Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York
By United States Department of Justice – https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/styles/pixels_200/public/fieldable-panel-panes/basic-panes/images/2018/05/22/doj_seal_1920_x_1080.png?itok=oHcPlI7Z, Public Domain, Link
Snapshot
The United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York brought the federal prosecution that ended Jeffrey Epstein’s freedom and exposed the alleged trafficking operation connected to his Manhattan residence.
The office began examining Epstein in December 2018. It worked with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the New York Police Department, and other agencies to interview survivors, obtain financial records, execute searches, and prepare criminal charges.
Authorities arrested Epstein on July 6, 2019. Two days later, prosecutors unsealed an indictment charging him with sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors.
Epstein died at the Metropolitan Correctional Center New York before his case reached trial. The court dismissed the charges without a verdict.
The investigation continued after his death. SDNY prosecutors investigated possible accomplices, prosecuted Ghislaine Maxwell, secured her conviction, and prosecuted two correctional officers accused of falsifying records from the night Epstein died.
The office achieved the only federal jury conviction of a central participant in Epstein’s sexual abuse operation. However, released evidence also shows that prosecutors examined additional possible accomplices who were never publicly charged.
What Is the Southern District of New York
The United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York is a federal prosecution office within the United States Department of Justice.
Its jurisdiction includes Manhattan, the Bronx, Dutchess, Orange, Putnam, Rockland, Sullivan, and Westchester counties.
The office prosecutes federal crimes committed within its territory and crimes with a sufficient legal connection to the district. It also represents the United States in civil litigation within the district.
The office is separate from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Prosecutors work for the executive branch. Federal judges independently decide questions involving warrants, evidence, detention, trials, and sentencing.
Why SDNY Had Jurisdiction
Epstein maintained a mansion at 9 East 71st Street in Manhattan.
The 2019 indictment alleged that Epstein used his Manhattan and Palm Beach residences to sexually exploit and abuse underage girls between approximately 2002 and 2005.
According to the official SDNY charging announcement, employees and associates contacted girls and scheduled appointments at the residences. Epstein allegedly paid victims following sexual encounters and paid some victims to recruit additional girls.
These allegations gave federal prosecutors in New York a direct jurisdictional basis for investigating conduct connected to the Manhattan property.
The Investigation Began in 2018
An FBI case summary states that the New York investigation began on December 6, 2018, after SDNY contacted the FBI concerning survivors who reported being sexually abused by Epstein during the 2000s.
The timing followed the publication of the Miami Herald’s Perversion of Justice investigation. Reporter Julie K. Brown’s work examined Epstein’s treatment by federal prosecutors in Florida and centered survivors who had been denied meaningful notice before the government entered its secret agreement with Epstein.
Between January and June 2019, investigators conducted survivor and witness interviews in New York and Florida.
The FBI summary describes allegations involving dozens of girls, including girls as young as 14, at Epstein’s Manhattan and Palm Beach residences.
FBI summary of the New York investigation
The record establishes that SDNY initiated the renewed federal inquiry. It does not establish that the office discovered the allegations independently of survivors, civil litigation, earlier police work, and investigative reporting.
The July 2019 Indictment
A federal grand jury charged Epstein with sex trafficking of minors and conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors.
The case was filed as United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, 19 Cr. 490.
The indictment alleged that Epstein created a system for obtaining a continuing supply of underage girls. It described employees and associates contacting victims and scheduling sexual encounters.
Prosecutors also alleged that Epstein encouraged victims to recruit other girls by paying recruitment fees. This created a structure in which exploited teenagers were drawn into bringing additional victims to him.
Epstein pleaded not guilty. Because he died before trial, the allegations in the indictment were never adjudicated against him.
DOJ collection of Epstein federal court records
2019 Federal Prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein
The Epstein Prosecution Team
The 2019 Epstein prosecution was handled by career prosecutors within the SDNY Public Corruption Unit. Several members of the team remained involved in the continuing investigation and the Maxwell prosecution.
Geoffrey S. Berman
Geoffrey S. Berman was the United States Attorney who announced the charges against Epstein in July 2019.
Berman supervised the office when the renewed investigation began, when Epstein was arrested, and when prosecutors began examining possible accomplices.
Berman later stated publicly that Prince Andrew had provided no cooperation with the federal investigation. In March 2020, Berman said Prince Andrew had closed the door on voluntary cooperation.
A public disagreement with the Justice Department preceded Berman’s departure from office in June 2020. Audrey Strauss then assumed leadership of SDNY.
Alexander Rossmiller
Alexander Rossmiller was one of the prosecutors assigned to the Epstein case and later helped prosecute Maxwell.
Rossmiller served as a federal prosecutor for more than a decade. His work included securities fraud, corruption, civil rights cases, and the Epstein and Maxwell investigations.
He later joined Quinn Emanuel’s investigations and white collar defense practice. His firm biography specifically identifies the Epstein and Maxwell prosecutions among the significant cases he handled at SDNY.
Alison Gainfort Moe
Alison Gainfort Moe was a member of both the Epstein and Maxwell prosecution teams.
Moe served more than seven years as an SDNY prosecutor. She later became Deputy Chief of the Criminal Division, where she supervised prosecutors handling fraud, money laundering, cybercrime, and general criminal matters.
She is now a partner at Sher Tremonte. Her practice focuses on criminal enforcement, investigations, trials, and complex litigation.
Maurene Comey
Maurene Comey was one of the principal prosecutors assigned to the Epstein investigation. She later participated in the Maxwell prosecution and other major federal cases involving sexual exploitation.
Comey remained at SDNY until the Justice Department terminated her employment in July 2025 without providing a public explanation.
She subsequently filed a lawsuit alleging that her dismissal was unlawful and politically motivated. Those claims remain allegations in civil litigation and should not be presented as adjudicated findings.
In February 2026, Comey joined Patterson Belknap as a litigation partner.
Abigail Kurland
Abigail S. Kurland assisted the Epstein prosecution as an SDNY Human Trafficking Coordinator.
Kurland had previously prosecuted organized crime, racketeering, firearms, narcotics, and witness tampering cases.
The official Epstein charging announcement specifically credits Kurland with assisting Rossmiller, Moe, and Comey.
Audrey Strauss
Audrey Strauss became Acting United States Attorney after Berman left the office in June 2020.
Strauss announced Maxwell’s arrest on July 2, 2020. She supervised the office during an important phase of the Maxwell investigation and preparation of the case for trial.
Damian Williams
Damian Williams led SDNY when the jury convicted Maxwell in December 2021 and when the court sentenced her in June 2022.
Williams credited the survivors who testified and the career prosecutors who prepared the case.
After leaving SDNY, Williams entered private practice. He later joined Jenner and Block as a partner focusing on litigation and investigations.
Additional Maxwell Prosecutors
The Maxwell prosecution eventually included additional Assistant United States Attorneys, including Andrew Rohrbach and Lara Pomerantz.
The official Maxwell case page provides the indictment, hearing information, survivor notification procedures, and sentencing information.
This expanded team carried the investigation from Epstein’s arrest through Maxwell’s trial and conviction.
Why the Public Corruption Unit Handled the Case
The Epstein and Maxwell prosecutions were assigned to the SDNY Public Corruption Unit.
The assignment attracted public interest because the indictments charged sexual exploitation and trafficking offenses rather than conventional government corruption crimes.
The official Epstein announcement confirms the unit assignment. The official Maxwell announcement confirms that the case remained in the unit.
Neither announcement explains the internal reason for the assignment. The unit may handle sensitive investigations involving powerful individuals, obstruction, institutional conduct, or public officials, but the published record does not establish which consideration controlled the decision.
The Arrest at Teterboro Airport
Authorities arrested Epstein on July 6, 2019, after his private aircraft returned from Paris and landed at Teterboro Airport in New Jersey.
The arrest involved coordination among SDNY, the FBI, the NYPD, and United States Customs and Border Protection.
Epstein appeared in federal court on July 8, 2019. He initially consented to detention while the court prepared to consider his request for release.
The court later denied bail and ordered Epstein detained pending trial.
Official SDNY Epstein case page
The Search of Epstein’s Manhattan Residence
Investigators searched Epstein’s Manhattan residence shortly after his arrest.
Prosecutors reported finding large numbers of photographs, compact discs, cash, diamonds, and passports. Some photographs appeared to depict underage girls.
A locked safe contained compact discs bearing handwritten labels referring to nude images and girls. The safe also contained an expired Austrian passport displaying Epstein’s photograph under another name and listing a Saudi Arabian residence.
An NYPD detective assigned to the joint Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force documented evidence including:
- Forty eight diamonds with appraisal documents
- Approximately $72,083 in cash
- Foreign currency
- A diamond ring
- An American Express traveler’s check
- Epstein’s expired United States passport
- The expired Austrian passport
NYPD task force correspondence about evidence recovered from the safe
The presence of these items supported the government’s argument that Epstein possessed considerable financial resources and the ability to leave the country. The presence of a passport or financial asset does not independently prove a trafficking offense.
Why Epstein Was Denied Bail
Epstein proposed a release package secured by his Manhattan residence and other assets.
SDNY opposed release. Prosecutors argued that Epstein posed a danger to the community and a serious flight risk.
The government emphasized his wealth, private aircraft, international travel, multiple residences, foreign connections, passports, cash, and valuables.
Prosecutors also disclosed financial transactions made shortly after the Miami Herald published its 2018 investigation.
According to an SDNY filing, Epstein transferred $100,000 to a person identified as a potential coconspirator protected by the Florida agreement. He reportedly transferred another $250,000 to a second person associated with his circle.
The government presented these transfers as possible evidence of attempted influence or obstruction. The filing did not establish through a completed trial that either recipient agreed to obstruct the investigation.
SDNY supplemental detention filing
Financial record connected to the November 2018 transfer
Judge Richard M. Berman denied Epstein’s request for release on July 18, 2019.
The Financial Investigation
SDNY did not limit its investigation to survivor testimony and property searches.
The office examined Epstein’s companies, trusts, banking relationships, payments, cash withdrawals, settlements, tuition expenses, payments to associates, and transfers involving women connected to Epstein.
On September 12, 2019, Deutsche Bank presented SDNY with an analysis of accounts associated with what the bank called the Southern Financial Relationship.
The presentation included sections addressing:
- Epstein affiliated entities
- The Butterfly Trust
- Payments to trust beneficiaries
- Payments to foreign models
- Large cash withdrawals
- Possible settlement payments
- Possible legal expenses for alleged coconspirators
- Payments to prominent individuals
- Tuition payments
- Relationships with other financial institutions
Deutsche Bank presentation to SDNY
The presentation shows that prosecutors possessed a substantial financial map of Epstein’s operation. It does not mean that every payment or account listed was unlawful.
Discovery and Evidence Processing
On July 31, 2019, SDNY sent Epstein’s attorneys an initial discovery production containing materials numbered USAO 000001 through USAO 004518.
The letter invoked the federal criminal discovery rules and requested reciprocal discovery from the defense.
The investigation eventually collected survivor interviews, financial records, travel records, seized devices, photographs, contact books, employee records, property records, and communications.
Epstein’s death prevented prosecutors from presenting this evidence against him at trial. Parts of the evidence were later used in the Maxwell investigation and prosecution.
Epstein’s Death and Dismissal of the Case
Epstein died at the Metropolitan Correctional Center on August 10, 2019.
The New York City Office of Chief Medical Examiner ruled his death a suicide.
Because a criminal prosecution cannot continue against a deceased defendant, SDNY asked the court to dismiss the case through an order of nolle prosequi.
Before ruling, Judge Berman held a public hearing on August 27, 2019. Survivors and their attorneys were allowed to address the court.
The hearing created a formal record of survivor statements even though Epstein could no longer be tried.
On August 29, 2019, the court dismissed the criminal case. The dismissal was procedural. It was not an acquittal, conviction, or factual determination concerning the allegations.
SDNY Epstein case updates and survivor hearing information
Contemporary report on the dismissal and survivor hearing
Survivor Outreach
SDNY established a public case page and invited people who believed they had been victimized by Epstein to contact the FBI or the office’s Victim Witness Unit.
The office provided notifications concerning Epstein’s arraignment, bail hearings, detention, death, and dismissal proceeding.
After Epstein died, SDNY stated that the investigation into his conduct would continue. The office continued requesting information from survivors regardless of when or where the abuse occurred.
This outreach was important because many survivors had previously been denied notice before federal prosecutors in Florida entered the controversial Non Prosecution Agreement.
The Investigation of Potential Coconspirators
Epstein’s death did not eliminate possible criminal liability for other participants.
An 86 page prosecution memorandum dated December 19, 2019, was titled “Investigation into Potential Coconspirators of Jeffrey Epstein.”
The memorandum reviewed evidence concerning Epstein’s network, survivor accounts, employees, associates, financial transactions, and possible charging decisions.
SDNY memorandum concerning potential coconspirators
Additional internal records show that prosecutors debated whether to charge at least one other person.
One communication described the decision as a close call between requiring felony pleas and declining prosecution.
Internal SDNY charging discussion
Another communication referred to a change in prosecutors’ assessment of possible obstructive conduct, including the destruction of materials.
Internal discussion of possible obstructive conduct
A separate record identifies Sarah Kellen as the only other individual prosecutors were then considering charging.
SDNY communication concerning Sarah Kellen
The public record does not show that SDNY filed criminal charges against Sarah Kellen, Nadia Marcinkova, Lesley Groff, or Adriana Ross.
The absence of charges does not establish innocence or guilt. It means prosecutors did not file a public criminal case they were prepared to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
Prince Andrew and the Cooperation Dispute
Prince Andrew’s name became part of the public dispute over cooperation with the SDNY investigation.
In January 2020, Geoffrey Berman stated that Prince Andrew had provided no cooperation, despite the prince’s earlier public statement that he was willing to assist appropriate law enforcement agencies.
Prince Andrew’s legal team later disputed the government’s characterization and said he had offered to cooperate under agreed conditions.
The dispute did not produce a public SDNY charge against Prince Andrew.
The competing statements should be presented as a documented disagreement between prosecutors and the prince’s representatives, not as proof of a criminal offense.
The Florida Non Prosecution Agreement
The 2007 agreement negotiated by the United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Florida promised that federal prosecutors there would not prosecute Epstein or certain potential coconspirators for covered conduct.
When SDNY prosecuted Maxwell, her attorneys argued that the Florida agreement protected her from prosecution in New York.
SDNY disputed that interpretation.
The federal courts ultimately ruled that the Florida agreement did not bind SDNY.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed Maxwell’s conviction and held that the agreement did not prevent her New York prosecution.
The United States Supreme Court later declined to review that ruling.
This legal conclusion was essential to SDNY’s ability to obtain and preserve Maxwell’s conviction.
Prosecution of Ghislaine Maxwell
Federal authorities arrested Maxwell on July 2, 2020.
The indictment alleged that she helped Epstein recruit, groom, transport, and sexually abuse girls as young as 14. Prosecutors also charged her with making false statements during depositions in civil litigation.
Audrey Strauss was serving as Acting United States Attorney when the charges were announced. The prosecution remained assigned to the Public Corruption Unit.
Official SDNY announcement of Maxwell’s arrest
Preserved Maxwell charging announcement
Maxwell Discovery and Trial Evidence
An October 2021 email shows a member of the joint NYPD and FBI task force transmitting scanned evidence for inclusion in the Maxwell discovery production.
The materials included a bound black address book identified as Government Exhibit 52 and handwritten notes on yellow legal paper.
Task force email concerning Maxwell discovery
The document demonstrates continuing coordination among SDNY prosecutors, federal investigators, and NYPD task force personnel during trial preparation.
The exhibit should not automatically be treated as identical to every other Epstein address book circulated publicly. Its exhibit number identifies the specific item used in the Maxwell proceeding.
Maxwell’s Conviction and Sentence
A federal jury convicted Maxwell on five counts on December 29, 2021.
The verdict established beyond a reasonable doubt that Maxwell participated in crimes connected to Epstein’s sexual abuse of minors.
On June 28, 2022, the court sentenced Maxwell to 20 years in federal prison.
Survivors submitted written statements and addressed the court during sentencing.
SDNY statement concerning the Maxwell verdict
SDNY human trafficking case summary
Maxwell’s conviction remains the principal criminal judgment produced by the renewed federal investigation into Epstein’s operation.
Prosecution of the MCC Correctional Officers
SDNY also prosecuted correctional officers Tova Noel and Michael Thomas following Epstein’s death.
The government alleged that the officers failed to perform required inmate counts and rounds during the night of August 9 and the morning of August 10, 2019.
Prosecutors also alleged that the officers created false records claiming the checks had been completed.
SDNY announcement of charges against the correctional officers
United States v. Noel court records
The officers later entered deferred prosecution agreements. The charges were dismissed after they completed the agreements’ requirements.
The Justice Department Inspector General investigation found serious failures by Bureau of Prisons personnel but did not find evidence contradicting the FBI’s determination that Epstein’s death involved no criminal act by another person.
The officer prosecution addressed alleged neglect and false records. It did not establish that the officers killed Epstein or permitted another person to enter his cell.
What SDNY Accomplished
SDNY’s investigation produced several important results.
- Epstein was arrested and detained without bail.
- Federal prosecutors documented an alleged trafficking operation centered partly in Manhattan.
- Investigators searched Epstein’s properties and collected extensive physical, digital, and financial evidence.
- Survivors were offered a formal opportunity to address the court.
- The office continued investigating possible accomplices after Epstein’s death.
- Maxwell was prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced to 20 years in prison.
- The courts confirmed that the Florida agreement did not prevent SDNY from prosecuting Maxwell.
- Correctional officers were charged over false records connected to the night Epstein died.
Unresolved Questions
The SDNY record leaves substantial unanswered questions.
- Why were no additional Epstein employees or alleged facilitators publicly charged?
- What final charging recommendations appeared in the December 2019 prosecution memorandum?
- What happened to the contemplated prosecution described in the internal charging records?
- How did prosecutors evaluate evidence concerning payments to potential witnesses and coconspirators?
- Which seized devices were successfully searched?
- Which evidence could not be recovered or decrypted?
- What investigative work continued after Maxwell’s conviction?
- Were financial institutions or professional service providers evaluated for criminal exposure?
- How did prosecutors distinguish victims, employees, facilitators, witnesses, and possible defendants?
- Which SDNY records remain protected by grand jury secrecy, court orders, or survivor privacy requirements?
These questions should be examined through primary documents rather than assumptions based only on a person’s presence in Epstein’s records.
Key Takeaways
- SDNY initiated a renewed federal Epstein investigation in December 2018.
- The office charged Epstein with federal sex trafficking offenses in July 2019.
- Epstein was detained without bail after prosecutors documented his resources, international mobility, and possible witness influence.
- Investigators collected extensive physical, financial, and digital evidence.
- Epstein died before trial, so the indictment never produced a verdict.
- Judge Berman allowed survivors to speak before dismissing the case.
- SDNY continued investigating Epstein’s potential coconspirators.
- Internal records show that prosecutors considered at least one additional charging decision that did not result in a public case.
- SDNY successfully prosecuted Maxwell despite her attempt to invoke the Florida agreement.
- Maxwell’s conviction remains the central criminal judgment arising from the renewed federal investigation.
- No other Epstein employee or alleged facilitator has been publicly convicted through the SDNY investigation.
- The office produced meaningful accountability but did not fully resolve the structure, financing, or personnel of Epstein’s operation.
Related EpsteinWiki Articles
- Jeffrey Epstein
- Ghislaine Maxwell
- 2019 Federal Prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein
- 2008 Non Prosecution Agreement
- Federal Bureau of Investigation
- New York Police Department
- Metropolitan Correctional Center New York
- Bureau of Prisons
- Epstein’s Manhattan Townhouse
- Deutsche Bank
- Sarah Kellen
- Nadia Marcinkova
- Lesley Groff
- Andrew Mountbatten Windsor
Primary Evidence Files
EFTA01649149: FBI summary of the New York investigation
This FBI summary states that the New York investigation began on December 6, 2018, after SDNY contacted the FBI about survivors who reported abuse by Epstein. It outlines interviews, searches, alleged recruitment practices, and conduct connected to the Manhattan and Palm Beach residences.
EFTA01625916: Epstein arrest warrant affidavit
This affidavit presents the facts investigators submitted to obtain judicial authorization for Epstein’s arrest. It explains the alleged trafficking operation and the evidence supporting probable cause. An affidavit records the government’s evidence and allegations at that stage. It is not a conviction.
EFTA01301551: Search warrant materials
This file contains materials supporting a search connected to the federal investigation. Search warrant documents explain the suspected offenses, the location or property investigators sought to examine, and the evidence they expected to find.
EFTA01659328: Epstein detention order
This court order records Judge Berman’s decision to detain Epstein pending trial. The court considered danger to the community, flight risk, Epstein’s wealth, international travel, private aircraft, foreign connections, and access to multiple passports.
EFTA00014493: SDNY supplemental detention filing
This prosecution filing describes financial transfers Epstein allegedly made after the Miami Herald investigation appeared. SDNY cited the transfers while arguing that Epstein posed a risk of witness influence or obstruction. The filing presents the government’s argument and does not independently establish criminal obstruction.
EFTA00016748: Duplicate supplemental detention filing
This is a substantially duplicate copy of the SDNY filing concerning Epstein’s financial transfers and detention. It corroborates the preserved filing but should not be counted as evidence of a separate event.
EFTA00020685: Financial record connected to a November 2018 transfer
This record documents a financial transfer discussed during the detention proceedings. It helps substantiate that a payment occurred. The record alone does not establish the recipient’s purpose, knowledge, or intent.
EFTA00021576: NYPD task force correspondence about Epstein’s safe
This email chain was written by personnel associated with the joint NYPD and FBI Child Exploitation and Human Trafficking Task Force. It documents cash, foreign currency, diamonds, appraisal records, passports, and other property recovered from Epstein’s Manhattan safe.
EFTA00021627: Austrian passport evidence
This file concerns an expired Austrian passport recovered from Epstein’s residence. The passport displayed Epstein’s photograph with another name and listed a Saudi Arabian residence. Prosecutors cited it as evidence relevant to flight risk. Its recovery does not establish that Epstein used it to commit a separate offense.
EFTA00030532: SDNY discovery letter
This July 31, 2019 letter documents SDNY’s initial production of discovery to Epstein’s attorneys. It states that the government provided materials numbered USAO 000001 through USAO 004518 and requested reciprocal discovery from the defense.
EFTA01681865: Deutsche Bank presentation to SDNY
This September 12, 2019 presentation supplied SDNY with an organized review of Epstein related Deutsche Bank accounts. It covers trusts, affiliated companies, cash withdrawals, payments to women and alleged coconspirators, possible settlements, tuition expenses, prominent recipients, and connections to other financial institutions. A transaction’s inclusion does not mean it was unlawful.
EFTA02731082: Investigation into potential coconspirators
This December 19, 2019 prosecution memorandum examines evidence concerning people who may have assisted, facilitated, witnessed, or participated in Epstein’s operation. It shows that SDNY continued evaluating possible cases after Epstein died. A person’s appearance in the memorandum does not establish criminal liability.
EFTA00024285: Internal charging discussion
This internal communication records prosecutorial discussion about whether to require an unidentified person to accept felony pleas or decline prosecution. The document describes the decision as close. Redactions and incomplete context prevent the person’s identity from being stated with certainty.
EFTA00016245: Internal discussion of possible obstructive conduct
This communication refers to a change in prosecutors’ assessment of an unidentified person’s possible obstructive conduct, including the destruction of materials. It shows that possible obstruction affected internal deliberations. It does not document a conviction or final charging decision.
EFTA00106062: SDNY communication concerning Sarah Kellen
This communication identifies Sarah Kellen as the only additional individual prosecutors were then considering charging. It demonstrates that a possible case against Kellen received active consideration. No public SDNY indictment against her followed.
EFTA00019540: Preserved Maxwell charging announcement
This file preserves the SDNY announcement of Maxwell’s July 2020 arrest and charges. It describes the government’s allegations that Maxwell helped Epstein recruit, groom, transport, and abuse minor girls. The allegations remained accusations until resolved through trial.
EFTA00028737: Additional Maxwell charging announcement
This is another preserved copy of the Maxwell charging announcement circulated through government email. It documents internal distribution of the announcement but does not represent a separate prosecution event.
EFTA00028093: Maxwell discovery correspondence
This October 2021 email shows an NYPD and FBI task force member transmitting a scanned black address book and handwritten notes for inclusion in the Maxwell discovery production. It demonstrates task force involvement in preparing evidence for trial.
EFTA01653379: NYPD firearms record for Maxwell
This NYPD database record concerns a New York City residence firearms license associated with Maxwell. Investigators retrieved it in October 2019. Several fields appear inconsistent with independently verified biographical information, so the document should not be used alone to claim military service, criminal history, or identity fraud.
EFTA00031025: SDNY declaration concerning the MCC investigations
This declaration was submitted by an SDNY official in litigation involving requests for records about Epstein’s confinement. It describes SDNY’s supervisory involvement in the correctional officer prosecution and explains why certain records were connected to active investigations.
Government and Court Sources
This is the official website of the federal prosecution office responsible for the Epstein and Maxwell cases.
SDNY announcement of Epstein’s charges
This announcement identifies the charges, alleged conduct, participating agencies, assigned unit, and original prosecution team.
This page records Epstein’s arraignment, bail proceedings, survivor notifications, dismissal hearing, and the formal termination of the prosecution after his death.
DOJ Epstein court record collection
This collection provides court records from the 2019 federal prosecution.
SDNY announcement of Maxwell’s charges
This announcement identifies the charges against Maxwell, the government’s allegations, participating agencies, and assigned prosecutors.
This page contains case updates, survivor notification information, hearing details, and sentencing procedures.
SDNY statement concerning Maxwell’s conviction
This statement records SDNY’s response to the jury’s guilty verdict and credits the survivors whose testimony made the prosecution possible.
Second Circuit decision affirming Maxwell’s conviction
This appellate decision affirmed Maxwell’s conviction and held that the Florida Non Prosecution Agreement did not bind SDNY.
Charges against the MCC correctional officers
This announcement describes the alleged missed inmate checks and false records from the night Epstein died.
Justice Department Inspector General report on Epstein’s confinement
This investigation documents extensive Bureau of Prisons failures while stating that investigators found no evidence contradicting the determination that Epstein died by suicide.
External Reporting and Professional Sources
Miami Herald Perversion of Justice investigation
Julie K. Brown’s investigation documented the Florida agreement, the treatment of survivors, and institutional failures that preceded the renewed federal investigation.
Geoffrey Berman on Prince Andrew’s cooperation
This report documents Berman’s public statement that Prince Andrew had provided no cooperation to SDNY.
Alex Rossmiller professional biography
This biography documents Rossmiller’s career at SDNY and his involvement in the Epstein and Maxwell prosecutions.
Alison Moe professional biography
This biography documents Moe’s SDNY service, supervisory experience, and current legal practice.
Maurene Comey lawsuit and dismissal reporting
This report documents Comey’s termination and the allegations in her lawsuit challenging the government’s action.
Maurene Comey’s move to Patterson Belknap
This report documents Comey’s current private practice position.
Damian Williams’s move to Jenner and Block
This report documents Williams’s professional position after leaving SDNY.
Evidence Reading Standard
Every Epstein Data file should be accompanied by an explanation of what the document is, what it supports, and what it does not prove.
Duplicate documents must be identified as duplicates. Government allegations must not be presented as adjudicated facts. Internal deliberations must not be treated as final charging decisions. Financial records establish transactions, but they do not establish criminal intent without additional evidence. A person’s appearance in an investigative file does not establish wrongdoing.