Skip to content
Case File
d-18961House OversightOther

Call to Unseal Appellate Briefs on Manhattan DA's Handling of Epstein Case

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #016502
Pages
1
Persons
2

Summary

The passage urges transparency and mentions the Manhattan District Attorney's abrupt change in stance on Epstein, but provides no concrete new evidence, transactions, or specific misconduct. It sugges Advocates for unsealing appellate briefs to reveal how prosecutors and the court handled the Epstein Notes the Manhattan District Attorney's sudden shift from a lenient position on Epstein. Proposes

This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.

View Source Collection

Persons Referenced (2)

Tags

transparencycourt-recordsdistrict-attorneypress-freedomlegal-exposuregovernment-transparencyhouse-oversightepstein
Share
PostReddit

Related Documents (6)

House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Court denies amendment to add additional Jane Doe plaintiffs in CVRA case

The passage discusses procedural arguments about adding parties to a civil rights case and does not reveal any new allegations, financial flows, or involvement of high‑profile officials. It offers no Petitioners seek to add Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 as parties but the court finds it unnecessary. Government argues Jane Doe 4 lacks standing because she was not known when a non‑prosecution agreeme T

1p
House OversightLegal FilingNov 11, 2025

Court hearing on Maxwell's statements in Epstein-related case

The passage records a routine courtroom exchange about the credibility of statements made by Ghislaine Maxwell. It mentions no high‑ranking officials, financial transactions, or novel allegations, off Discussion centers on whether Maxwell's statements about Virginia Giuffre are false. The court is focusing on the credibility of those statements for the jury. No new evidence, dates, or financial fl

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Court transcript snippet discussing defamation claims involving alleged sexual abuse and references to Epstein and Maxwell

The passage provides a vague reference to alleged sexual abuse and a possible connection to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, but offers no concrete names, dates, transactions, or actionable lead The case involves defamation claims centered on alleged sexual abuse. Plaintiff alleges the defendant was a 'madam' and co-conspirator with Jeffrey Epstein. The court is focusing on the truth or fals

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Court denies addition of new Jane Does in lawsuit seeking to invalidate Jeffrey Epstein's non‑prosecution agreement

The passage reveals a procedural fight over standing to challenge Epstein's non‑prosecution agreement, indicating ongoing litigation that could expose details of the deal. While it does not provide ne Petitioners are seeking to invalidate Jeffrey Epstein’s non‑prosecution agreement. Jane Doe 3 and Jane Doe 4 request to join the suit, claiming similar CVRA rights violations. The court rejects their

1p
House OversightOtherNov 11, 2025

Dershowitz seeks to seal Giuffre affidavit in Edwards‑Cassell defamation case, claims media attacks are fabricated

The passage hints at a possible concealment of evidence in a high‑profile defamation dispute involving Alan Dershowitz, a prominent attorney, and references the infamous Giuffre allegations. While it Dershowitz requests the court to declare portions of Ms. Giuffre’s affidavit confidential. He publicly denies the allegations on BBC Radio 4, framing them as a coordinated false‑story campaig Dershow

1p
House OversightDepositionNov 11, 2025

Witness Testimony Blocked Over Attorney-Client Privilege in Epstein-Related Trial

The passage suggests that key testimony about Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, Alan Dershowitz, and possibly former President Clinton is being suppressed by invoking attorney‑client privilege, indi Attorney‑client privilege is being used to block questions about Epstein and Maxwell. The court previously barred non‑Fifth Amendment questions about Dershowitz. Reference to “Clinton” and “other wor

1p

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.