Epstein Data Wiki

The prosecution of the two MCC officers on duty

Properties2
tagstopic, southern-district-of-new-york, bureau-of-prisons, mcc-new-york, oig, 2019, 2021
aliasesUnited States v. Noel and Thomas, 19 Cr. 830 (AT), Prosecution of the MCC officers

36 min read

The actThe United States charged the two Bureau of Prisons staff who worked the overnight shift in the Special Housing Unit of the Metropolitan Correctional Center on 9–10 August 2019, released them on conditions, deferred the prosecution and then dismissed it
Charging institutionThe United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York and a grand jury sitting in that district12
CaseUnited States of America v. Tova Noel and Michael Thomas, 19 Cr. 830 (AT); 1:19-cr-00830-AT13
Statutes chargedTitle 18, United States Code, sections 371, 1001(a)(3) and 21
CountsSix. Count One, conspiracy; Counts Two to Six, individual false-records counts. Noel was charged in the conspiracy count and five false-records counts; Thomas in the conspiracy count and three456
Parallel Bureau fileBureau of Prisons Office of Internal Affairs matter OIA-2019-05324, opened 12 August 2019, six allegations, last event recorded as “Pending Deferral by OIG”789
Grand-jury subpoenasDrafted for both officers and a third person, and approved by the United States Attorney, on 12 August 20191011
ArrestBoth defendants self-surrendered to the FBI on 19 November 2019 at approximately 10:00 a.m.1213
Presentment and arraignment19 November 2019, 3:54 p.m., before Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn; both pleaded not guilty3414
Release$100,000 personal recognizance bond for each, to be co-signed by two financially responsible persons, on their own signature131516
For the governmentNicolas Roos and Rebekah Donaleski, Assistant United States Attorneys12
For the defendantsJason Foy for Noel; Montel Figgins, Law Offices of Montel Figgins, for the co-defendant. Both retained121317
Deferred prosecution agreementsDated 20 May 2021, approved by District Judge Analisa Torres on 25 May 2021, filed the same day as Documents 56 and 591817192021
DispositionCharges dismissed 13 December 2021, as recorded by the Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General; see the death of Jeffrey Epstein

This page is about the criminal case itself: how it was built, how it was brought, what the two defendants agreed to, and on what terms they were released and then let go. The death it arose from, the Office of the Inspector General’s findings about staffing and rounds, and the substance of the grand jury’s factual allegations are set out on the death of Jeffrey Epstein and are not repeated here.

Anchor

The back cover of the indictment carries the caption “UNITED STATES OF AMERICA — v. — TOVA NOEL and MICHAEL THOMAS, Defendants.”, the word “INDICTMENT”, the docket line “19 Cr.” with no number typed after it, and “Title 18, United States Code, Sections 371, 1001(a)(3), and 2.” Beneath that sits an unmarked rule with the printed name “GEOFFREY S. BERMAN” and the printed line “United States Attorney” below it, and beneath that again the words “A TRUE BILL” over a signature in ink above a printed line reading “Foreperson.” The signature is ink: the stroke width varies and the mark runs past both ends of the rule. No name is read from it here.1 The preceding sheet, which closes Count Six, carries two ink signatures side by side: one over a printed “FOREPERSON” line, one over the printed “GEOFFREY S. BERMAN / United States Attorney”.2

That is the anchor: a named institution, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, and a grand jury sitting in that district, and the instrument in which they acted.

The subpoenas, 12 August 2019

Two days after the death, the United States Attorney’s Office was already preparing compulsory process against the staff who had been on the unit.

At 11:36 a.m. on Monday 12 August 2019 an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York circulated an e-mail under the subject line “MCC officer subpoenas and approaches”. The sender’s name and address are barred, and the signature block below gives the office, “United States Attorney’s Office / Southern District of New York / One St. Andrew’s Plaza”, with the telephone line barred. The message encloses drafted subpoenas naming the two officers and a third person whose name is barred; it records that the United States Attorney had still to approve them and was expected to do so within a short time; and it asks for a telephone conference, proposed for midday, to settle the procedure to be followed both in approaching those named on the roster and in serving the subpoenas. Beneath that it reproduces a roster of people to be seen which it describes as having gone round before. The roster runs to thirteen entries; the first two are the two officers, each given as a duty officer and each carrying a note that two agents from the Bureau would be wanted, and both print in the clear, while the name in every entry below them is barred.10

Three minutes later, at 11:39 a.m., a further message in the same chain, two sentences and nothing else, reports that the United States Attorney had by then given approval, and asks for confirmation that the proposed midday conference suited.11

At 12:53 p.m. EDT the same day, on the only stamp in the chain that carries a time zone on its face, a message forwarded into the chain carries a revised roster of the people to be interviewed, with what was known of their working hours, and sets out the plan:

We really need to do a number of these interviews today, but we can assist with pulling in additional agents if needed. We’ve put them in priority order: 1-3 are in progress; we need to knock out 4-11; we will push off 12 and 13. Dave Carpenter will coordinate from the OIG side. Bekah and I can assist with putting together brief interview outlines for these folks. Thanks everyone!

