MS. POMERANTZ
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Dr. Rocchio
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Opposing counsel |
12
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Opposing counsel |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
61 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Dr. Rocchio
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
23 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Mr. Flatley
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. Flatley
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional adversarial |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Opposing counsel |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Flatley
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Opposing counsel |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Rocchio
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Drescher
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
DAVID JAMES MULLIGAN
|
Professional |
7
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | An afternoon session of a court case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE) during the cross-examination of witness ... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness A. Farmer regarding the dating of a past event. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | The cross-examination of witness Espinosa concludes, and the defense calls its next witness, Ragh... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Witness testimony | A witness identified as 'Kate' is called by the government and sworn in to testify. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Redirect examination | Ms. Sternheim conducts a redirect examination of Professor Loftus regarding her career in psychol... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness A. Farmer regarding her knowledge of Ghislaine's involvement in her ... | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Direct examination | Ms. Pomerantz questions witness Dr. Rocchio in a legal proceeding. | Courtroom or deposition set... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Cross-examination of witness A. Farmer regarding a past incident and statements made to a victims... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Redirect examination of a witness named Loftus in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The questioning focuses... | Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A court trial, specifically the cross-examination of a witness named Kate, is taking a lunch break. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Lunch break | The court announced a lunch break starting at 12:45 for a duration of 45 minutes to an hour. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A court proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving the direct examination of witness Mr. Flatley. | Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness A. Farmer regarding their memory of a trip to New Mexico. | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of a witness named Kate regarding her correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Legal proceeding | A sidebar discussion in court regarding the admissibility of evidence to test a witness's memory. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion was held regarding the jury deliberation schedule, a jury note requesting transcript... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A direct examination of a witness named Rocchio, during which a legal objection was raised and ru... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Direct examination of a witness named Loftus regarding the constructive process of memory. An obj... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Redirect examination of witness A. Farmer in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The transcript shows a legal... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Direct examination of witness A. Farmer by Ms. Pomerantz. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion in court with the jury not present, where a witness is excused and procedural matter... | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A sidebar discussion during a trial regarding the admissibility of a witness's prior consistent s... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness A. Farmer regarding her public statements and involvement in legal m... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of Dr. Rocchio regarding literature on child sexual abuse. The testimony is int... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Expert witness testimony | Professor Elizabeth Loftus is qualified as an expert witness in the field of memory science and b... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
DOJ-OGR-00018658.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) is questioning a witness named Mr. Flatley regarding Government Exhibit 418B, which contains the metadata properties for Exhibit 418. The court also admits Exhibit 418 under seal due to the presence of third-party telephone numbers.
DOJ-OGR-00018657.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing attorney Ms. Pomerantz conducting a direct examination of witness Mr. Flatley. Mr. Flatley identifies Government Exhibits 418 and 418R, confirming they are accurate copies of a document he reviewed. Subsequently, Ms. Pomerantz offers the exhibits into evidence to the court.
DOJ-OGR-00018656.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley by Ms. Pomerantz. Flatley reads into the record excerpts from an email sent by 'gmax' (gmax1@mindspring.com) to 'MarkhamCPM@earthlink.net'. The email content discusses the creation of a household manual, specific cleaning supply preferences (Tide, Downy, Bounce), purchasing locations (Publix, Sam's Club-PB Gardens), and coordination with an individual named John regarding checkoff lists.
DOJ-OGR-00018655.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Flatley. The testimony focuses on an email exchange from May 25, 2001, sent by 'Sally' to 'Ms. Maxwell' regarding a 'PB manual' (likely Palm Beach manual) and a conversation with 'John'.
DOJ-OGR-00018654.jpg
This document is a court transcript page from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Witness Mr. Flatley reads an email dated May 25, 2001, from 'gmax1@mindspring.com' to Sally Markham. The email details specific failures by a staff member named John, including issues with a Mercedes ('black Merc'), a dirty pool deck, technical issues with a computer, and disorganized massage creams in Jeffrey Epstein's ('JE') bathroom.
DOJ-OGR-00018653.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It details the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley by prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz, focusing on the authentication and admission of Government Exhibit 424, which is described as an email. The defense attorney, Ms. Menninger, offers no objection, and the Judge admits the exhibit into evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00018648.jpg
This document is page 50 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley by Ms. Pomerantz regarding forensic evidence. Flatley identifies Government Exhibit 54 as a hard drive he examined, noting its unique identifier 'NYC024350', and begins describing the forensic process involving a write blocker.
DOJ-OGR-00018647.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley by Ms. Pomerantz. Flatley provides technical definitions for digital evidence, computers, and hard drives, and confirms that he examined digital evidence relevant to the case, noting that forensic examiners usually know nothing about the case details while analyzing data.
DOJ-OGR-00018645.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, covering the beginning of testimony from a government witness, Stephen Flatley. After being sworn in, Flatley is questioned by attorney Ms. Pomerantz and establishes his identity and his employment with the FBI's Computer Analysis Response Team in the New York division.
DOJ-OGR-00018614.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between the judge and counsel for the government (Mr. Rohrbach) and an opposing party (Ms. Menninger). Mr. Rohrbach confirms that the government will not question a witness, Mr. Flatley, about 'CDs' during direct examination, which resolves a procedural issue and satisfies the court and Ms. Menninger. The judge remarks that prior preparation for this line of questioning is now moot but may be saved for future use.
DOJ-OGR-00018597.jpg
This document is an index of examination from a court transcript for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It outlines the examination of witnesses KATE, PATRICK McHUGH, KELLY MAGUIRE, and KIMBERLY MEDER by various attorneys, listing the page numbers for each direct, cross, redirect, and recross examination. The document also lists several government exhibits that were received into evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00018477.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a portion of a cross-examination of a witness named Kate regarding her U visa status. During the proceeding, attorney Ms. Sternheim moves to admit Exhibits K-8 and K-10, which the court accepts under seal to protect the witness's identity.
DOJ-OGR-00018476.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning focuses on whether she has discussed her alleged abuse by Epstein with other victims and probes her memory of a meeting with the government concerning her U visa application, which her lawyer, Mr. Edwards, attended. The witness states she has not discussed her experiences with others and does not recall specific details about the meeting or her lawyer's actions during it.
DOJ-OGR-00018475.jpg
This document is page 138 of a court transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim cross-examines a witness named Kate regarding her memory of being asked to wear a uniform and an alleged conversation with Ghislaine about 'St. Trinian's,' which the witness does not recall. The prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) successfully objects to questions about costumes as being 'beyond the scope' of redirect.
DOJ-OGR-00018474.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the testimony of a witness named Kate. Under questioning by Ms. Pomerantz, Kate explains that money received from the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund represented recognition of her pain and truth, rather than just financial gain, and she explicitly denies having a financial stake in the outcome of the current trial. The page concludes with Ms. Sternheim beginning recross-examination.
DOJ-OGR-00018469.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a dialogue between the judge (THE COURT) and three attorneys (Mr. Everdell, Mr. Rohrbach, and Ms. Pomerantz) regarding an objection to having an agent testify about exhibits. The discussion clarifies that the agent in question is the one who conducted a search, not the current witness, after which the judge concludes the matter and calls for the witness and jury to enter.
DOJ-OGR-00018466.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a conversation between the judge (THE COURT), Ms. Pomerantz, and Ms. Sternheim about the admissibility of email evidence. The judge rules that the dates of the emails can be presented to the jury, but the content and subject matter must be redacted, and information identifying a witness must be sealed.
DOJ-OGR-00018465.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim argues for the admission of evidence showing the dates a female witness ('she') maintained contact via email with a male subject ('him') to prove a relationship existed after the events in question. The prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) argues that the witness already admitted to the dates, making the evidence cumulative.
DOJ-OGR-00018463.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a legal argument between defense attorney Ms. Sternheim and the Court regarding the admissibility of evidence—specifically an email—under the doctrine of 'past recollection recorded.' The Judge questions what specific details the witness failed to recall that would necessitate admitting the prior record.
DOJ-OGR-00018462.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It details a legal exchange between Ms. Sternheim (Defense) and Ms. Pomerantz (Prosecution) regarding an exhibit labeled 'Defendant's K-8' or '3513-019'. Ms. Pomerantz begins a legal argument citing the 'recorded recollection rule' as an exception to hearsay.
DOJ-OGR-00018461.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim and prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz discuss the admissibility and origin of two exhibits: a visa application bearing the name 'Kate' (Exhibit K-9) and emails between a witness and Mr. Epstein (Exhibit K-7). Ms. Pomerantz clarifies that the visa form was provided by the witness's counsel during a previous meeting to discuss visa status.
DOJ-OGR-00018458.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The transcript captures a brief exchange where an attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, requests a lunch break during the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The Court grants the request, announcing to the jury a break for 45 minutes to an hour starting at 12:45.
DOJ-OGR-00018457.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. An attorney, Ms. Sternheim, questions Kate about her employment in the music industry and her limited knowledge of the requirements for a U visa, specifically its connection to being a victim of a crime. After the questioning concludes, another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, requests a break from the court.
DOJ-OGR-00018456.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning focuses on the justification for her visa, which she claims is based on an 'extraordinary ability' related to music coaching. The attorney challenges this basis, and an objection from another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, is sustained by the court.
DOJ-OGR-00018449.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing a cross-examination of a person named Kate. The questioning covers a $1,200 payment for therapy and Kate's familiarity with a man named Ray Hamilton, whom she describes as an acquaintance and a friend of a friend, known both in 'the states' and London.
Clarification of questioning regarding grooming
Discussion regarding a distinction between third-party presence and sexual gratification in the context of grooming strategies.
Work location cross-examination
Pomerantz confirms Espinosa worked at the Madison Ave office, not the homes or Palm Beach house.
Cross-examination regarding consulting history
Pomerantz questions Loftus about her history consulting with defense attorneys in criminal cases 'hundreds of times'.
Direct and Redirect Examination
Legal examination in court
Grooming and sexual gratification
Ms. Pomerantz asks if the person doing the grooming is always the recipient of sexual gratification. Dr. Rocchio begins to answer 'No' before being interrupted by an objection.
Identification of Journal Entry
Questioning regarding Government Exhibit 603.
Direct Examination
Establishment of witness age (42) and introduction of Government Exhibit 13.
Direct examination and introduction of evidence
Ms. Pomerantz questions the witness, Flatley, about his review of evidence using forensic software. She successfully enters Government Exhibit 418B into evidence and requests that exhibits 420, 421, and 422 be displayed for the witness.
Allegations of recruiting underage girls for sexual abuse
Ms. Pomerantz outlines the prosecution's case, alleging the defendant recruited multiple underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein to sexually abuse under the guise of massages, citing specific examples involving victims named Jane, a 16-year-old, and a 17-year-old in various locations.
First meeting with Jeffrey Epstein
Ms. Pomerantz questions the witness, Annie, about her age during a trip to New York and asks her to identify Jeffrey Epstein in a photograph. She then asks Annie to describe her first meeting with Epstein.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity