MAXWELL
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jane
|
Acquaintance |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Friend |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Romantic |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Judicial |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Judge Nathan
|
Professional judicial |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Judge Nathan
|
Litigant judge |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Elizabeth
|
Adversarial defendant victim |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Minor Victim-1
|
Perpetrator victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Virginia Giuffre
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
SARAH
|
Adversarial defendant victim |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Accomplice |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Criminal conspiracy |
7
|
3 | |
|
organization
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Defendant victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Annie Farmer
|
Acquaintance |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Conspirators |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Annie
|
Groomer victim |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Scotty
|
Juror defendant |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Groomer victim |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Unnamed speaker
|
Victim abuser |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Facilitator |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Adversarial investigative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Employees
|
Employee |
6
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The 'Doe case' was stayed to avoid adversely affecting an ongoing criminal prosecution against Ma... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trip | A witness (A. Farmer) stayed at a ranch with Epstein and Maxwell. | the ranch | View |
| N/A | Conversation | Kate and Maxwell discussed Kate's family situation, including her mother's illness. | Maxwell's townhouse | View |
| N/A | Conversation | Kate and Maxwell discussed Kate's future plans, including her offer to study law at Oxford Univer... | Maxwell's townhouse | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Maxwell lied under oath during a civil deposition to conceal her crimes, specifically regarding h... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal action | A Superseding Indictment (S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)) was filed, charging Maxwell with eight counts, inc... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Defendant met victim and asked her to give massages. | The house | View |
| N/A | Trial | A four-and-a-half-week jury trial was held where the Government presented evidence of sexual abus... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | Judge Nathan entered a 'challenged Order' denying Maxwell's request to use criminal discovery mat... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal action | Maxwell filed a motion to modify a Protective Order and subsequently appealed the denial. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal action | The Government charged Maxwell with perjury in connection with civil cases. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trip | Maxwell and Mr. Epstein would be "out of town and be flying in" when appointments were scheduled ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | The trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, where this summation was delivered. | Southern District Court (im... | View |
| N/A | Scheduling | Maxwell called Carolyn to schedule sexualized massages. This is related to counts Five and Six. | New York | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | An appeal by Maxwell regarding an Order to prevent documents in a civil case from being unsealed. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A pending criminal case involving the parties. | District Court | View |
| N/A | Trip | The narrator visited Epstein's private island in the U.S. Virgin Islands. | private island in the U.S. ... | View |
| N/A | Abuse | The narrator was subjected to sexual predation multiple times per day over a period of seven to e... | New York mansion and privat... | View |
| N/A | Crime | Maxwell transported Jane to New York for sexual abuse and conspired to do the same. | New York | View |
| N/A | Trial | Maxwell's criminal trial, for which she received evidence (notes of Jane's interview) over three ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Sentencing | The District Court sentenced Maxwell to 240 months' imprisonment, which was slightly above the Gu... | District Court | View |
| N/A | Crime | Epstein and the Defendant (Maxwell) groomed victims for abuse at various properties and in variou... | various properties and in v... | View |
| N/A | Attempted college application | The author wrote an application to FIT, which was controlled and ultimately never submitted by Ma... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | A court holds that the District Court did not err in applying a leadership enhancement or in expl... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Interview | Upon her arrest, the defendant was interviewed by Pretrial Services and allegedly lied about her ... | N/A | View |
EFTA00026456.pdf
This document is an email header from November 18, 2020, forwarding a notification regarding activity in the criminal case 'USA v. Maxwell' (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). Specifically, it relates to a 'Memo Endorsement'. The sender and primary recipients are redacted, but a Bcc includes 'USAHUB-USAJournal111'.
EFTA00026402.pdf
This document is an email header dated December 11, 2020, with the subject 'RE: Maxwell Financial Report Appendices'. The identities of the sender and recipients are fully redacted. The email appears to be part of legal discovery or internal correspondence regarding financial reports related to Ghislaine Maxwell, indicated by the Bates number EFTA00026402 at the bottom.
EFTA00025557.pdf
This document is an email header dated December 11, 2020, regarding 'Maxwell Financial Report Appendices'. The sender and primary recipients are redacted, but a Bcc includes 'USAHUB-USAJournal111'. The email includes an embedded message file with the same subject.
EFTA00025354.pdf
This document is an email dated April 29, 2020, sent between redacted parties. The subject line and attachment indicate the correspondence concerns a 'draft indictment' for Maxwell (Ghislaine Maxwell), dated April 28, 2020. The sender asks the recipient to review the document before discussing it.
EFTA00025210.pdf
This document is a digital calendar entry from March 10, 2021, recording the acceptance of a meeting titled 'Epstein/Maxwell FOIA'. The attendee is an individual from the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS), whose name is redacted. The meeting was scheduled for 30 minutes and classified as 'X-PERSONAL'.
EFTA00025034.pdf
An internal email dated October 25, 2021, from an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York. The email concerns a '3500 cover letter' (referring to Jencks Act disclosures) and includes an attachment named '2021.10.25_Maxwell_Cover_Letter_v1.docx', indicating preparation for discovery production in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial.
EFTA00024999.pdf
This document is an email metadata record dated January 11, 2021, regarding a 'Maxwell drive delivery'. The email was routed through a Bureau of Prisons (BOP.GOV) server, suggesting it concerns the delivery of digital materials (likely legal discovery) to Ghislaine Maxwell while in custody. The sender and primary recipients are redacted, but a Bcc to 'USAHUB-USAJournal111' is visible.
EFTA00024926.pdf
This document is an email chain from April and May 2021 between staff and contractors at the US Attorney's Office (SDNY). The correspondence concerns the transcription of a specific, redacted recording. One participant explicitly mentions being preoccupied with work related to 'Maxwell' (Ghislaine Maxwell), indicating this administrative task was part of the preparation for her prosecution. The final email confirms the transcription was completed, with one interviewer in the recording identified only as 'UM1'.
EFTA00023894.pdf
This document is an email dated August 17, 2021, from Assistant US Attorney Andrew (likely Andrew Rohrbach) to redacted colleagues. It discusses a recent ruling by Judge Nathan denying Ghislaine Maxwell's supplemental motions. The email focuses on correcting the Judge's presumption that the prosecution intended to provide the defense with the identities of uncharged co-conspirators, stating clearly that they 'do not, in fact, intend to do so' and have drafted a letter to that effect.
EFTA00023821.pdf
This document is an email dated February 13, 2020, from Alaska Airlines' legal department to an FBI Special Agent in New York. The airline confirms they have 'no responsive records' regarding a Federal Grand Jury subpoena issued on January 23, 2020, related to 'Maxwell' (presumably Ghislaine Maxwell).
EFTA00023692.pdf
This document is an email metadata printout dated September 28, 2020, originating from the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS). The subject concerns a draft letter to Judge Nathan regarding discovery in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. The document contains technical email headers, including a Message-ID and an embedded message reference, with most participant identities redacted.
EFTA00023687.pdf
This document is an email header and metadata printout dated September 25, 2020. The subject line 'RE: Epstein/Maxwell Upload' suggests the transmission of digital files related to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The sender and primary recipients are redacted, but a Bcc recipient is visible as 'USAHUB-USAJournal111'.
EFTA00023466.pdf
An email dated September 30, 2021, from an Assistant US Attorney in the Southern District of New York regarding the 'Maxwell case.' The email discusses a draft 'RTC' (likely Requests to Charge/Jury Instructions) attached as 'Maxwell_RTC_v11.docx' and notes a filing deadline of October 27 for a joint proposal.
EFTA00023460.pdf
This document is an email from the Chambers of Judge Alison J. Nathan dated October 29, 2021, regarding the case US v. Maxwell (20cr330). It is addressed to counsel, including Laura Menninger and Jeff Pagliuca, distributing an attached Order issued by the Judge and noting it will be filed publicly the following Monday.
EFTA00023344.pdf
This document is an email dated August 5, 2020, from an Assistant United States Attorney to a redacted recipient. The email contains an attachment titled '2020.08.05_Maxwell_Discovery_Letter.docx', indicating it relates to legal discovery in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. The body text is brief, simply stating 'Here's the letter.'
EFTA00023254.pdf
This document is a digital calendar entry dated October 16, 2020, scheduling a 30-minute tentative meeting titled 'Maxwell - Discuss Images from Epstein Devices'. The entry includes metadata such as creation and modification timestamps, but the attendee information and dial-in details are redacted. The document appears to be part of an investigative or legal file (likely related to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) referencing evidence from Jeffrey Epstein's electronic devices.
EFTA00023250.pdf
This document is an email notification dated October 16, 2020, indicating the acceptance of a meeting invitation. The subject of the meeting is 'Maxwell - Discuss Images from Epstein Devices', sent by an individual from the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS). The names of the sender and recipient are redacted.
EFTA00023073.pdf
This document is an email sent on February 3, 2021, by an unnamed Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The subject deals with 'Maxwell motions' (part 2 of 3) and includes a zip file attachment related to a filing from January 25, 2021.
EFTA00023033.pdf
An email correspondence dated November 4, 2021, from an Assistant United States Attorney at the Southern District of New York (SDNY) to an unknown recipient. The email contains an attachment titled '2021.11.03_Maxwell_RTC_[unredacted].docx', likely pertaining to legal filings or proceedings regarding Ghislaine Maxwell.
EFTA00023016.pdf
This document is a heavily redacted email chain from September 10, 2020, between unidentified government officials (likely DOJ/FBI). The discussion concerns a budget shortage ('out of money through the end of the fiscal') preventing the immediate hiring of a vendor to scan 'SDFL Epstein stuff' and process 'OPR Epstein stuff'. Despite the shortage, one participant confirms that an unidentified male superior 'will find the 10K for Maxwell' to ensure the work proceeds without waiting until October.
EFTA00022051.pdf
An email dated October 19, 2020, from a Paralegal Specialist at the U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding the '5th Production' of discovery materials. The email outlines the procedure for sending hard drives and password-protected cover letters to Ghislaine Maxwell at the MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center) and defense counsel.
EFTA00022047.pdf
This document is an email chain from October 13-14, 2020, discussing technical discovery tasks for the Ghislaine Maxwell case. The correspondence involves the transfer and database indexing of files, specifically 26,164 documents from the 'FBI Files from Florida Office' and boxes of files from the 'USAO-SDFL' (Southern District of Florida). The participants are coordinating the loading of these materials into a 'US v Epstein' Relativity database and physical delivery of drives to 1 St. Andrews (SDNY office).
EFTA00022038.pdf
This document contains an email chain from June 2021 involving an Assistant United States Attorney (SDNY) investigating a specific financial transaction from October 1999. The investigation focuses on a $18,300,000 transfer to 'Maxwell' (presumably Ghislaine Maxwell) from the Financial Trust Company's JP Morgan account (ending in 5001). The correspondence confirms the transfer was funded by the sale of a JP Morgan Institutional Prime Money Market Fund.
EFTA00021904.pdf
This document is an email dated August 14, 2020, with the subject 'Key docs'. It lists several attached files which appear to be internal prosecution memoranda and reports related to the Jeffrey Epstein case. The attachments include a prosecution memo for Epstein (JE), a co-conspirator investigation update from Dec 2019, a prosecution memo for Ghislaine Maxwell (GM), a perjury supplement, a prosecution memo for a redacted individual, and original Palm Beach Police reports.
