MS. POMERANTZ
PersonRelationship Network
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Jury Selection (Voir Dire) for Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross-examination testimony of witness Flatley. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of witness 'Kate' | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony of Stephen Flatley | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Admission of Government Exhibit 5 into evidence. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Conclusion of A. Farmer's testimony. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Calling of witness David Mulligan. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct Examination of Lisa Rocchio by Ms. Pomerantz | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination testimony regarding sexual abuse disclosure statistics. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross-examination of witness 'Kate' regarding exhibits 3513-014. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Admission of Defendant's Exhibit MA1 into evidence under seal. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross-examination of witness Rocchio regarding the 'Craven article' and the definition of grooming. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court testimony regarding the nature of Epstein and Maxwell's relationship. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Admission of Government Exhibit 424 into evidence during the testimony of Mr. Flatley. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of Dr. Rocchio regarding Government Exhibit 3. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of Jane | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Lisa Rocchio | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court Sidebar/Discussion without Jury | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Witness Kate is questioned by Ms. Pomerantz about a visit to Maxwell's house and is shown Governm... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court examination | Direct examination of ANNIE FARMER by Ms. Pomerantz, starting on page 2049. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court examination | Redirect examination of ANNIE FARMER by Ms. Pomerantz, starting on page 2213. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court examination | Direct examination of DAVID JAMES MULLIGAN by Ms. Pomerantz, starting on page 2231. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court examination | Redirect examination of DAVID JAMES MULLIGAN by Ms. Pomerantz, starting on page 2245. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court examination | Direct examination of JANICE SWAIN by Ms. Pomerantz, starting on page 2247. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Witness Annie Farmer is questioned by Ms. Pomerantz, identifies the defendant in the courtroom, a... | courtroom | View |
DOJ-OGR-00013780.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Redirect of A. Farmer) filed on August 10, 2022. During questioning by Ms. Pomerantz, the witness confirms telling the FBI in 2006 that Ghislaine Maxwell demonstrated how to give Jeffrey Epstein a foot massage, after which the witness began doing it on her own. The defense attorney, Ms. Menninger, raises objections regarding leading questions and the witness reading from a document.
DOJ-OGR-00013779.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022, featuring the redirect examination of witness A. Farmer. The testimony concerns a statement made to the FBI regarding a trip to New Mexico, specifically that either Epstein or Maxwell was responsible for canceling 'Maria's' trip at the last minute. The defense attorney, Ms. Menninger, objects on grounds of hearsay and foundation, but is overruled by the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00013778.jpg
This page is a transcript from the redirect examination of witness A. Farmer in the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The witness confirms that in a 2006 FBI interview, conducted without a lawyer present, she reported that Maxwell massaged her breasts. The prosecutor (Ms. Pomerantz) attempts to ask about Epstein getting into bed with the witness, but the defense (Ms. Menninger) successfully objects to the question as leading. The examination then turns to reviewing a specific document (3514-001) to clarify a statement regarding a person named Maria.
DOJ-OGR-00013772.jpg
This document is a segment of a court transcript from the cross-examination of A. Farmer, filed on August 10, 2022. The testimony covers her credibility, her public identity as a psychologist, and her 2006 interaction with FBI Agent Nesbitt Kuyrkendall concerning Mr. Epstein. An objection by Ms. Pomerantz is sustained by the Court, with Ms. Menninger also speaking.
DOJ-OGR-00013771.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer, by an attorney, Ms. Menninger. The questioning establishes that the witness is a psychologist who works with victims of sexual trauma and has mentioned this in public appearances. An objection to a question about credibility is made by another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, and is subsequently withdrawn.
DOJ-OGR-00013770.jpg
This document is a page from the cross-examination transcript of witness A. Farmer (likely Annie Farmer) in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The defense attorney, Ms. Menninger, questions Farmer about an incident of sexual abuse in a movie theater and introduces a document (Exhibit AF-14), which is a release form signed by Farmer in October 2020. The testimony confirms that Farmer received $1.5 million from the Victims Compensation Program.
DOJ-OGR-00013768.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. It documents the cross-examination of witness A. Farmer by Ms. Menninger regarding her attorneys from Boies Schiller and their involvement in the Epstein Victims Compensation Fund. Ms. Pomerantz objects to the line of questioning citing hearsay and privilege, while the Court instructs the defense to establish a foundation for the questions.
DOJ-OGR-00013767.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named A. Farmer. The questioning focuses on Farmer's communications with other accusers of 'Epstein', confirming their participation in a WhatsApp group and direct email exchanges with other accusers, including Virginia Roberts. The transcript highlights the interconnectedness and communication channels among the accusers.
DOJ-OGR-00013766.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named A. Farmer. The questioning focuses on the witness's knowledge of lawyers Ms. McCawley and Mr. Edwards, from the firm Boies Schiller, representing Virginia Roberts in a separate civil litigation. The witness confirms their knowledge and that they were prepared to testify in that case, despite an objection for relevance which the court overruled.
DOJ-OGR-00013765.jpg
This document is a page of a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named A. Farmer by an attorney, Ms. Menninger. The questioning focuses on Farmer's preparation for a prior civil case testimony in 2016 or 2017 and her knowledge that her attorneys also represented Virginia Roberts in matters related to Epstein's accusers. The testimony is frequently interrupted by objections from another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, which are ruled on by the court.
DOJ-OGR-00013760.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer, by an attorney, Ms. Menninger. The questioning focuses on potential inconsistencies between Farmer's direct testimony and a statement she gave to the Epstein Victims Compensation Fund regarding an alleged assault by Mr. Epstein. The transcript also includes a question about Ghislaine's behavior towards the witness in New Mexico.
DOJ-OGR-00013759.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named A. Farmer. The questioning focuses on clarifying the details of an alleged sexual assault by a "Mr. Epstein," comparing the witness's current testimony with previous statements made to a victims' compensation fund regarding the nature of the physical contact. An attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, makes objections during the questioning.
DOJ-OGR-00013758.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer. The questioning attorney probes inconsistencies between Farmer's statements to a victims' compensation fund, the government, and the jury regarding massages involving Mr. Epstein. The focus is on Epstein's behavior during a foot massage (staring, groaning) and whether the witness's chest was also massaged, contrasting her detailed account to the fund with what she allegedly told the government previously.
DOJ-OGR-00013756.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the cross-examination of witness A. Farmer. The questioning focuses on Farmer's application to a victims compensation fund, specifically regarding whether incidents of 'hand-holding' and 'caressing' in movie theaters in New York and New Mexico were categorized as sexual abuse. The prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) objects to the line of questioning, but is overruled by the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00013754.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named A. Farmer by an attorney, Ms. Menninger. The questioning focuses on the witness's awareness of the legal consequences of filing a fraudulent claim, specifically the penalties of perjury. An objection by another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, to a question about the witness's testimony is sustained by the court.
DOJ-OGR-00013750.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Witness A. Farmer is under cross-examination by Ms. Menninger regarding the distinction between being 'raped' versus 'sexually abused' after returning from Thailand. The questioning also establishes a timeline regarding the witness speaking to the government on May 9, 2020, and the opening of the Epstein Victims Compensation Fund in late June 2020. The defense introduces exhibit AF-12 to refresh the witness's memory.
DOJ-OGR-00013749.jpg
This document is a page from the cross-examination transcript of witness A. Farmer (Annie Farmer) in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The defense attorney, Ms. Menninger, questions Farmer about inconsistencies regarding whether she felt an 'erect penis' against her back during an encounter with a male subject (implied to be Epstein) and references a May 2020 government interview. The testimony also touches on conversations Farmer had with her mother about being 'not raped' after returning from trips to New Mexico and Thailand.
DOJ-OGR-00013745.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of witness A. Farmer (Annie Farmer) in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The defense attorney, Ms. Menninger, questions Farmer about the specifics of a massage given by Maxwell, specifically regarding physical contact with nipples and breast exposure. Farmer testifies that her entire breast was exposed and denies the defense's suggestion that she did not believe the encounter was explicitly sexual.
DOJ-OGR-00013744.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer. The questioning focuses on the witness's memory of being undressed during a massage administered by someone named Ghislaine. Farmer clarifies that her memory of not wearing a top is very clear, while her memory of wearing underwear is less certain, and she confirms her prior testimony that Ghislaine massaged her chest.
DOJ-OGR-00013743.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer. The questioning focuses on a massage incident where a person named Maxwell allegedly asked Farmer to undress, exposing her breast. The cross-examination highlights a potential inconsistency between Farmer's current testimony and a 2019 conversation she had with Mike Baker of The New York Times, specifically regarding her uncertainty at the time about whether she was wearing underwear during the massage.
DOJ-OGR-00013741.jpg
This is a page from the cross-examination transcript of witness A. Farmer (Annie Farmer) in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Defense attorney Ms. Menninger attempts to impeach the witness using a prior statement given to Mr. Baker of The New York Times regarding whether the witness was nude during a massage. The prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) objects, arguing the statement is not inconsistent, and the Court sustains the objection.
DOJ-OGR-00013739.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer. The questioning, conducted by Ms. Menninger, centers on a foot massage involving a Mr. Epstein and whether Ms. Farmer previously told the government she did not remember it being sexualized. Ms. Farmer clarifies that while she felt it was 'sexualized to some degree,' it did not involve inappropriate touching, and the exchange is marked by several sustained objections from another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz.
DOJ-OGR-00013738.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer, by an attorney, Ms. Menninger. The questioning centers on a meeting the witness had with prosecutors and FBI agents on May 9, 2020, where she was apparently questioned about her memory of a 'foot massage, being sexualized'. The transcript indicates the witness's attorney, Ms. McCauley, was also present at that 2020 meeting.
DOJ-OGR-00013735.jpg
This document is a transcript of a sidebar conference during the cross-examination of witness A. Farmer (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The defense (Ms. Menninger) attempts to introduce an August 2019 email from the witness to a New York Times reporter to impeach the witness's memory regarding the date of a 2007 meeting with the FBI. The defense argues this reflects on her ability to recall events from 1996, but the prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) objects on grounds of collateral matter/extrinsic evidence, and the Court sustains the objection.
Scheduling concerns
Asking if there are concerns regarding the Friday morning session plan.
Displaying Government Exhibit 604
Ms. Pomerantz asks Ms. Drescher to pull up Government Exhibit 604 for the witness, parties, and the Court.
Reliability and validity of psychological judgments on gr...
Rocchio answers questions about the concepts of validity and reliability in psychological science, specifically in the context of identifying grooming behaviors. Validity is measured by the overlap between victim and offender accounts, while reliability is measured by the agreement among professionals. Ms. Pomerantz then directs Rocchio to a specific page and section of a document.
Conferring
(Counsel confer) noted in transcript.
A peer-reviewed article from October 2020
Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio about an article he provided to the government, confirming its publication date, peer-review status, and the conclusions of the study regarding perpetrator behaviors.
Agreement with an article's conclusions
Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio about an article, focusing on a specific passage. Dr. Rocchio states that he does not agree with the article's conclusions and finds the specified text to be incomplete.
Professional Capacity
Questioning regarding duties as president-elect of the division of trauma psychology.
A peer-reviewed article from October 2020
Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio about an article he provided to the government, confirming its publication date, peer-review status, and the conclusions of the study regarding perpetrator behaviors.
Witness's professional qualifications in psychology
Ms. Pomerantz questions the witness, Rocchio, about their specialization in trauma psychology, leadership roles in professional organizations like the Rhode Island and American psychological associations, and how they maintain their expertise.
Audio volume
Instruction to speak into the microphone.
Grooming by proxy
Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio about their knowledge of the term 'grooming by proxy' in scientific or clinical literature.
Exhibit management
Discussion regarding providing binders and locating Tab 6 for the witness and judge.
Request for a lunch break
Ms. Pomerantz requests that the proceedings break for lunch and resume afterward.
Calling next witness
Ms. Pomerantz calls the witness 'Kate' on behalf of the government.
Allegations of sexual abuse against Epstein and the defen...
Ms. Pomerantz outlines the facts of the case, detailing the sexual abuse committed by Epstein against teenage girls and the defendant's alleged role as an essential accomplice who recruited, groomed, and facilitated the abuse.
Allegations of sexual abuse and recruitment against the d...
Ms. Pomerantz outlines the prosecution's case, alleging the defendant recruited multiple underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein and facilitated their sexual abuse at various locations, including New York, Florida, and New Mexico.
Direct examination of Dr. Lisa Rocchio's professional qua...
Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio about her profession as a clinical and forensic psychologist, the definitions of those fields, and her educational background from Emory University and the University of Rhode Island.
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.
Clarification on questioning a witness
Ms. Pomerantz asked for clarification about a planned line of questioning for a witness, initially believing it concerned an unsigned declaration involving the witness's ex-husband.
Basis of witness testimony and knowledge of the case
Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio, who confirms he has not interviewed witnesses, has no personal knowledge of the case facts, and that his testimony will not be based on information from this specific case. He also states he is being paid hourly for his time.
Relationship between Epstein and Maxwell; events at a ranch
Ms. Pomerantz questions the witness, A. Farmer, about her observations of the relationship between Epstein and Maxwell during a weekend at a ranch, and who was staying at the residence.
Explanation of a forensic practice
Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio, asking him to explain to the jury what a forensic practice entails. Dr. Rocchio describes being hired by attorneys to conduct psychological evaluations for various legal matters.
Relationship between Epstein and Maxwell; events at a ranch
Ms. Pomerantz questions the witness, A. Farmer, about her observations of the relationship between Epstein and Maxwell during a weekend at a ranch, and who was staying at the residence.
Opening Statement (Prosecution)
Ms. Pomerantz instructs the jury to pay attention to evidence, follow the judge's instructions, and use common sense to reach a guilty verdict for Ghislaine Maxwell.
Clarification of Dr. Rocchio's testimony regarding a thir...
Ms. Pomerantz addresses the court to state the government's understanding that the Court's opinion excluded Dr. Rocchio's opinion on the presence of a third party. She references a specific part of the transcript to distinguish this from the defense's concept of 'grooming by proxy'.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity