Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
sd-10-EFTA01263272Dept. of JusticeOther

EFTA Document EFTA01263272

1 XJ49HGJS SEALED - DO NOT DOCKET 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x In Re Grand Jury Subpoena, 19 Misc. 149 (CM) Conference New York, N.Y. April 9, 2019 11:45 a.m. Befol HON. COLLEEN MCMAHON, Chief District Judge APPEARANCES United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Assistant United States Attorney SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. CON F I

Date
Unknown
Source
Dept. of Justice
Reference
sd-10-EFTA01263272
Pages
3
Persons
0
Integrity
Loading PDF viewer...

Summary

1 XJ49HGJS SEALED - DO NOT DOCKET 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x In Re Grand Jury Subpoena, 19 Misc. 149 (CM) Conference New York, N.Y. April 9, 2019 11:45 a.m. Befol HON. COLLEEN MCMAHON, Chief District Judge APPEARANCES United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Assistant United States Attorney SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. CON F I

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit
Review This Document

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
1 XJ49HGJS SEALED - DO NOT DOCKET 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x In Re Grand Jury Subpoena, 19 Misc. 149 (CM) Conference New York, N.Y. April 9, 2019 11:45 a.m. Befol HON. COLLEEN MCMAHON, Chief District Judge APPEARANCES United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York Assistant United States Attorney SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. CON F I titNif M. SDNY_GM_00000901 EFTA_00114985 EFTA01263272 2 XJ49HGJS SEALED - DO NOT DOCKET 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (In the robing room) THE COURT: This is 19 Misc. 149, In Re Grand Jury Subpoena. I've had one conference with the government in this matter. You want to put your appearance on the record. MR. : Yes. Good morning, your Honor. for the government. THE COURT: Mr. I now know a lot more about what's going on than I did the last time we were together. My question is this: I'll be very up-front with you. I want to make sure I'm not in a Chemical Bank kind of situation, so I would like to know about contacts between the United States Attorney's Office and the Boies Schiller firm prior to the issuance of the subpoena on the subject of your investigation. MR. . Yes, your Honor. So with respect to this investigation, the investigation was opened in late November or early December, either on Friday, November 30, or Monday, December 3. THE COURT: OK. MR. : In the initial days and weeks of the investigation, we endeavored to identify information about the subject of the investigation, including, among other things, possible victims who we should speak to. In the process of doing so, we identified certain counsel that were identified as representing victims or witnesses either in public filings or SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. CON F I biElltat SONY_GM_00000902 EFTA_00114986 EFTA01263273 3 XJ49HGJS SEALED - DO NOT DOCKET 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 in media reports. Boies Schiller was among those plaintiff attorneys. So following the opening of the investigation, we were in touch with Boies Schiller, among other plaintiff and witness counsel, in connection with their representation of witnesses or victims. With respect to Boies Schiller in particular, we quickly came to learn during the investigation that they had at the time either active or recently completed civil litigation and so asked them, as is our standard practice, told them, I should say, that we expected to make document requests. They generally advised us that they believed there was a protective order that would govern at least some of the materials, and that is why we ultimately made the application to the Court. THE COURT: OK. That's all I needed to know. I want to make two little changes in this opinion, and if you come back in an hour, you'll have it. MR. : OK. THE COURT: All right. MR. : Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: And we are granting your request. MR. : Understood. Thank you, your Honor. THE COURT: OK. (Adjourned) SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. CON F I titnitNi SONY_GM_00000903 EFTA_00114987 EFTA01263274

Link to Specific Page

Share a direct link to a specific page in this document:

https://epsteinexposed.com/documents/sd-10-EFTA01263272?page=[page_number]

Related Documents (6)

House OversightUnknown

Alan Dershowitz seeks to modify confidentiality order to use [REDACTED - Survivor] deposition in court

Alan Dershowitz seeks to modify confidentiality order to use [REDACTED - Survivor] deposition in court The filing reveals a procedural move by a high‑profile attorney to access testimony from [REDACTED - Survivor], a key witness in the Epstein‑related allegations. While it connects a well‑known lawyer to the case, it offers no new factual disclosures, financial flows, or direct involvement of senior officials. The lead is moderately useful for tracking litigation strategy but lacks novel or explosive content. Key insights: Dershowitz filed a motion to lift a confidentiality seal on a deposition of [REDACTED - Survivor].; The motion was filed on Feb 3 2016, referencing a Jan 12 2016 confidentiality order.; Dershowitz argues the need to share the testimony with expert witnesses and other parties for his defense.

1p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

[REDACTED - Survivor] v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation

The complaint provides a dense web of alleged connections between Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, and the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA). It cites specif Roberts alleges she was trafficked by Epstein from 2000‑2002 and forced to have sex with Dershowitz. Dershowitz is accused of helping draft and pressure the government into the 2008 NPA that shielded

87p
House OversightApr 17, 2019

[REDACTED - Survivor] v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation

[REDACTED - Survivor] v. Alan Dershowitz – Allegations of Sex Trafficking, NPA Manipulation, and Defamation The complaint provides a dense web of alleged connections between Alan Dershowitz, Jeffrey Epstein, former U.S. Attorney Alexander Acosta, and the 2008 non‑prosecution agreement (NPA). It cites specific actions (e.g., alleged drafting of the NPA, defamatory statements, settlement confidentiality) and dates that could be pursued for documentary evidence, witness interviews, and financial‑flow analysis. If substantiated, the lead would expose potential prosecutorial misconduct and high‑level collusion, generating major public outrage. Key insights: Roberts alleges she was trafficked by Epstein from 2000‑2002 and forced to have sex with Dershowitz.; Dershowitz is accused of helping draft and pressure the government into the 2008 NPA that shielded Epstein and co‑conspirators.; Acosta, then U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Florida, approved the NPA; later became Trump’s Secretary of Labor.

1p
House OversightNov 23, 2015

Plaintiffs seek to unseal court filings alleging sexual abuse by Alan Dershowitz in [REDACTED - Survivor] defamation case

Plaintiffs seek to unseal court filings alleging sexual abuse by Alan Dershowitz in [REDACTED - Survivor] defamation case The passage reveals a motion to keep certain filings confidential that contain allegations of sexual abuse by a high‑profile attorney, Alan Dershowitz, on behalf of [REDACTED - Survivor]. While it identifies a potential lead—unsealing these records could provide evidence of misconduct—it lacks concrete details such as dates of alleged abuse, financial transactions, or direct links to powerful political figures. The controversy is moderate, and the novelty is limited given the public nature of the Dershowitz‑Giuffre allegations. Key insights: Defendants Bradley J. Edwards and Paul G. Cassell filed a response to Dershowitz’s motion to keep records confidential.; The contested records are three filings that recount [REDACTED - Survivor]’s allegations of sexual abuse by Alan Dershowitz.; Plaintiffs argue the filings are not confidential and should be part of the public record in the defamation case.

1p
Dept. of JusticeAug 22, 2017

15 July 7 2016 - July 17 2016 working progress_Redacted.pdf

Kristen M. Simkins From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Irons, Janet < Tuesday, July 12, 2016 10:47 AM Richard C. Smith     Hello Warden Smith,     mother is anxious to hear the results of your inquiry into her daughter's health.   I'd be grateful if you could  email or call me at your earliest convenience.  I'm free today after 2 p.m.  Alternatively, we could meet after the Prison  Board of Inspectors Meeting this coming Thursday.    Best wishes,    Janet Irons    1 Kristen M. Simkins From: Sent:

1196p
House OversightFinancial RecordNov 11, 2025

Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, and Leslie Wexner entangled in alleged $1 Billion extortion scheme linked to Jeffrey Epstein’s network

The document contains multiple specific allegations that connect high‑profile figures – Prince Andrew, Alan Dershowitz, and billionaire Leslie Wexner – to a coordinated extortion effort involving a $5 [REDACTED - Survivor]’ lawyers allegedly pressured her to name Prince Andrew and Dershowitz to leverage a Rebecca (Roberts’ friend) allegedly demanded £500,000 from the Prince for access, and claimed the

68p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,500+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Support This ProjectSupported by 1,550+ people worldwide
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.