EFTA00020861.pdf
This document is an email chain from late September 2020 between members of a legal team regarding the 'Fourth Production' of discovery materials. Key topics include the technical handling of 'LSJ Scene2Go' (an application containing 3D maps of Little St. James, specifically the grotto and main structure), the processing of a JPMorgan document production, and the status of files related to 'Maxwell's MDC drive'. The team discusses strategies for Bates stamping viewable image files versus system files to ensure the defense can utilize the materials.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Paid | MAXWELL | Court/Government | $250,000.00 | Fine imposed on each count. | View |
| N/A | Paid | MAXWELL | Court/Government | $750,000.00 | Total fine imposed. | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Paid | MAXWELL | Court/Government | $750,000.00 | Criminal fine imposed at sentencing. | View |
| 1999-10-19 | Received | Financial Trust C... | MAXWELL | $18,300,000.00 | Transfer sourced from the sale of JP Morgan Ins... | View |
| 1999-10-19 | Received | Financial Trust C... | MAXWELL | $0.00 | Transfer to Maxwell discussed in email; investi... | View |
Legal Review
Review of discovery materials
Scheduling an appointment for Carolyn
Carolyn's mom would receive a phone call, which Carolyn later learned was from Maxwell, and would hand the phone to Carolyn to schedule an appointment.
Small talk during massage
making small talk
Instruction to undress
She told me to get undressed.
Carolyn's career aspirations
Maxwell asked Carolyn what she wanted to do in the future, and Carolyn replied that she wanted to become a massage therapist.
Reconsideration of the District Court's response
Maxwell filed a letter seeking reconsideration of a response from the District Court, claiming it resulted in a constructive amendment or prejudicial variance.
Massage
MAXWELL sent an unsolicited message to Minor Victim-2, during which Minor Victim-2 was topless.
Scheduling an appointment for Carolyn
Shawn would receive a phone call from Maxwell and would then tell Carolyn that she had a phone call and instruct her to say yes to the appointment.
Reconsideration of response to jury note
Maxwell filed a letter seeking reconsideration of Judge Nathan's response to the jury's note and raised issues of constructive amendment or prejudicial variance.
Scheduling massage appointments
The question implies that Maxwell would call Carolyn to schedule massage appointments with Jeffrey Epstein, even after learning she was 14.
Reply to Government's Opposition
A reply brief cited as "Maxwell Reply at 18" where the Defendant asserts the government failed to prove its case.
Rule 29 Motion for Acquittal
A brief cited as "Maxwell Br. at 30" where the Defendant requests a judgment of acquittal on all counts.
Epstein's sexual preferences and needs
Maxwell told the witness, Kate, that Epstein likes 'cute, young, pretty' girls and that he needed to have sex about three times a day. These conversations occurred frequently ('All the time') within the first couple of months after they met.
Massages
Maxwell asked Annie if she had ever received a massage and told her she would have the opportunity to have one, describing how enjoyable it would be.
Scheduling sexualized massages
Maxwell called Carolyn to schedule sexualized massages while Maxwell was in New York.
Scheduling appointments
Maxwell would call Carolyn to ask if she was available for an appointment, sometimes mentioning that she and Mr. Epstein would be out of town and flying in.
Massage
MAXWELL sent an unsolicited message to Minor Victim-2, during which Minor Victim-2 was topless.
Travel and an invitation to an island
Maxwell asked Carolyn about her travel history and invited her to an island. Carolyn declined, stating she was too young and her mother would not permit it.
Civil Case Testimony
Testimony given by Maxwell in a civil case (Giuffre v. Maxwell).
Epstein's whereabouts
Maxwell informing Carolyn that Epstein was on a jog or would be back soon and that she could go upstairs to set up.
Taking over the house
Maxwell told Juan Alessi that she was taking over the house right away when she arrived.
Scheduling massages
Maxwell calling Carolyn to schedule sexualized massages when Maxwell was in New York.
Spending time vs Communicating
Witness clarifies distinction between spending physical time vs communicating. States she stopped spending time around age 24.
Reconsideration of response
Seeking reconsideration claiming constructive amendment or prejudicial variance.
Request to question Juror 50
Renewing request to question Juror 50 directly and proposing twenty-one pages of questions.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity