Epstein's residences
LocationRelationship Network
EFTA00031580.pdf
This document is an internal email chain from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) dated December 29, 2020. It discusses preparing a summary of the Ghislaine Maxwell case (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) for the incoming presidential transition team as one of the office's 'two most significant publicly filed criminal cases.' The document includes the drafted case summary detailing charges of facilitating sexual abuse of minors, perjury, and conspiracy.
EFTA00030021.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (led by Laura Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office regarding the logistics of reviewing evidence for the case *US v. Maxwell*. The discussion focuses on the protocols for reviewing 'Highly Confidential' materials (specifically nude images and videos seized from Jeffrey Epstein's devices), the transport of physical evidence (including massage tables, plaster busts, and a stuffed dog) from the FBI Bronx warehouse to the courthouse, and the scheduling of Maxwell's transport by Marshals to 500 Pearl Street. The prosecution refuses to transport bulky items or obscene digital material freely, requiring the defense to view some items at the warehouse or on specific laptops under supervision.
EFTA00028585.pdf
This document is an email chain between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (Cohen & Gresser; Haddon, Morgan & Foreman) and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding discovery disputes. The defense raises seven key issues, including over 109,000 emails missing attachments, metadata discrepancies on files extracted from Epstein's devices, and difficulties providing discovery materials to Maxwell at the MDC due to technical and bureaucratic limitations. The prosecution responds with technical explanations regarding FBI CART processes, 'carved' or deleted files lacking metadata, and the conversion of VHS/cassette tapes.
EFTA00028571.pdf
This document is a chain of email correspondence between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (Everdell, Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding discovery disputes in Spring 2021. Key issues include the defense's inability to view certain files on prison computers, missing email attachments (over 109,000), and technical disputes over metadata for 'carved' or deleted files recovered from Jeffrey Epstein's electronic devices. The prosecution explains that metadata for deleted files was not recovered and that certain images (nude and non-nude) were seized from CDs in Epstein's residences rather than extracted by CART from devices.
EFTA00026872.pdf
This document contains a series of email exchanges between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (led by Laura Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office regarding the logistics of reviewing discovery evidence in March and April 2021. The correspondence details disputes over the location of the review (FBI Bronx Warehouse vs. 500 Pearl Street courthouse), specifically concerning 'bulky' items such as massage tables, plaster busts, and framed art which the government refused to transport. Significant discussion focuses on the protocols for reviewing 'Highly Confidential' materials, including approximately 2,100 nude or obscene electronic images seized from Jeffrey Epstein's devices, which required specific viewing conditions on non-networked laptops due to their nature.
EFTA00015770.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (led by Laura Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding the logistics of reviewing evidence for the case *US v. Maxwell*. The correspondence details negotiations over the location of the review (500 Pearl St vs. FBI Bronx Warehouse), the transportation of specific physical evidence (including excluding 'bulky' massage tables and cash), and protocols for viewing 'highly confidential' and 'obscene' electronic images seized from Jeffrey Epstein's properties. The defense expresses concerns about missing items, the format of electronic surveillance, and the need for their client to meaningfully participate in the review.
EFTA00015636.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (Cohen & Gresser) and the US Attorney's Office regarding discovery disputes. Key issues include the logistics of providing electronic discovery to Maxwell in prison (MDC) because she cannot use disks, missing email attachments, and metadata discrepancies for thousands of files and photos recovered from Epstein's devices and residences. The prosecution explains that 'carved' or deleted files lack original metadata and that certain photos came from seized CDs rather than devices processed by the FBI's CART unit.
EFTA00003506.pdf
This document is a color photograph featuring Jeffrey Epstein standing in a room with classical decor, including a gold-framed mirror, pink curtains, and an ornate wooden chair in the background. The only text contained in the image is the Bates stamp identifier 'EFTA00003506' located in the bottom right corner.
DOJ-OGR-00018111.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues against the admissibility or weight of photographs taken during a 2005 walk-through of an Epstein residence, noting that witness Juan Alessi left in 2002 and witness 'Jane' only gave general descriptions of art, not specific identifications of the photos in question. The defense contends there is no testimony placing specific photos on the wall during the time relevant to the case.
DOJ-OGR-00015135.jpg
This legal document, page 3 of a filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, summarizes the evidence from Ghislaine Maxwell's trial, which concluded on December 29, 2021, with her conviction on five counts. It details testimony from four victims (Jane, Kate, Annie, Carolyn) and other evidence establishing Maxwell's instrumental role in Jeffrey Epstein's decade-long scheme to sexually abuse underage girls. The document also references post-trial motions, appeals, and the separate dismissal of perjury charges against Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00001564.jpg
This document is page 2 of a federal court filing (Document 17) from July 8, 2020, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines the 'Factual Background' of the indictment, stating that Maxwell had a personal, professional, and intimate relationship (specifically 1994-1997) with Jeffrey Epstein and was paid to manage his properties. It also alleges she groomed victims for sexual abuse and lied under oath about her conduct in 2016.
DOJ-OGR-00001503.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing (Document 16, filed 07/02/20) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines the 'Factual Background' of the case, asserting that Maxwell had a close personal and professional relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, including an intimate relationship between roughly 1994 and 1997. It alleges she was paid to manage his properties, knew about the grooming and abuse of minors at his residences, and lied under oath about her conduct in 2016. The page includes a photograph of Maxwell and Epstein together.
DOJ-OGR-00001321.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing from April 12, 2021, detailing the government's allegations against Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines how Maxwell normalized Epstein's abuse, participated in sexual acts with minors as young as 14, facilitated financial dependence, and conspired to transport victims across state lines. It also references perjury charges stemming from false statements Maxwell made during a civil deposition regarding her interactions with minors.
DOJ-OGR-00001132.jpg
This document is page 30 of a defense filing (Document 197) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, dated December 14, 2020. The defense argues that despite the government's initial claims of 'strong' evidence backed by flight logs and diaries, the discovery produced (over 1.2 million documents) contains 'no meaningful documentary corroboration' of the allegations for the indictment period of 1994-1997. The text notes that the majority of evidence produced relates to the 2000s and 2010s, and mentions electronic devices seized from Jeffrey Epstein's residences in 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00020742.jpg
This document is page 7 of a court indictment filed on March 29, 2021, detailing allegations against Ghislaine Maxwell regarding the grooming of minors. It specifically outlines the grooming of 'Minor Victim-1,' who was approximately 14 years old when met by Maxwell. The text describes how Maxwell and Epstein befriended the victim between 1994 and 1997 via shopping trips and movies, asked personal questions, and normalized nudity to facilitate sexual abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00002306.jpg
This document is page 7 of a legal motion filed on January 25, 2021, in the case US v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The defense argues that Count One and Count Three of the indictment are 'multiplicitous' and violate the Fifth Amendment because they allege identical overt acts, geographic scope (NY, FL, NM, UK), and objectives. The filing requests the Court dismiss one of the counts.
DOJ-OGR-00002305(1).jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal defense filing (Document 122) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, dated January 25, 2021. The defense argues that Counts One and Three of the indictment are 'clones' because they share identical participants (Epstein and Maxwell), time periods (1994-1997), and operations (enticing minors to travel for abuse). The text specifically details an allegation regarding 'Minor Victim-1' being transported from Florida to New York for sexual abuse at Epstein's New York residence.
DOJ-OGR-00019478.jpg
This document is a page from an indictment filed on July 2, 2020, detailing charges against Ghislaine Maxwell. It describes how Maxwell enticed minor victims, specifically 'Minor Victim-1' (age 14), between 1994 and 1997. The text outlines grooming tactics used by Maxwell and Epstein, including shopping trips and movies, as well as Maxwell normalizing sexual abuse by undressing in front of the victim and being present during abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00019212.jpg
This legal document, filed on July 2, 2020, alleges that MAXWELL actively participated in the sexual abuse of minors with Epstein. It details MAXWELL's involvement with 'Minor Victim-1' in 'group sexualized massages' at Epstein's residences in New York and Florida. The document also describes how MAXWELL allegedly groomed 'Minor Victim-2' in New Mexico around 1996, when the victim was under 18, for the purpose of being abused by Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00019176.jpg
This document is page 3 of an indictment (Case 1:20-mj-00132-AJ) filed on July 2, 2020. It outlines the 'Factual Background' of the charges against Ghislaine Maxwell, alleging she knowingly participated in the grooming of minors for sexual abuse and lied under oath about it in 2016. The text details her intimate relationship with Jeffrey Epstein between 1994 and 1997 and notes she was a paid employee managing his properties.
DOJ-OGR-00010408.jpg
This page from a court order (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) rejects the Defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) argument that she was prejudiced by the inability to call deceased witnesses, specifically two architects and a housekeeper. The court rules that this argument is speculative and unsubstantiated because other available witnesses, including Juan Alessi, Larry Visoski, and David Rodgers, testified at trial covering similar topics regarding Epstein's residences, renovations, and private aircraft.
DOJ-OGR-00009602.jpg
This legal document is a court filing arguing against a defendant's claim of prejudice due to the unavailability of certain witnesses. The filing contends that the defendant has failed to prove these witnesses (architects Pinto and Salhi) were 'key' or that their testimony would have been irreplaceably helpful. It further points out that the defendant had the opportunity to, and did, cross-examine other employees of Epstein, such as Juan Alessi and pilots Larry Visoski and David Rodgers, to establish facts about the defendant's role and time spent at Epstein's residences.
DOJ-OGR-00020050.jpg
This is page 30 of a defense filing (likely a bail application) dated December 14, 2020, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that despite the government's initial claims of 'strong' evidence backed by flight logs and diaries, the 1.2 million pages of discovery produced so far contain no meaningful corroboration of the charges. The defense emphasizes that the produced documents largely date from the 2000s and 2010s, rather than the 1994-1997 period charged in the indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00002849.jpg
This document is a page from a legal indictment (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on March 29, 2021. It alleges that defendant Ghislaine Maxwell induced and enticed several minor victims, including Minor Victim-1, whom she met at age 14. The text details how Maxwell, in concert with Epstein, groomed Minor Victim-1 between 1994 and 1997 at Epstein's residences by befriending her and normalizing abusive conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00002844.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing (likely an indictment) filed on March 29, 2021, detailing the factual background of charges against Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines her intimate relationship with Jeffrey Epstein (1994-1997), her role as his paid property manager (1994-2004), and her specific methods of grooming minor victims by feigning friendship and asking about their personal lives. It also alleges she committed perjury in 2016 regarding these activities.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity