IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
Summary
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA Case No.: Division: IN RE: GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF GRAND JURY TRANSCRIPTS AND TO SEAL ALL PROCEEDINGS FILED UNDER SEAL IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA Case No.: Division: IN RE: GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS MOTION FOR PRODUCTION OF GRAND JURY TRANSCRIPTS AND TO SEAL ALL PROCEEDINGS Comes now the United States of America, by and through the undersigned Assistant United States Attorney, and moves this Court, on behalf of the federal grand jury, for the production of transcripts of any and all proceedings before the State Grand Jury on Wednesday, July 19, 2006, referring or relating to Jeffrey Epstein and/or including but not limited to witness testimony, statements made by any member of the State Attorney's Office, and instructions given by any member of the State Attorney's Office. In support of thi
Persons Referenced (6)
“...ing attorney to his or her assistants, legal associates, and employees, and to the defendant and the defendant's attorney, and by the latter to his or her legal associates...”
United States of AmericaUnited StatesUnited States Attorney“...edings in this matter be sealed. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY BY: 111.11.1 ATESATTORNEY Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 South Australian Ave,...”
Alexander Acosta“... all further proceedings in this matter be sealed. Respectfully submitted, R. ALEXANDER ACOSTA UNITED STATES ATTORNEY BY: 111.11.1 ATESATTORNEY Florida Bar No. 0018255 500 South Australian Ave, ...”
Jeffrey EpsteinTags
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureRelated Documents (6)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. / PLEA AGREEMENT The United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida ("the United States"), and Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") enter into the following agreement: 1. The defendant agrees to plead guilty to a two-count Information which charges that the defendant intentionally harassed two other persons, that is, S.K. and N.M., in an attempt to delay, prevent, and dissuade those persons from reporting to a law enforcement officer of the United States the commission of a federal offense; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1512(d)(2) and 2. 2. The defendant agrees and understands that the above charges involve his conduct, and the criminal conduct of others, between in and around early 2001 through in and around September 2007. This agreement resolves the federal criminal liability of th
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. PLEA AGREEMENT The United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida ("the United States"), and Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") enter into the following agreement: 1. The defendant agrees to plead guilty to a two-count Information which charges the defendant as follows. Count 1 charges that the defendant intentionally harassed another person, that is in an attempt to delay, prevent, and dissuade Efrom attending or testifying in an official proceeding, that is a Federal Grand Jury appearance in the Southern District of Florida, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1512(d)(2) and 2; and Count 2 charges that the defendant intentionally harassed another person, that is,=, in an attempt to delay, prevent, and dissuadafrom reporting to a law enforcement officer of the United States the commission
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA Case No. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA vs. JEFFREY EPSTEIN, Defendant. PLEA AGREEMENT The United States Attorney for the Southern District of Florida ("the United States"), and Jeffrey Epstein (hereinafter referred to as the "defendant") enter into the following agreement: 1. The defendant agrees to plead guilty to the Information which charges the defendant with two counts of knowingly and intentionally violating the privacy protection accorded to child victims by 18 U.S.C. § 3509; in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 403. 2. The defendant is aware that the sentence will be imposed by the Court after considering the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements (hereinafter "Sentencing Guidelines"). The defendant acknowledges and understands that the Court will compute an advisory sentence under the Sentencing Guidelines and that the applicable guidelines will be determined by the Court re
09/18/2007 02:53
09/18/2007 02:53 PM To 'Jay Lefkowite < cc bec Subject Factual proffer Hi Jay — I didn't want us to get sidetracked during the conference call. I want to make sure that we have a factual basis for "harassment" Forcibly flying omewhere else is a different 1512 offense with a 10 year cap. 1 is is the factual proffer that I drafted up earlier this afternoon, to give you an idea of what it would look like. When I include a factual proffer in a plea agreement, I usually use prefatory language like: The parties agree that, had this case proceeded to trial, the United States would have proven the following facts beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the following facts are true and correct and are sufficient to support a plea of guilty . <Cpstein Plea Proffer.doc>> Assistant U.S. Attorney 500 S. Australian Ave, Suite 400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Phone Fax «< Attachment 'Epstein Plea Proffer.doc' has been archived by user 'CommonStorellT/Klrkland•Ellls' on '11/26/2007
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 MOTION TO DISMISS SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT FOR BREACH OF NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT Mark S. Cohen Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. Bobbi C. Stemheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00065989 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 STATEMENT OF FACTS 7 A. The Structure of the NPA 8 B. The Negotiation of the NPA 11 ARGUMENT 12 I. The Indictment Should Be Dismissed for Breach of the NPA. 14 A. Ms. Maxwell Has Standing to Enforce the NPA. 15 B. The NPA's Prohibition on Prosecution of Potential Co-Conspirators Is Not Limited to the SDFL. 18 1. The NPA is binding on the USAO in this District 18 2. United States v. Annabi does not alter the an
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 MOTION TO DISMISS SUPERSEDING INDICTMENT FOR BREACH OF NON-PROSECUTION AGREEMENT Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00099352 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 STATEMENT OF FACTS 7 U The Structure of the NPA 8 B. The Negotiation of the NPA 11 ARGUMENT 12 I. The Indictment Should Be Dismissed for Breach of the NPA. 14 a Ms. Maxwell Has Standing to Enforce the NPA. 15 B. The NPA's Prohibition on Prosecution of Potential Co-Conspirators Is Not Limited to the SDFL. 18 1. The NPA is binding on the USAO in this District 18 2. United States v. Annabi does not alter the analysis. 19 1. There is an "affirmative appearance" that the co-conspirator immunity provision was intended to apply outside the SDFL 20 b. The Second Circuit's subsequent applic
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.