CAROLYN
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
defendant
|
Trafficker victim |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Abuser victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Visitor victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Adversarial |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Unspecified |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Kellen
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Adversarial |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Adversarial professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Acquaintance |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Virginia Roberts
|
Recruiter recruit |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jack Scarola
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Adversarial professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Alleged trafficker and victim |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Transactional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
AMANDA
|
Friend |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
SARAH KELLEN
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Tatum
|
Friend |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Carolyn's mom
|
Family |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Sean
|
Confidant |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Scheduler victim |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JEFFREY
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Willits
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn and Sean stole a car and ran away from Florida to Georgia. | Florida to Georgia | View |
| N/A | N/A | Massage appointments attended by Carolyn | Palm Beach residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn and Ms. Roberts leaving Epstein's house after payment | Epstein's House | View |
| N/A | N/A | Visits by Carolyn to Epstein's home. | Mr. Epstein's home | View |
| N/A | N/A | Receipt of package containing lingerie and a movie. | West Palm Beach (Carolyn's ... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Second visit to Epstein's property. Sean drove and waited in the car. Carolyn sat in the kitchen ... | Epstein's Residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | Defendant (Maxwell) entered massage room while Carolyn was nude and touched her. | Massage room | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial testimony regarding Count Five and Count Three. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn's second visit: Greeted by Sarah, Chef offered food, Sarah prepared table. | Epstein's residence (implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn dropped out of school in the seventh grade. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn testified and wrote down her mother's phone number to avoid saying it aloud. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Visit to Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach home. | Palm Beach, FL | View |
| N/A | N/A | Virginia and Carolyn enter Epstein's house for approximately one hour and five minutes. | Jeffrey Epstein's home | View |
| N/A | N/A | Massage encounter where Epstein masturbated in Carolyn's presence. | Unspecified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn visited Jeffrey Epstein's house at age 14. | Jeffrey Epstein's house | View |
| N/A | N/A | Massage appointments attended by Carolyn. | Palm Beach residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony given by Larry Visoski, Cimberly Espinosa, and Carolyn. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn turned 18, marking the legal end of the specific charged sex-trafficking conspiracy regar... | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn received a package via FedEx containing lingerie and a movie. | West Palm Beach (Carolyn's ... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Visits to Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach house. | Epstein's Palm Beach house | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony given by Carolyn and Juan Alessi regarding the roles of Maxwell and Kellen. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn going to Epstein's house for massages. | Jeffrey Epstein's house | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn observing Maxwell in the office area off the kitchen. | Jeffrey Epstein's house (of... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Virginia brought Carolyn to the residence; Defendant greeted them and instructed Virginia. | The residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn witnessed Virginia give Epstein a sexualized massage involving sexual intercourse. | The residence | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021075.jpg
This document is page 28 of a legal appellate brief filed on February 28, 2023, arguing that all counts against Ghislaine Maxwell should be dismissed based on the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) between the Government and Jeffrey Epstein. It claims the NPA immunized Maxwell as a 'potential co-conspirator' and cites Supreme Court precedent requiring prosecutors to fulfill plea agreement promises. Additionally, the text argues jury prejudice occurred due to media interviews given by accusers named Carolyn and Kate.
DOJ-OGR-00021068.jpg
This document, dated February 28, 2023, appears to be a legal filing summarizing trial testimony against Ghislaine Maxwell. It highlights inconsistencies between trial testimony and pre-trial statements made by accusers 'Jane' and 'Carolyn' regarding Maxwell's presence and involvement in sexual abuse. Specifically, it notes that Carolyn did not mention Maxwell in 2007 FBI interviews or a 2008 lawsuit, despite implicating her at trial.
DOJ-OGR-00021043.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (likely a sentencing hearing for Ghislaine Maxwell) where the judge is ruling on sentencing guidelines. The judge overrules an objection, finding by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant supervised Sarah Kellen, who is identified as a 'knowing participant in the criminal conspiracy.' The ruling cites testimony from Larry Visoski, David Rodgers, and Carolyn, as well as flight records and a household manual, to establish the defendant's leadership role as 'Epstein's number two.'
DOJ-OGR-00021040.jpg
This legal document is a judicial analysis regarding the sentencing of a defendant. The judge concludes that the evidence, including message pads, does not sufficiently prove the offense continued after November 1, 2004, and therefore the 2003 sentencing guidelines must apply instead of the 2004 guidelines. The judge then begins to address the defendant's objections to specific sentencing enhancements under the 2003 guidelines, confirming that the requirements for an enhancement under 4B1.5(b) have been met.
DOJ-OGR-00021039.jpg
This legal document, dated February 28, 2023, analyzes evidence to determine if a sex trafficking conspiracy involving Epstein continued into late 2004. It scrutinizes the testimony of a woman named Carolyn, detailing her visits to Epstein's house, phone calls she made to him in the summer of 2004, and her final visit in 2005 after she turned 18. The analysis suggests a lack of evidence for conspiratorial conduct in the specific period of November-December 2004.
DOJ-OGR-00021038.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (likely United States v. Maxwell given the context and case number 22-1426) filed on February 28, 2023. The text details a judge's analysis of sentencing guidelines (2003 vs 2004) and determines the timeline of a sexual abuse conspiracy, specifically noting that the conspiracy involving a victim named Carolyn ended in early 2005 when she turned 18. The judge explicitly states that they found Carolyn to be a credible witness.
DOJ-OGR-00021034.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 22-1426) dated February 28, 2023. The defense argues against a sentencing 'leadership enhancement' for Ghislaine Maxwell, citing testimony from pilot Larry Visoski and assistant Cimberly Espinosa to prove that Sarah Kellen worked solely for Jeffrey Epstein, not Maxwell. In rebuttal, the government (Ms. Moe) cites testimony from a victim named Carolyn, who stated that Maxwell remained present at the Palm Beach residence even when Kellen took over scheduling massages.
DOJ-OGR-00021022.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (Document 657 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) addressing the Defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) claim that delay in prosecution caused prejudice to her defense. The text argues the defendant failed to prove substantial prejudice but outlines her specific claims regarding lost evidence, including flight records, financial documents, phone records, and property records. It specifically names deceased witnesses the defense claims were unavailable: architects Albert Pinto and Roger Salhi, and property manager Sally Markham.
DOJ-OGR-00021018.jpg
This document is page 35 of a court order filed on April 29, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text discusses the denial of the Defendant's arguments regarding 'constructive amendment' and 'prejudicial variance' related to Count Three (conspiracy to transport) and Count Four. The Court rules that testimony from a victim named 'Jane' regarding abuse in New Mexico did not improperly amend the charges, noting that evidence also involved victims 'Annie' and 'Carolyn'.
DOJ-OGR-00021004.jpg
This legal document is a court filing that denies a defendant's motions for acquittal and to vacate convictions related to the Mann Act. The court found sufficient evidence from witness testimonies (including from 'Carolyn', 'Annie', and 'Kate') to conclude that the defendant conspired with Epstein to transport minors to locations like New York, New Mexico, and the Caribbean for illegal sexual activity. The defendant's actions, such as paying for sexualized massages and inviting girls to travel, were considered part of this conspiracy, justifying the jury's conviction.
DOJ-OGR-00021003.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing dated April 29, 2022, outlines the court's conclusion that trial evidence supported a guilty verdict for the Defendant on Count Three, conspiracy to transport minors for illegal sexual activity. The document summarizes testimony from victims 'Jane' and 'Annie,' who described being groomed and taken on trips to New York and New Mexico by the Defendant and co-conspirator Epstein. The court found this and other evidence sufficient to prove the Defendant's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
DOJ-OGR-00021002.jpg
This legal filing (page 19 of 45) details court testimony regarding 'Count Six' and 'Count Five' of sex trafficking charges against the Defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell). It summarizes victim Carolyn's testimony that the Defendant scheduled sexualized massages for Epstein, paid her, and touched her inappropriately while she was 14 years old. A footnote discusses corroborating evidence involving Virginia Roberts, Juan Alessi, and flight logs from December 2000.
DOJ-OGR-00020997.jpg
This document is a page from a legal ruling (likely the Maxwell case, 1:20-cr-00330) discussing legal arguments regarding conspiracy counts, overt acts, and the interdependence of crimes. It analyzes whether the abuse of specific victims (Carolyn, Jane, Annie) constituted one common conspiracy or distinct conspiracies involving the Defendant and Epstein. The text references legal precedents and the timing of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act enactment in 2000.
DOJ-OGR-00020996.jpg
This legal document details how the Defendant and Epstein used financial gifts and payments as a grooming tactic to gain victims' trust and facilitate sexual abuse. It cites testimony from a victim named 'Jane' about receiving money and payments for lessons, and mentions promises made to another victim, 'Annie'. The document also discusses the geographic scope of the conspiracy, noting that sexual conduct occurred not only in New York and Florida but also in New Mexico and London, involving other victims like Carolyn and Virginia Roberts.
DOJ-OGR-00020994.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing reviewing the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It details the Government's argument that Maxwell utilized a specific 'playbook' to groom four specific victims (Jane, Annie, Carolyn, and Kate) for sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein. The text describes a 'pyramid scheme of abuse' beginning in 2001 involving payments for 'massage' appointments.
DOJ-OGR-00020990.jpg
This legal document analyzes two counts from an indictment against an unnamed Defendant. Count Three alleges a conspiracy from 1994-2004 to transport minors across state lines for sexual activity, based on testimony from victims Jane, Carolyn, and Annie Farmer. Count Five alleges a conspiracy from 2001-2004 for trafficking individuals for commercial sex acts, based on evidence related to Carolyn and Virginia Roberts. The Defendant argues, and the Court appears to agree, that Count Five is a subset of Count Three.
DOJ-OGR-00020889.jpg
This Reuters news article reports on the perspectives of jurors from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. Juror Scotty David describes how another juror, Carolyn, was influenced by a fellow juror's story of growing up in a similar socioeconomic background, leading her to believe girls in her neighborhood could have been victimized by people like Epstein and Maxwell. David also states his own conviction that Maxwell was complicit and not merely a scapegoat for Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00020887.jpg
This Reuters article, dated January 5, 2022, reports on the jury deliberations in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. A juror, Scotty David, revealed that some jurors initially doubted the credibility of two accusers' memories. David, a survivor of childhood sexual abuse himself, shared his personal experience with the jury, which helped them understand trauma's effect on memory and ultimately led to a unanimous guilty verdict against Maxwell on December 29, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00020872.jpg
This legal document excerpt details a juror's, named David, perspective on the acquittal of Maxwell on a specific charge ('count two') involving an accuser named Jane. David explains that while Jane's story was corroborated by flight logs and Epstein's 'little black book', the jury ultimately found insufficient direct evidence to prove Maxwell had 'enticed' Jane to travel, which was required for a conviction on that charge. The decision was based on a lack of evidence for that specific action, not on a disbelief of the victim.
DOJ-OGR-00020871.jpg
This document appears to be a court exhibit containing excerpts from media interviews (MailOnline, The Independent) with a juror named 'David' following the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. David explains that the jury was swayed by the 'pattern' of grooming established by multiple accusers (Kate, Jane, Annie Farmer, Carolyn), despite the defense's attempts to challenge memories via expert Loftus. He specifically notes that while accuser Kate's testimony could not be used for charges due to UK laws, it was crucial for establishing the grooming methodology.
DOJ-OGR-00020870.jpg
This document is a legal exhibit containing an excerpt from an article in The Independent featuring an interview with a juror named David following the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. David explains that the jury found the victims credible despite defense attempts to attack them and use memory expert Elizabeth Loftus to cast doubt on their recollections. He highlights a specific moment where a victim named 'Carolyn' became distressed on the stand, noting that such incidents increased his compassion rather than creating doubt.
DOJ-OGR-00018989.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving the examination of a witness named Rodgers. The proceedings involve a discussion between the Court, Ms. Comey, and Mr. Everdell regarding the redaction of a name ('Carolyn') and phone numbers from evidence. Mr. Everdell also coordinates the placement of folders for the jury ahead of cross-examination, and the parties agree to discuss an 'in limine instruction' after the lunch break.
DOJ-OGR-00018953.jpg
This document is page 91 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness, Mrs. Hesse, by Ms. Moe. The testimony focuses on identifying a message from 'Carolyn' in Exhibit 3E and establishing that Mrs. Hesse worked at the Palm Beach house specifically when Maxwell and Epstein were not home.
DOJ-OGR-00018952.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the direct examination of a witness, Mrs. Hesse, by an attorney, Ms. Moe. The questioning confirms that a person named Carolyn left a message for a Mr. Epstein on March 11, 2003, and directs the witness and jury to review Government Exhibits 4B and 3E.
DOJ-OGR-00018951.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness, Mrs. Hesse, by an attorney named Ms. Moe. The testimony focuses on confirming the spelling of the name 'Carolyn' and identifying a specific message on 'Government Exhibit 2T' that is addressed 'for Mr. Epstein'.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Sarah Kellen / Je... | CAROLYN | $600.00 | Offer of 'five to $600' to take pictures of the... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Gift: Massage book for dummies | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $300.00 | Payment made before Carolyn left the house with... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $300.00 | Payment for massage, left on the sink. Stated a... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $400.00 | Payment for massage, left on the sink. Stated a... | View |
| N/A | Received | Victims' Compensa... | CAROLYN | $2,800,000.00 | Payout received by the witness Carolyn, cited b... | View |
| N/A | Received | The defendant (Ma... | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Payments for sexualized massages, personally pa... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $300.00 | Payment for an encounter involving a massage an... | View |
| N/A | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | CAROLYN | $300.00 | Payment for each time Carolyn gave Epstein an e... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Epstein sent her gifts. | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Epstein paid Carolyn after sexual act. | View |
| N/A | Received | the defendant | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Paid twice as much when she brought friends to ... | View |
| N/A | Paid | CAROLYN | Shawn | $0.00 | Money given to witness, ostensibly for gas, adm... | View |
| N/A | Received | Implied (Epstein/... | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Ms. Roberts told Carolyn 'we could make money' ... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein (... | CAROLYN | $600.00 | Payment for massage/visit, paid in hundreds. | View |
| N/A | Received | Mr. Epstein (impl... | CAROLYN | $300.00 | Cash payment found on top of the sink after the... | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein /... | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Carolyn begging to come over because she 'neede... | View |
| N/A | Received | Implied (Epstein/... | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Money received for attending 'appointments'. | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Over 100 paid sexualized massages. | View |
| N/A | Received | The defendant | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Large sums of money needed to fuel her drug add... | View |
| N/A | Received | The defendant | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Money for engaging in sex acts. | View |
| N/A | Received | Implied (Epstein/... | CAROLYN | $0.00 | General statement that 'we could make money' by... | View |
| N/A | Received | Unnamed Older Man... | CAROLYN | $300.00 | Proposed payment for providing a massage (discu... | View |
| N/A | Received | Implied (Virginia... | CAROLYN | $300.00 | Offer made by Virginia to Carolyn to 'make $300'. | View |
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | CAROLYN | $0.00 | Gift: Concert tickets to Incubus | View |
Direct Examination
Questioning regarding witness's mental health diagnoses (schizophrenia), medications (Vyvanse, Doxepine), and reliability of memory.
Direct Examination
Questioning regarding identification of birth certificate (Government Exhibit 11).
Cross-examination regarding substance abuse
Attorney questions witness about drug use in 2002-2003 and at age 13.
Direct Examination
Questioning regarding identification of a photograph (Exhibit 104) depicting the witness at age 14.
Direct Examination regarding personal history
Witness testifies about moving to Florida in 1999, dropping out of school in 7th grade, and addiction to pain pills and cocaine.
Redirect Examination
Testimony regarding age of first contact with Maxwell/Epstein and denial of coaching or financial motive.
Discrepancies in Epstein Victim Compensation Fund submission
Mr. Pagliuca questions the witness, Carolyn, about the start date of alleged abuse (May 1, 2001) and additional claims of specific sexual acts in her submission to the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund, which she denies making.
Lawsuit settlement and victim compensation fund payments
An unnamed questioner interviews Carolyn about money she received from a 2009 lawsuit settlement against Jeffrey and Sarah, and a subsequent award from a victim compensation fund related to Jeffrey Epstein.
Events during a massage involving Mr. Epstein and Virginia
An unnamed questioner elicits testimony from Carolyn about a massage she and Virginia gave to Mr. Epstein. Carolyn states that after 45 minutes, Mr. Epstein turned over, Virginia got on top of him, and they had sex while Carolyn watched from a couch. Afterwards, Carolyn and Virginia were paid $300.
Cross-examination regarding instructions to lie about age...
Carolyn is being cross-examined about being told by Ms. Roberts and Virginia to say she was 17 to Epstein, and about her first visit to Epstein's house.
Victim Compensation Application
Submission of application for compensation.
Witness meetings
Witness was meeting with the government during the same time period she applied to the fund.
Unknown
Emails forwarded by Scarola to Carolyn.
Contacting the government
Mr. Scarola left multiple voice messages for the witness (Carolyn) in 2020 regarding the government.
Legal representation/advice
Witness confirms speaking with Mr. Scarola in 2020
Legal consultation
Witness confirms speaking with Mr. Scarola in 2020.
Re-establishing contact
Agents contacted Carolyn; she requested to speak to her lawyer first.
Unspecified
The witness confirms she did not respond to messages from Mr. Scarola in 2019.
Request to come to Epstein's home
Requests for Carolyn to visit Epstein's home, made on Epstein's behalf.
Request to come to Epstein's
Requests for Carolyn to visit Epstein, made by Sarah or Maxwell rather than Epstein directly.
Lawsuit connection
Alleged 6.5-hour meeting at lawyer's office regarding the lawsuit.
Interview
Witness was interviewed by the FBI; currently being questioned about the truthfulness of her statements during that meeting.
Escort Service
Deposition where Carolyn was not asked about working for an escort service.
Prior Oath
Answers given under oath regarding drug use and Epstein's instructions.
Deposition testimony
Carolyn described Maxwell in her deposition.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity