. It claims the NPA immunized Maxwell as a 'potential co-conspirator' and cites Supreme Court precedent requiring prosecutors to fulfill plea agreement promises. Additionally, the text argues jury prejudice occurred due to media interviews given by accusers named Carolyn and Kate.

This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, showing a rebuttal by Ms. Comey. She argues against the defense's claim that their client, Maxwell, was framed by witnesses. Comey's reasoning is that before Epstein's death in 2019, he was the 'big fish' and the logical target for any fabricated stories, meaning there was no motive for witnesses to invent Maxwell's involvement years ago.

This legal document is a filing from the Government in response to a Court order in case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. The Government confirms it reviewed the Maxwell grand jury transcripts before moving to unseal them and has notified all but one of the referenced victims. The filing also states that the Government is submitting the complete grand jury materials for both Epstein and Maxwell to the Court under seal to protect victim-identifying information.

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) made with Epstein does not prevent the prosecution of Maxwell by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USAO-SDNY). The document asserts that the NPA's scope was explicitly limited to the Southern District of Florida and did not bind other districts. It cites legal precedents, such as United States v. Annabi, to support the conclusion that Maxwell's prosecution can proceed.

This legal document, dated August 4, 2025, is a letter from the Government to Judges Richard M. Berman and Paul A. Engelmayer. It outlines the submission of grand jury materials related to the Epstein and Maxwell cases, including the dates the respective grand juries met. The Government discusses the process of identifying publicly available information from these materials and presents a legal argument that a 'nolle prosequi' in the Epstein case does not prevent the court from disclosing sealed records.

This legal document, filed on July 29, 2025, outlines a court order issued on July 22, 2025. The Court has directed the Government to file a legal memorandum and submit extensive materials concerning the grand jury proceedings of Epstein and Maxwell. This includes indices, complete transcripts, proposed redactions, and a statement on whether victims were notified, all in relation to a motion to unseal the grand jury records.