Lara Pomerantz

Named on the documents as	Lara Pomerantz, and as Lam Pomerantz — not a nickname but the extraction’s misreading of her forename inside the government’s own signature block, and the form that reaches most of her file1
Size of the file	523 documents on the correct spelling against 755 on the surname. ⚠⚠ CORRECTED 2026-09-19: an earlier version called 755 a CEILING. It is not. The reciprocal signature-block redaction removes her name from documents the surname cannot reach either: the correct spelling reaches only 69% of her. Union of forms 714 ⚠⚠ AND THE FLOOR IS NOW PROVEN SHORT BY A MEASURED MINIMUM. A dataset-12 study of 2026-09-19 found that the government’s signature block is redacted RECIPROCALLY between productions: in one dataset the producer bars the U.S. Attorney’s surname and prints the line prosecutors in full; in three others the same sheets print the U.S. Attorney and bar the line prosecutors. Each copy hides what the other shows. Her name is therefore absent from a block of documents that no form of her name, surname included, can reach. The understatement is proved at a minimum of fifteen documents and is bounded above by 120, the whole barred-block population. The figure on this page is a floor in the strict sense and should never be quoted as her reach. See _desk/gate-reports/20260919T031200Z-dataset12-name-bar-test.md.12
⚠ And most of that is a signature block	504 of the 714, or 70.6%, are a four-name government signature block, and a further 103 are service lists. The page below rests on three documents standing against a background of 504 that say nothing about her individually, and it says so rather than trading on the total2
The act this page is built on	On 7 March 2022 she was the sole sworn declarant on an application to compel a witness’s testimony under immunity, and two days later a federal judge granted it “upon the declaration of Assistant United States Attorney Lara Pomerantz”3
And an investigative instruction	On 4 October 2021 she sent the FBI and an NYPD detective a numbered list of twenty potential trial witnesses: “Please run rap sheets as discussed.”4
What she did NOT do	⚠ She signed no grand jury subpoena in this release. The search returns zero, against nine custodian certifications for a colleague. That is stated because a reader may otherwise assume the roles were alike2
Covered elsewhere on this wiki	Maurene Comey and Alison Moe, her co-authors on the device-review protocol · Ghislaine Maxwell

Lara Pomerantz was an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York and one of the prosecutors who tried Ghislaine Maxwell. She is a career federal prosecutor acting in her official capacity throughout, and nothing on this page is a suggestion of wrongdoing.

⚠ This page begins with a caveat rather than ending with one. Her name appears on more than seven hundred documents, and seven in ten of those are a four-name signature block at the foot of a government filing. A count of her documents is very nearly a count of the office’s filings. What follows rests on the small number of sheets where she acted individually, and the page is deliberately short because that number is small.

The declaration

On 7 March 2022 an application went to the court to compel a witness to testify under a grant of immunity. Such applications require a sworn declaration from a prosecutor. On this one she is the sole declarant, swearing under section 1746 of Title 28, and the signature on the release copy is in wet blue ink.³

The Department of Justice’s own authorisation for the application, issued under section 6003(b) by a Deputy Assistant Attorney General, is addressed to her by name.³

Two days later the court granted it. The order records the basis in a single clause:

upon the declaration of Assistant United States Attorney Lara Pomerantz³

⚠ What that means in plain terms is worth stating, because it is the strongest thing on this page. A witness who had invoked the privilege against self-incrimination was compelled to testify, and the judge’s stated ground for compelling them was her personal sworn representation. Not the office’s. Hers, alone, on her signature.

⚠ This page does not identify the witness, describe the testimony, or say what followed. None of that is reproduced here.

The rap sheets

On 4 October 2021, eight weeks before the trial began, she e-mailed an FBI special agent and a New York Police Department detective, copying a co-counsel. The subject line is the case initials and the word “Witnesses”. The message is three sentences:

Below is the list of potential testifying witnesses as discussed. Please run rap sheets as discussed. Do you think you could get them to us by Wednesday or Thursday?⁴

That is a prosecutor directing law enforcement to perform an investigative step, in her own name. ⚠ It is also entirely ordinary. A trial team checking whether its own witnesses have criminal records is routine and proper preparation, and this page records it as an act rather than as a criticism.

⚠ The list beneath it is numbered 1 to 20 and twelve of the names are redacted. The desk can say “twenty” because the numbering survives the redaction, not because it can read the names, which it cannot. No name from that list appears on this page.⁴

What else the documents show, and what they do not

She was a working member of the trial team rather than a figurehead. She is recorded conducting witness examinations at trial; she drafted correspondence to the defence and a joint letter to the court; she sat in on witness interviews alongside colleagues; and she swore an affirmation in the Second Circuit under her sole signature.⁵ With Maurene Comey and Alison Moe she co-authored the memorandum of 19 October 2020 setting the review protocol for the image and video files taken from 62 seized devices.⁶

⚠ And one thing she is not recorded as doing. A search for a grand jury subpoena signed by her returns nothing at all. For comparison, nine custodian certifications in this release recite subpoenas signed by one of her co-authors. The page states the zero because the two prosecutors sit side by side in the same signature block, and a reader would otherwise reasonably assume their roles were the same.²

Identification: her own government’s typing defeats her name

Union 714 documents. The correct spelling reaches 523 of them.

form	documents	outside the correct spelling
Pomerantz (bare surname)	755	the ceiling
"Lam Pomerantz"	203	157
"Lara Pomerantz"	523	base
"Ms. Pomerantz"	63
"Pomerantz, Lara"	22
"Lan Pomerantz"	12

⚠ THE BEST-REACHING FORM OF HER NAME IS A MISREADING OF IT. The extraction renders her forename Lam, and it does so inside the four-name signature block the government printed at the foot of its own filings, so the error is replicated everywhere that block appears. "Lam Pomerantz Andrew Rohrbach" alone returns 139 documents. A sweep on her correct name misses nearly a third of her file, and misses it in the most routine place it could possibly hide.¹

⚠ "Ms. Pomerantz" returns 63, not zero. She is discussed in the third person as well as named in blocks, which distinguishes her from several subjects on this wiki whose equivalent form returns nothing.¹

Surname contamination was measured, not assumed: about 41 of the 755 are other people, each identified individually, including a sales representative, a law firm of the same name, a scientist and an FBI employee elsewhere. ⚠ And a near-miss worth recording: the surname Pomeranz, without the t, returns 126 documents and is a dentist. It is not a spelling of her name and none of it is hers.²

---

Footnotes

1. Counts on the authoritative pages_fts route, scoped text_content, exact phrases, count(distinct efta_number), sets compared by set difference. ⚠ The tokeniser splits on . and ,, so "Pomerantz, Lara" and "Pomerantz Lara" are one query, as are "Ms. Pomerantz" and "Ms Pomerantz"; neither pair is treated here as two corroborating forms. Lam is an extraction artefact and not a name she uses; it is listed because it is the productive key, not because anyone calls her that. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴

2. Same route. Correct spelling 523; union 714; surname ceiling 755; contamination about 41, identified individually. By role across the 714: 504 government signature block, 103 certificates of service or electronic filing lists, 20 named as an Assistant United States Attorney in prose, 13 transcript appearances, 13 e-mail to-or-copy lines, 8 sworn declarant, 8 addressee of an outside letter, 4 sender, 41 other. ⚠ About 666 of the 714 were not opened and are UNTESTED, not cleared; roughly 48 were read and 2 were verified at the image. The sender-header test returns 3 for her and all three were read and are genuinely hers, against controls of 8, 9 and 8 on the identical query shape. ⚠ A test on "Pomerantz wrote" returns 6 and every one of the six is a different person; the hits were read rather than counted. A search for a grand jury subpoena signed by her, in either spelling, returns 0. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴ ↩⁵

3. https://epstein-data.com/DOJ-OGR-00009626, the application of 7 March 2022 on which she is the sole sworn declarant under 28 U.S.C. § 1746, VERIFIED AT THE IMAGE at 400 dpi including the ink signature; the Department’s authorisation under 18 U.S.C. § 6003(b), addressed to her by name; and https://epstein-data.com/DOJ-OGR-00009660, the court’s order of 9 March 2022 granting the application. ⚠ The witness is not identified on this page, and nothing about the testimony, its content or its consequences is reproduced. ↩ ↩² ↩³ ↩⁴

4. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01653769 p. 3, her e-mail of 4 October 2021 to an FBI special agent and a New York Police Department detective, copied to a co-counsel, under her own Assistant United States Attorney block. VERIFIED AT THE IMAGE at 400 dpi. ⚠ The list below the message is numbered 1 to 20 and twelve entries are redacted. The count is legible because the numbering survives; the names are not legible and are not sought. No name from the list appears on this page. ↩ ↩² ↩³

5. Her trial examinations, her drafting of correspondence to the defence and of a joint letter to the court, her attendance at witness interviews with colleagues, and her Second Circuit affirmation under sole signature. Read from the text layer; not verified at the image, save where stated elsewhere on this page. ↩

6. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01653601 pp. 1-3, the memorandum of 19 October 2020 addressed to the case file, from Maurene Comey, Alison Moe and Lara Pomerantz. VERIFIED AT THE IMAGE at 400 dpi. ⚠ Two further copies of this memorandum redact the authors’ names, one as three separate bars and the other as a single continuous bar; this copy is cited because it is the one that carries the attribution. ↩