The roster that follows opens with Tova Noel and then Michael Thomas, each recorded as off duty at that moment and each marked for approach without delay. The numeral against the first prints in the clear; the numeral against the second is barred, though the name beside it is not. The name in every entry below the second is barred.11

The chain then moves outside the prosecutor’s office. At 1:18 p.m. a Special Agent of the Office of the Inspector General forwarded it to a Special Agent of the FBI in New York; at 1:26 p.m. the FBI agent replied with one question, asking whether it was known where the individuals on the roster could be found; and the reply above it, timed 17:27:31 +0000, reads “Working on pulling address”. The FBI agent’s signature block prints in the clear, giving the Bureau’s New York office and the squad to which the agent belonged, C19, a task force on violent crime. The two intermediate stamps are printed as bare “Sent:” lines with no zone on them; the top-of-message header is the one that carries “+0000”, and the forwarded message inside it is the one that carries “EDT”.22

The Bureau’s own file

The Bureau of Prisons opened its own matter on the same day, and the record of it survives inside the FBI’s death-investigation file.7

The record is headed “Matter ID: OIA-2019-05324” with the short description “MICHAEL THOMAS - 062A - ENDANGERING THE SAFETY OF AN INMATE”. It classifies the matter as “Category 2 - Administrative”, places it in the “NORTHEAST REGION - NER” at “New York (MCC) - NYM” with the field office given as “DC HEADQUARTERS”, and records “Investigated By: OIA”. Five yes/no screening fields (Patriot Act violation, staff search procedure, insider threat, Office of Special Counsel, self-reporting) are all answered “No”. Under “Progress” the incident date is 08/10/2019 and the reported and open dates are both 08/12/2019; the last event is “Pending Deferral by OIG” with a due date of 10/11/2019. Under “OIG Information” the referral date is 08/12/2019 and the field office is “NEW YORK FIELD OFFICE”, while the disposition, deferral date, case number and “Date Rpt Sent to OIG” lines are all blank on the sheet. Matter access is “Public” and matter status is “Open”; the close date is blank. The “Current Owner” field is barred.7

The individual list on that sheet has five rows under the column headings “Type”, “Additional Role”, “Name”, “ID” and “Empl/Inmt/Other”. The first is typed “Complainant” with the additional role “Witness”, the name barred and the person recorded as an employee; the second is “OIG Staff” against “NEW YORK FIELD OFFICE”; two rows are typed “Subject”, against Michael Thomas and Tova Noel, both recorded as employees; and the last is “Victim”, with the additional role “Other”, against Jeffrey Epstein, recorded as an inmate. Four of the five name cells print in the clear and one is barred. Three rows carry a numeric record identifier, which is not reproduced here.7

Six allegations are recorded against the two officers, and every one of them uses category “111 - Inmate - Other On-Duty Misconduct”. The subcategories are “062A - Endangering the Safety of an Inmate” against Thomas and against Noel; “054 - Inattention to Duty” against Thomas and against Noel; and “060 - Failure to Follow Policy” against Thomas and against Noel.789 On every one of the six the “Status”, “Charged Offense” and “Other (Legal Action)” lines are blank on the sheet, and “Arrested?”, “Convicted?” and “Incarcerated?” are each answered “No”, a state of the record that dates it before the November arrests rather than describing them.789

The narrative on the record, typed under the heading “CASE SUMMARY”, is the Bureau’s own first account:

Reportedly, on August 10, 2019, at approximately 6:33 a.m., inmate Jeffery Epstein, [register number], was found unresponsive in his assigned cell in the Special Housing Unit. Epstein was pronounced dead at 7:36 a.m., by an emergency room physician at the local hospital. In a memorandum dated August 10, 2019, Lieutenant [barred] claims that while speaking to Correctional Officer Tova Noel she stated that she and Material Handler Michael Thomas did not conduct the 3:00 a.m., and 5:00 a.m., rounds. It is also alleged Thomas stated We messed up, and I messed up, shes not to blame we didnt do any rounds. Note: Additional staff memorandums have not yet been collected due to Noel and Thomas being authorized leave, claiming they were traumatized over event. Allegedly the staff also requested that the local Union President review any memorandums written.9

The register number printed in that passage is not reproduced here; the spellings, punctuation and the missing apostrophes are as typed on the sheet. The Lieutenant’s name is barred. The final two sentences are worth reading on their own terms: on 12 August the Bureau was recording that the other staff memoranda had not yet been collected, and that staff had asked for union review of anything they wrote.9

One clerical point about the file: the matter is numbered OIA-2019-05324 in its own heading, while the single attachment listed under “Matter Documents” is named “2019-05234 PRED.pdf”, created 08/12/2019, with the “Created By” field barred. Read at 600 dpi, the two strings differ in the order of their middle digits.9

Surrender, presentment and arraignment

The grand jury returned the six-count indictment on 19 November 2019. Both defendants were processed the same day.

The transcript of the proceeding records the courtroom as “New York, N.Y. / November 19, 2019 / 3:54 p.m.” and carries no time-zone label on that line or anywhere else in the transcript.3 Asked by the court for “the date and time of the defendants’ arrests”, the prosecutor answered: “Both defendants self-surrendered to the FBI this morning at approximately 10:00 a.m.”12 The clerk’s bail-disposition form for Noel likewise records the date of arrest as 11/19/2019 with the “VOL. SURR.” box marked and the time-of-arrest and time-of-presentment lines left blank.13

Appearances were entered by “Nicolas Roos and Rebekah Donaleski for the United States”; by “Jason Foy, attorney for Ms. Tovah Noel”; and by “Montel Figgins, from the Law Offices of Montel Figgins”, for the co-defendant, whose surname is barred at that line of the transcript.12 Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn presided, telling the defendants “My name is Judge Netburn”, and said that the purpose of the proceeding was “to advise you of certain rights that you have, inform you of the charges against you, consider whether counsel shall be appointed for you, and decide under what conditions, if any, you shall be released.” She noted that “I understand that each of you has retained private counsel.”1223

The court summarised the instrument: “Count One charges the defendants with conspiracy in violation of Title 18 of United States Code, Section 371. And Counts Two through Six each charge an individual act of false records in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001(a)(3) and (2).” Each defendant confirmed receipt of the indictment, declined to have it read in open court, and pleaded not guilty.414

Two small discrepancies in the court’s own paperwork are worth recording. Counsel gave his name in open court as “Jason Foy” and signed the 2021 agreement as “Jason Foy, Esq.”; the clerk’s bail-disposition form of the same afternoon types the defence attorney’s name as “James E. Foy”, read at 600 dpi.121713 And the transcript renders the defendant’s forename as “Tovah” in counsel’s appearance line, against “Tova” in the caption and everywhere else on the case papers.312 The co-defendant’s counsel is spelled “Montel Figgins” on the transcript and “Montell Figgins” on the 2021 agreement and on the 2020 discovery letter; each spelling is given here as the sheet cited for it prints it.122124

Conditions of release

The prosecutor told the court that “the bail packages are nearly identical with the exception of one or two conditions”, and listed what was common to both: “$100,000 bond, secured by two financially responsible persons and their own signature; pretrial supervision, as directed; surrender of travel documents, and no new applications; no contact with codefendants; surrender of firearms.” Travel for the co-defendant was to be limited to the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York and the District of New Jersey; for Noel, those three districts and the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The special conditions differed: a condition on the use of alcohol for the co-defendant, and for Noel a condition relating to mental health evaluation and treatment as directed by pretrial services. The government asked that both be released that day on their own signature, and proposed a week to produce the two cosigners.1425

Noel’s counsel objected to one condition only:

With regards to the surrender of firearm, I’m asking that your Honor not make that a requirement of her release. I ask that because - in this nonviolent allegation, in which no firearm was involved, with a history of having no criminal record of any kind or any history of violence - she, who legally possesses and has a permit for the firearm, should still be able to possess her firearm because she’s not a convicted felon and someone who’s not permitted to do so.26

Asked by the court whether the weapon was “a duty firearm or personal use”, counsel answered “Personal.” He added that his client had “voluntarily surrendered”, had “participated in a pretrial interview”, and that “[w]e’ve been in communication with the government since August 14th, and communicated about her international travel since this investigation began.”2627 That date sits four days after the death and two days after the subpoenas were approved.11

The court refused the application and gave its reasons on the record. It said first that a bail agreement between the parties “is meaningful to me but it’s certainly not controlling”. On the firearm it said the requirement “is in fact a policy. It’s not a policy of the U.S. Attorney’s Office; it’s a policy of our pretrial service office, because they are going to be sending officers in to enforce the terms of your client’s release”, and accepted in the same breath that “this case is not a violent case and there are not allegations that your client has engaged in violence, either in connection with this case or in her history”.28 It then imposed the condition:

So I am going to impose the condition. I am going to require your client to surrender her firearm. Both defendants will have to surrender their firearms and their permits so that they can’t secure new firearms. That is a safety precaution that we undertake to protect our people who are going to be enforcing the terms of this release. It has nothing to do with the government per se.16

Both were released “on their own signature and the posting of $100,000 bond that needs to be secured by two financially responsible cosigners”, prohibited from contact with each other “except in the presence of counsel”, and required to surrender travel documents and firearms with the permits authorising them.1629 Time was excluded under the Speedy Trial Act to a conference set for 25 November 2019.293013

The order setting conditions of release for Noel records the same package in the court’s own words: “$100,000 PRB TO BE CO-SIGNED BY 2 FINANCIALLY RESPONSIBLE PERSONS; TRAVEL LIMITED TO SDNY/EDNY; DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY & EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA; SURRENDER TRAVEL DOCUMENTS (& NO NEW APPLICATIONS); PRETRIAL SUPERVISION AS DIRECTED BY PTS; MENTAL HEALTH EVALUATION/TREATMENT AS DIRECTED BY PTS; DEFT NOT TO POSSESS FIREARM/DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE/OTHER WEAPON; DEFT TO BE RELEASED ON OWN SIGNATURE; REMAINING CONDITIONS TO BE MET BY 11/26/2019; NO CONTACT WITH CO-DEFENDANT UNLESS IN THE PRESENCE OF COUNSEL”.15 On the bail-disposition sheet the same no-contact condition is written by hand in the comments box, and the deadline for the remaining conditions is filled in by hand as 11/26/19; the magistrate judge’s signature is in ink over a printed title line, and no name is printed under it.13

Discovery under a protective order

Between the arraignment and the agreements the case ran on discovery, and one of the government’s discovery letters is in the release.

Written on the United States Attorney’s letterhead on 14 October 2020 and addressed to Montell Figgins as counsel for the co-defendant, it opens: “This letter provides additional discovery pursuant to Rule 16(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. This letter and the materials identified herein are subject to the protective order entered in this case on December 16, 2019, and have been designated as ‘Protected Materials’ as defined in the order where noted below. Accordingly, the materials and information identified herein shall not be disclosed to any third party or referenced publicly except as set forth in the protective order.”24

The letter that follows is two tables, and the producing party has redacted them in one direction only. In the first table, every cell of the “Description” column is barred while the “Bates Numbers” and “Classification Pursuant to Protective Order” columns print in the clear: the Bates column lists eight ranges, seven of them marked “Confidential” and the last, a single Bates number, marked “Attorney’s Eyes Only”. A footnote explains that the files in the first range carry no physical confidentiality stamp because of their format and are confidential under the order regardless. A second table, introduced “Additionally, the Government is producing the following materials only to your client”, lists four further ranges with the Description column barred and the classification column blank. What was produced is therefore withheld from the reader; how much of it, and how tightly it was restricted, is not.2431

The letter closes “Very truly yours” over the printed name “AUDREY STRAUSS” and the printed title “Acting United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York”. The “By:” line beneath prints “/s/” followed by a rule; the typed name below that rule is barred, above the printed line “Assistant United States Attorneys”, with a further bar below it.31

The deferred prosecution agreements

Each defendant signed a deferred prosecution agreement addressed to them personally by the United States Attorney’s Office. Both are in the release: Noel’s was filed as Document 59 and the co-defendant’s as Document 56, both stamped filed 5/25/21.56

Each agreement opens by reciting the indictment and the government’s decision:

On November 19, 2019, a grand jury sitting in this District returned a six-count indictment (the “Indictment”), which charged [defendant] (“you”) with committing offenses against the United States, to wit, conspiring to knowingly defraud the United States and to knowingly make and use a false writing or document, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, and [five / three] counts of knowingly making and using a false writing or document, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001. However, after a thorough investigation, and based on the facts of this case and your personal circumstances, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York (“USAO-SDNY”) has determined that the interests of justice will best be served by deferring prosecution in this District.56

The bracketed alternative is the only difference between the two recitals: Noel’s says five counts of section 1001, the co-defendant’s says three.56

The conditions of good behaviour run to seven numbered paragraphs: obey the law and report any arrest or questioning to the pretrial services officer, associate only with law-abiding persons, work or study or support dependents, not leave the contiguous United States without permission, report changes of residence, follow the officer’s instructions, and report as directed. A consent to the release of medical and treatment records to the supervising officer follows them. The fourth condition also undoes one of the November 2019 release terms: “the U.S. Pretrial Services Office shall return your passport upon the Court’s entering this Agreement, and shall do so indefinitely unless this Agreement is violated.”532633

Three special conditions follow. The first is an obligation to talk:

You shall truthfully and completely disclose all information with respect to the activities of yourself and others related to your employment by the Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”), which information can be used for any purpose. You shall agree to meet with and be interviewed by the USAO-SDNY, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of Justice, Office of the Inspector General (“DOJ-OIG”), and any other law enforcement agency designated by this Office.32

The second requires “100 documented hours of community service, preferably related to the criminal justice system, including working with recently released inmates”, the type to be approved by the pretrial services officer. The third reserves the government’s position: the office “may at any time revoke or modify any condition of this provisional release or change the period of such supervision, which shall in no case exceed six months”, may discharge the defendant from supervision at any time, and “may at any time proceed with the prosecution for this offense should the USAO-SDNY, in its sole discretion, deem such action advisable.” Against that, on a favourable written report from the supervising officer at the end of the term, “no further prosecution will be instituted in this District for the above offenses.”32

The agreements expressly leave the Bureau’s own track open, which is where the internal-affairs matter described above rejoins the story: “Nothing in this Agreement shall be interpreted to preclude the BOP or the DOJ-OIG from taking any administrative action against you, including suspension or termination of employment, based on the facts alleged in the Indictment, the facts identified in the course of the investigation that led to the Indictment, or your own statements to the DOJ-OIG or any other law enforcement entity”, and nothing in it requires the Bureau or the Inspector General “to delay any administrative action until after the expiration of the period of deferment contemplated by this Agreement.”3218 The agreements also provide that the Bureau of Prisons is to receive a copy: “You agree that a copy of this Agreement, including your admission and acceptance of responsibility, shall be provided to the BOP.” If the term is completed, “the Government will move the Court to dismiss the Indictment as to the defendant”, and the agreement “and the terms and conditions set forth herein are limited to the facts and circumstances of this case and lack precedential value.”1820

The admission each defendant signed is a single sentence:

The undersigned hereby consents to the foregoing. The undersigned hereby further admits that she willfully and knowingly completed materially false count and round slips regarding required counts and rounds in the Special Housing Unit of the Metropolitan Correctional Center (“MCC”) on August 9, 2019 and August 10, 2019.17

The co-defendant’s copy is identical but for the pronouns.21 The same paragraph waives the Sixth Amendment and Speedy Trial Act rights, consents to the adjournment of all pending proceedings, and waives the statute of limitations on any prosecution not already time-barred, “to toll the applicable statute of limitations during the pendency of the deferred prosecution”, so the government retained the ability to prosecute if the deferral failed.1721 A further paragraph provides that if the court rejected the agreement, “neither party shall be bound to any term of this Agreement, and no admissions in this Agreement may be used against the undersigned.”1721

The dating of the agreements answers a question the papers raise elsewhere. The government’s block on each agreement is dated “New York, New York / May 20, 2021”; on Noel’s copy the defence date line is a blank with “20” written into it by hand, and on the co-defendant’s copy the electronic signature stamps read “May 20, 2021 15:49 EDT” for counsel and “May 20, 2021 16:04 EDT” for the defendant. The judicial approval on each is dated 25 May 2021 and the filing stamp on each is 5/25/21.181719202134 The agreements were therefore signed on 20 May and approved and filed on 25 May.

The four field states differ across the two copies’ signature blocks, and each is reported here as read at the image. On Noel’s copy, page 3: the line above the printed “United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York” is barred, and the block above the printed “Assistant United States Attorneys” is barred, with a further bar below it.18 On the co-defendant’s copy, page 3: the line above “United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York” is barred; the “By:” line carries a signature in ink; the typed name beneath that signature is barred; and the “Tel.:” line is barred.20 On page 4 of Noel’s copy, two ink signatures sit over their rules, above the printed names “Jason Foy, Esq. / Attorney for Defendant” and “Tova Noel / Defendant”.17 On page 5 of Noel’s copy, an ink signature sits above the printed “Honorable Analisa Torres / United States District Judge” with the date written in by hand as 25 May, and a second ink signature sits above a printed “United States Pretrial Services Officer” line with the date written in as 24 May and no name printed under it.19 On page 5 of the co-defendant’s copy the same approval carries the handwritten date 25 May but the rule above the judge’s printed name carries no mark at all, and the pretrial services officer’s consent is a digital signature stamp with a printed name and a stamped date of 24 May 2021 over a typed date line left blank.34

Dismissal

The Office of the Inspector General records that on 13 December 2021, after the two had fulfilled the terms of their agreements, the district court entered a nolle prosequi order and dismissed all charges. The copy of the nolle prosequi in the release is the unexecuted form as submitted for signature. Both are set out on the death of Jeffrey Epstein and are not restated here.

What the sheets show about the extraction

Several of the documents on this page are ones where the extracted text and the image do not agree, and in each case the page follows the image.

  • On the Bureau’s allegation record the allegation category prints as the digits “111” on every one of the six allegations; the extraction renders it as “III” on three of them and “111” on the other three.789
  • On the same sheet the subcategory of the fourth allegation prints as “054 - Inattention to Duty”; the extraction gives “059”.8
  • On the individual list, the extraction prints the four surviving names as one contiguous block and the type and additional-role labels as another, so nothing aligns row for row; at the image the list is five rows and one of the five name cells is barred, which is what puts the columns out of step.7
  • On the bail-disposition sheet the handwritten comment and the handwritten deadline are unreadable in the extraction and legible at the image.13
  • On the 12 August e-mail the numeral beside the second entry in the priority list is barred while the name beside it prints in the clear; and a conference passcode prints in the clear on the same sheet beside a barred dial-in number.1110

Timeline

DateEventSource
10 Aug 2019Incident date recorded on the Bureau’s internal-affairs matter7
12 Aug 2019, 11:36 a.m.Subpoenas for both officers and a third person circulated within the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the United States Attorney’s approval still awaited10
12 Aug 2019, 11:39 a.m.The United States Attorney’s approval of the subpoenas reported in the chain11
12 Aug 2019, 12:53 p.m. EDTThirteen-name interview roster circulated in order of priority; the two officers stand first and second, each marked for approach without delay; coordination by the Office of the Inspector General11
12 Aug 2019, 1:18–1:26 p.m.Chain forwarded from OIG to FBI New York; the FBI agent asks whether it is known where the individuals on the roster can be found22
12 Aug 2019Matter OIA-2019-05324 opened, reported and referred to OIG; six allegations recorded7
14 Aug 2019Date from which Noel’s counsel told the court his side had been “in communication with the government”27
11 Oct 2019Due date recorded on the Bureau’s matter for the event “Pending Deferral by OIG”7
19 Nov 2019Six-count indictment returned; both defendants self-surrender to the FBI at approximately 10:00 a.m.112
19 Nov 2019, 3:54 p.m.Presentment and arraignment before Magistrate Judge Netburn; not-guilty pleas; release on $100,000 bonds31416
26 Nov 2019Deadline set by hand for the remaining release conditions1513
16 Dec 2019Date of the protective order entered in the case, as recited in a later discovery letter24
14 Oct 2020Rule 16(a) discovery letter to the co-defendant’s counsel, twelve ranges produced under the protective order2431
20 May 2021Deferred prosecution agreements signed1721
25 May 2021Agreements approved by Judge Torres and filed as Documents 56 and 591934
13 Dec 2021Charges dismissed; see the death of Jeffrey Epsteinsee that page

Note on protected material

Numeric record identifiers appearing beside named individuals on the Bureau’s internal-affairs sheet, and an inmate register number appearing in the narrative on that record, are not reproduced on this page. A telephone number, a dial-in number and an e-mail address are barred on the sheets cited from the August 2019 e-mail chain, and a telephone number is barred on one of the agreements; none is reproduced here. No person on this page is a victim or survivor, and no person on this page is described as a cooperating witness. Where a document withholds a name, this page does not supply it from another.

Footnotes

  1. Indictment, United States of America v. Tova Noel and Michael Thomas, U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, 20 sheets; back cover, printed page 20, stamped EFTA00164396. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00164377 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  2. Indictment, United States v. Noel and Thomas, printed page 19, stamped EFTA00164395: the close of Count Six, the statutory citation “(Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1001(a)(3) and 2)”, and two ink signatures, one over a printed “FOREPERSON” line and one over the printed “GEOFFREY S. BERMAN / United States Attorney”. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00164377 ↩ ↩2

  3. Transcript of proceedings, United States of America v. Tova Noel, Michael [surname barred], 19 Cr. 830 (AT)(SN), Document 14, filed 12/16/19, twelve sheets; printed page 1, stamped EFTA02845787: caption, “New York, N.Y. / November 19, 2019 / 3:54 p.m.”, “Before: HON. SARAH NETBURN”. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  4. Transcript, printed page 4, stamped EFTA02845790: the court’s summary of the six counts and Noel’s plea of not guilty. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  5. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Tova Noel, 19 Cr. 830 (AT), Document 59, filed 05/25/21, five sheets; printed page 1, stamped EFTA00023087: the electronic filing stamp dated 5/25/2021, the caption, the recital of the indictment naming five counts under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and conditions (1) to (4), the last of which provides for the return of the passport on the court entering the agreement. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023087 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  6. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Michael Thomas, 19 Cr. 830 (AT), Document 56, filed 05/25/21, five sheets; printed page 1, stamped EFTA00023092: the electronic filing stamp dated 5/25/2021, the caption, the recital of the indictment naming three counts under 18 U.S.C. § 1001, and conditions (1) to (4). Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023092 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  7. Bureau of Prisons Office of Internal Affairs matter record, reproduced within an FBI death-investigation file, printed page 25, stamped EFTA00131249: matter details, state information, OIG information, progress fields, individual list, event list and Allegation 1. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00131225 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10 ↩11

  8. Bureau of Prisons Office of Internal Affairs matter record, printed page 26, stamped EFTA00131250: Allegations 2 to 5 and the opening line of Allegation 6. The subcategory of Allegation 4 was confirmed at 600 dpi. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00131225 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  9. Bureau of Prisons Office of Internal Affairs matter record, printed page 27, stamped EFTA00131251: the remainder of Allegation 6, the “CASE SUMMARY” narrative, and the matter-documents table. The attachment file name was confirmed at 600 dpi. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00131225 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  10. E-mail chain, “MCC officer subpoenas and approaches”, printed page 3, stamped EFTA01659586: the originating message of 12 August 2019, timed thirty-six minutes past eleven in the morning, the subpoena sentence, the proposed midday call, the thirteen-entry roster, and the Assistant United States Attorney signature block giving “United States Attorney’s Office / Southern District of New York / One St. Andrew’s Plaza / New York, New York 10007” with the sender’s name and telephone line barred. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01659584 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  11. E-mail chain, “MCC officer subpoenas and approaches”, printed page 2, stamped EFTA01659585: the forwarded message of 12 August 2019, timed 12:53 in the afternoon and labelled EDT, carrying the paragraph that sets the order of priority and the interview roster; and beneath it two messages of the same date, one timed twenty-one minutes past twelve and one timed thirty-nine minutes past eleven, the earlier of those two recording the United States Attorney’s approval of the subpoenas and seeking confirmation that midday suited for the call. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01659584 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  12. Transcript, printed page 2, stamped EFTA02845788: appearances, “My name is Judge Netburn”, and “Both defendants self-surrendered to the FBI this morning at approximately 10:00 a.m.” The co-defendant’s surname is barred at line 12. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9 ↩10

  13. Bail-disposition sheet, United States of America v. Tova Noel, Document 9, printed page 8, stamped EFTA02845777: docket number, defendant, AUSA, defence counsel with the “RETAINED” box marked, date of arrest and voluntary-surrender box, the marked bail conditions, the handwritten comment and deadline, the arraignment and speedy-trial boxes, and an ink signature over the printed line “UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE, S.D.N.Y.” with no name printed beneath it. The defence counsel field was confirmed at 600 dpi. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845770 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9

  14. Transcript, printed page 5, stamped EFTA02845791: the co-defendant’s plea of not guilty and the prosecutor’s statement of the common bail conditions. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  15. Order setting conditions of release, United States of America v. Tova Noel, 19 Cr. 830 (AT), Document 9, filed 11/19/19, eight sheets; printed page 5, stamped EFTA02845774, “ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF RELEASE”. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845770 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  16. Transcript, printed page 10, stamped EFTA02845796: the imposition of the firearm condition, the release terms and the no-contact condition. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  17. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Tova Noel, printed page 4, stamped EFTA00023090: the admission, the speedy-trial and limitations waivers, the rejection clause, the handwritten date and the two ink signatures. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023087 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7 ↩8 ↩9

  18. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Tova Noel, printed page 3, stamped EFTA00023089: the copy-to-BOP clause, the dismissal clause, the no-precedential-value clause, the date “May 20, 2021”, and the government signature block. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023087 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  19. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Tova Noel, printed page 5, stamped EFTA00023091: the Speedy Trial Act approval dated by hand 25 May 2021 over an ink signature above the printed name of the district judge, and the pretrial services officer’s consent dated by hand 24 May 2021 over an ink signature with no printed name. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023087 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  20. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Michael Thomas, printed page 3, stamped EFTA00023094: the copy-to-BOP clause, the dismissal clause, the no-precedential-value clause, the date “May 20, 2021”, and the government signature block. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023092 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  21. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Michael Thomas, printed page 4, stamped EFTA00023095: the admission in the masculine, the waivers, the rejection clause, and the two electronic signature stamps timed “May 20, 2021 15:49 EDT” and “May 20, 2021 16:04 EDT” above the printed names of counsel and the defendant. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023092 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5 ↩6 ↩7

  22. E-mail chain, subject “MCC officer subpoenas and approaches”, three sheets; printed page 1, stamped EFTA01659584: a top-of-message header of 12 August 2019, timed in the late afternoon and labelled +0000, with sender and recipient barred; the reply “Working on pulling address”; an Office of the Inspector General signature block; beneath that a quoted message of the same afternoon, timed twenty-six minutes past one, putting the single question about where the individuals on the roster were to be found, over an FBI New York signature block; and below it again a forwarding message of the same date timed eighteen minutes past one. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA01659584 ↩ ↩2

  23. Transcript, printed page 3, stamped EFTA02845789: the advice of rights and “I understand that each of you has retained private counsel.” The referring district judge’s name is barred at line 20. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩

  24. Discovery letter, United States Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York to counsel for Michael Thomas, Re: United States v. Michael Thomas, No. 19 Cr. 830, two sheets; printed page 1, stamped EFTA00084755: the letterhead and office address, the date, the addressee, the Rule 16(a) and protective-order paragraph, the first row of the first table and its footnote. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00084755 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4 ↩5

  25. Transcript, printed page 6, stamped EFTA02845792: the differing travel restrictions and special conditions, the request for release on own signature, and “A week is appropriate, your Honor, for the two cosigners.” Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩

  26. Transcript, printed page 7, stamped EFTA02845793: the firearm application, “Is that a duty firearm or personal use? … Personal.”, and “We voluntarily surrendered. We participated in a pretrial interview.” Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩ ↩2

  27. Transcript, printed page 8, stamped EFTA02845794: “We’ve been in communication with the government since August 14th, and communicated about her international travel since this investigation began.” Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩ ↩2

  28. Transcript, printed page 9, stamped EFTA02845795: the court’s response on the weight of a bail agreement and on the pretrial-services firearm policy. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩

  29. Transcript, printed page 11, stamped EFTA02845797: the travel restrictions and special conditions as imposed, the warning on failure to appear, and the next conference date of November 25, 2019. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩ ↩2

  30. Transcript, printed page 12, stamped EFTA02845798: the government’s application to exclude time for discovery and the court’s exclusion “on defendants’ consent, from today to November 25th”. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA02845787 ↩

  31. Discovery letter of 14 October 2020, printed page 2, stamped EFTA00084756: the remainder of the first table, the second table introduced “Additionally, the Government is producing the following materials only to your client”, and the closing block. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00084755 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

  32. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Tova Noel, printed page 2, stamped EFTA00023088: conditions (5) to (7), the consent to disclosure of medical and treatment records, and the special conditions, including the disclosure and interview condition, the 100 hours of community service, the reservation of the government’s discretion to proceed, the promise of no further prosecution on completion, and the preservation of Bureau and Inspector General administrative action. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023087 ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4

  33. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Michael Thomas, printed page 2, stamped EFTA00023093: conditions (5) to (7), the consent to disclosure of medical and treatment records, and the special conditions. UNVERIFIED, from a search hit. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023092 ↩

  34. Deferred prosecution agreement addressed to Michael Thomas, printed page 5, stamped EFTA00023096: the Speedy Trial Act approval with “25” written by hand into the date line, above a rule carrying no mark and the printed name “Honorable Analisa Torres / United States District Judge”; and the pretrial services officer’s consent carrying a digital signature stamp with a printed name and a stamped date of 24 May 2021, the typed date line above it left blank. Read at the image by the writer at 2026-09-10T03:35Z. https://epstein-data.com/EFTA00023092 ↩ ↩2 ↩3

Backlinks