UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
Summary
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In the Matter of the Application of the United States Of America for a Search and Seizure Warrant for the Premises Known and Described as 9 East 71st Street, New York, New York and Any Closed Containers/Items Contained Therein TO BE FILED UNDER SEAL Agent Affidavit in Support of Application for Search and Seizure Warrant SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK) ss.: Amanda Young, being duly sworn, deposes and says: I. Introduction A. Affiant 1. I have been a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBP") since 2017. During that time, I have participated in numerous investigations and prosecutions of crimes against children, including the sex trafficking of minors. I have also participated in the execution of multiple search warrants. 2. I make this Affidavit in support of an application pursuant to Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for a warrant to search the premises specified below
Persons Referenced (4)
“...ther facilitate his ability to abuse minor girls in New York, JEFFREY EPSTEIN, the defendant, asked and enticed certain of his victims to recruit additional minor girls to...”
The victim“...t Premises with a massage table, where she would perform a massage on EPSTEIN. The victims, who were as young as 14 years of age, were told by EPSTEIN or other individuals to partially or fully undr...”
United StatesJeffrey Epstein“...ein, the Subject Premises is believed to be owned, possessed and controlled by JEFFREY EPSTEIN, a target subject of this investigation. A photograph of the front entrance to...”
Tags
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureRelated Documents (6)
Westlaw.
Westlaw. Pagel 749 F.3d 999, 24 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C 1270 (Cite as: 749 F.3d 999) H United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. Jane DOE NO. 1, Jane Doe No. 2, Plaintiffs-Appellees, 1. UNITED STATES of America, Defendant. Roy Black, Martin G. Weinberg, Jeffrey Epstein, Intervenors-Appellants. No. 13-12923. April 18, 2014. Background: Alleged minor victims of federal sex crimes brought action against the United States alleging violations of the Crime Victims' Rights Act ( CVRA) re- lated to the United States Attorney Office's execution of non-prosecution agree- ment with alleged perpetrator. After the victims moved for disclosure of corres- pondence concerning the non-prosecution agreement, the alleged perpetrator and his criminal defense attorneys intervened to assert privilege to prevent the disclos- ure of their plea negotiations. The United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida Court, No. 9:08-CV-80736-KAM, ordered disclosure. The inter- v
Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM
Case 1:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/07/2008 FRIT1113w1 O_to D.C. ELECTRONIC UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 08-80736-Civ-MAR RA/JOHNSON CASE NO.: IN RE: JANE DOE, Petitioner. JULY 7, 2008 STEVEN M. LARIMORE CLERK U.S. GIST. CT. S.D. OF FLA. • MIAMI enc y VICTIM'S PETITION FOR ENFORCEMENT OF CRIME VICTIM'S RIGHTS ACT, 18 U.S.0 . SECTION 3771 COMES NOW the Petitioner, JANE DOE (hereinafter "Petitioner"), by and through her undersigned attorneys, pursuant to the Crime Victim's Rights Act, 18 U.S.C. Section 3771 ("CVRA"), and files this Petition for Enforcement in the above styled action as follows: 1. Petitioner, an adult, as a minor child was a victim of federal crimes committed by JEFFREY EPSTEIN (hereinafter "Defendant"). These crimes included sex trafficking of children by fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1591, use of a means of interstate commerce to entice a minor to commit prostitution, in violation of 18
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA S 120 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x THE GOVERNMENT'S OMNIBUS MEMORANDUM IN OPPOSITION TO THE DEFENDANT'S PRE-TRIAL MOTIONS AUDREY STRAUSS United States Attorney Southern District of New York Attorney for the United States of America Assistant United States Attorneys - Of Counsel - EFTA00039421 TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 BACKGROUND 2 ARGUMENT 3 I. Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Is Irrelevant to This Case 3 A. The NPA Does Not Bind the Southern District of New York 4 1. The Text of the Agreement Does Not Contain a Promise to Bind Other Districts 5 2. The Defendant Has Offered No Evidence That the NPA Binds Other Districts 9 B. The NPA Does Not Immunize Maxwell from Prosecution 15 1. The NPA Is Limited to Particular Crimes Between 2001 and 2007 15 2. The NPA Does Not Confer Enforceable Rights on Maxwell 17 C. The Defendant
Ca_4ate.24h24/43134.01FrietibtOrtlefifitin0a0le28013,8111$2eafiabef146f 22
Ca_4ate.24h24/43134.01FrietibtOrtlefifitin0a0le28013,8111$2eafiabef146f 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK X Plaintiff, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. X 15-cv-07433-LAP Ms. Maxwell's Reply In Support Of Iler Objections to tnsealinu Sealed Materials Laura A. Menninger Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Ty Gee HADDON, MORGAN AND FOREMAN, P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue EFTA00074964 Ca_QatIgt24743tictoWneDbtOrfiefiVIMOXIle?BOWERKVaffizte12401 22 Introduction This Court asked the parties to brief three issues: "(a) the weight of presumption of public access that should be afforded to an item, (b) the identification and weight of any countervailing interests supporting continued sealing/redaction of the item, and (c) whether the countervailing interests rebut the presumption of public access to the item." DE 1044 at 1. Plaintiff and the Miami Herald's responses improperly afford the highest level of presumption to discovery dispute documents, deny that any co
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2012 Page 1 of 23
Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 161 Entered on FLSD Docket 04/17/2012 Page 1 of 23 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA CASE No. 08-80736-CIV-MARRA/JOHNSON JANE DOE 1 and JANE DOE 2, Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING OF INTERVENORS ROY BLACK, MARTIN WEINBERG, AND JAY LEFKOWITZ IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER CONCERNING PRODUCTION, USE, AND DISCLOSURE OF PLEA NEGOTIATIONS During the hearing on August 12, 2011, the Court directed the proposed intervenors to file additional briefing on their argument that plea negotiations are privileged and not subject to discovery or use as evidence in these proceedings. Proposed intervenors submit the following memorandum of law, which is identical to Parts I and II of the memorandum of law submitted by proposed intervenor Jeffrey Epstein in support of his motion for a protective order and his opposition to the motions of the plaintiffs for production, use,
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL IN SUPPORT OF HER RENEWED MOTION FOR BAIL Mark S. Cohen Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP New York, NY 10022 Phone: Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. Denver, CO 80203 Phone: Bobbi C. Stemheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim New York, NY 10011 Phone: Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00094289 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 ARGUMENT 7 I. Reconsideration of the Court's Bail Decision is Appropriate Under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(O 7 II. Ms. Maxwell Should Be Granted Bail Under the Proposed Strict Bail Conditions 10 A. Ms. Maxwell Has Deep Family Ties to the United States and Numerous Sureties to Support Her Bond 10 1. Ms. Maxwell is Devoted to Her Spouse and Stepchildren and Would Never Destroy Her Family By Leaving th
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.