MS. POMERANTZ

Person
Mentions
906
Relationships
87
Events
370
Documents
441

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.
87 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person Dr. Rocchio
Legal representative
13 Very Strong
10
View
person Ms. Sternheim
Opposing counsel
12 Very Strong
11
View
person MR. PAGLIUCA
Opposing counsel
11 Very Strong
7
View
person A. Farmer
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
6
View
person A. Farmer
Professional
10 Very Strong
13
View
organization The Court
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
7
View
person Ms. Sternheim
Professional
10 Very Strong
7
View
organization The Court
Professional
10 Very Strong
61
View
organization The government
Representative
10 Very Strong
6
View
person Dr. Rocchio
Professional
10 Very Strong
8
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Professional
10 Very Strong
23
View
person MR. PAGLIUCA
Professional
10 Very Strong
5
View
person Mr. Flatley
Professional
10 Very Strong
10
View
person Mr. Everdell
Professional
9 Strong
4
View
person Mr. Flatley
Legal representative
9 Strong
5
View
person Kate
Legal representative
8 Strong
4
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Professional adversarial
8 Strong
4
View
person Mr. Everdell
Opposing counsel
8 Strong
4
View
person Flatley
Legal representative
8 Strong
4
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Opposing counsel
7
3
View
person Rocchio
Legal representative
7
3
View
person Kate
Professional
7
3
View
person MR. ROHRBACH
Professional
7
3
View
person Ms. Drescher
Professional
7
3
View
person DAVID JAMES MULLIGAN
Professional
7
2
View
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-00017924.jpg

This document is page 51 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It depicts the direct examination of expert witness Dr. Rocchio by Ms. Pomerantz regarding whether a 'groomer' is always the recipient of sexual gratification. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca objects to the questioning, the objection is sustained by the Court, and Ms. Pomerantz subsequently requests a sidebar conference.

Court transcript (trial proceedings)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00017922.jpg

This document is a transcript of a legal proceeding. Mr. Pagliuca objects to testimony, Ms. Pomerantz defends it, and the Court comments on the nature of the testimony in relation to Daubert standards.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00017909.jpg

This document is a transcript of a direct examination in a legal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Attorney Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio, who confirms he has no personal knowledge of the case facts, has not interviewed any witnesses, and that his testimony will not be based on specifics from this case. Dr. Rocchio also states he is being paid an hourly rate for his time preparing and testifying.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00017902.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. Attorney Ms. Pomerantz questions a witness, Dr. Rocchio, about the nature of his forensic practice. Dr. Rocchio explains that he is hired by attorneys to conduct psychological evaluations to assess mental health issues related to alleged abuse or to determine the role of mental health in criminal cases for sentencing purposes.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00017896.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing the beginning of the direct examination of Dr. Lisa Rocchio. Called as a witness by the Government, Dr. Rocchio, a clinical and forensic psychologist, is questioned by Ms. Pomerantz about her professional expertise and educational qualifications, including her degrees from Emory University and the University of Rhode Island.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00015034.jpg

This document is an 'Index of Examination' page from a court transcript filed on January 15, 2025, associated with Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It outlines the testimony of witness Lisa Rocchio, detailing page numbers for direct examination by Ms. Pomerantz and cross-examination by Mr. Pagliuca. It also lists Government Exhibits 1-5 and Defendant Exhibits A and B introduced during this testimony.

Court transcript index / case filing
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00015022.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript filed on January 15, 2025, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It details the cross-examination of a witness, Dr. Rocchio, concerning statistical data on Child Sexual Abuse (CSA) disclosure rates, specifically discussing a study where 50% of participants did not disclose abuse until after age 19. The transcript also captures administrative exchanges regarding exhibit binders and microphone usage between the attorneys (Pomerantz, Rohrbach, Pagliuca) and the Judge.

Court transcript / legal filing
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00015020.jpg

This is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca is cross-examining a witness named Rocchio regarding 'Government Exhibit 6,' a study analyzing delayed reporting of psychological issues. Pagliuca attempts to establish that the current case does not involve allegations of delayed reporting by males, leading to an objection by prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz on the grounds that the witness does not know the specific details of the case.

Court transcript (united states v. ghislaine maxwell)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00015019.jpg

This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on January 15, 2025. It documents the cross-examination of an expert witness named Rocchio by attorney Mr. Pagliuca regarding 'Exhibit 6,' a study on barriers to and facilitators of delayed disclosure in abuse cases. The witness defends their opinion as being based on the totality of their professional experience rather than a single article.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00015018.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on January 15, 2025. It details the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio regarding a 2016/2017 scientific article about the difficulty of identifying predatory behaviors and child molesters ahead of time. The dialogue includes a debate on 'hindsight bias' in characterizing grooming behaviors and concludes with the admission of Defendant's Exhibit B into evidence.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00015015.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on January 15, 2025. It depicts the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio by defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca regarding an article written in 2006 by Ms. Craven. The questioning focuses on the academic understanding of the term 'sexual grooming of children,' specifically highlighting a quote stating that the phenomenon is not clearly understood in the public domain.

Court transcript (cross-examination)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014978.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated January 15, 2025, featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. The questioning focuses on a phone call in April 2021 where Rocchio allegedly defined terms such as 'child,' 'sexual abuse,' and 'nonconsensual' to a group of Assistant US Attorneys (Comey, Moe, Pomerantz, Rohrbach). Rocchio states they do not specifically recall the definitions given or the context of the notes taken by the AUSAs.

Court transcript (cross-examination)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014973.jpg

Transcript page from the cross-examination of Dr. Rocchio in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Maxwell). The witness confirms possession of his engagement agreement and time logs, prompting defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca to request immediate production of the file. Prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz responds that the government has already fulfilled its Jencks Act obligations by producing notes from meetings and calls with the witness.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014971.jpg

This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on January 15, 2025. It captures the beginning of a cross-examination where counsel Mr. Pagliuca questions a witness, Dr. Rocchio, about the frequency of his meetings with the government. Dr. Rocchio acknowledges that he may have had around 14 contacts with the government in the past year, clarifying that this number would include telephone calls for scheduling.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014968.jpg

This document is page 92 of a court transcript (Document 782, filed 01/15/25) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It features the direct examination of an expert witness, Dr. Rocchio, by Ms. Pomerantz. The testimony focuses on statistical methodologies for tracking sexual abuse disclosure rates, comparing retrospective studies with real-time data (such as children with STDs), and confirms the expert's opinion that childhood sexual abuse creates higher risks for victims.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014955.jpg

This document is page 79 of a court transcript filed on January 15, 2025, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It features the direct examination of expert witness Dr. Rocchio by Ms. Pomerantz. Dr. Rocchio defines grooming as a pattern of coercive control and testifies that a relationship of trust between a victim and perpetrator causes the victim confusion regarding what constitutes abuse.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014949.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a case filed on January 15, 2025, showing the direct examination of a witness, Dr. Rocchio, by attorney Ms. Pomerantz. The questioning centers on the concept of 'grooming by proxy,' a term the witness is unfamiliar with in scientific literature. The judge intervenes to clarify the witness's expert opinion: that the presence of another individual can facilitate the sexual abuse of minors.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014944.jpg

This document is page 68 of a court transcript filed on January 15, 2025, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It features the direct examination of Dr. Rocchio by Ms. Pomerantz. The testimony focuses on expert analysis of 'Victim Selection' and the 'grooming process,' discussing scientific literature and professional agreement regarding behaviors used by offenders to build trust and attachment.

Court transcript (direct examination)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014943.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on January 15, 2025. It features the direct examination of an expert witness, Dr. Rocchio, by Ms. Pomerantz. The testimony focuses on the 'victim-selection model' as the first stage of grooming, discussing how offenders choose victims based on specific vulnerability factors established by professional literature and offender interviews.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014936.jpg

This document is a court transcript page from a case filed on January 15, 2025, containing the direct examination of Dr. Rocchio. Dr. Rocchio testifies about the tactics of grooming for sexual abuse, explaining how offenders manipulate children to build trust and attachment. He highlights the similarity between grooming behaviors in literature and his own clinical and forensic experience, and describes the resulting psychological harm to victims, including confusion, self-blame, and shame.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014934.jpg

This page is a transcript from the direct examination of Dr. Rocchio in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The government moves to admit 'Government Exhibit 5,' an article written by Park Dietz, which is accepted without objection. Dr. Rocchio explains that he provided this article to the government to clarify the concepts of 'grooming' and 'seduction' as established patterns in sexual abuse dynamics, noting specifically how older literature often used terminology that victim-blamed.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014930.jpg

This page contains a transcript of the direct examination of Dr. Rocchio by Ms. Pomerantz in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Dr. Rocchio provides expert testimony refuting an older article's conclusion that there is no consensus on 'grooming,' arguing that while universal agreement on every detail is rare in social science, there is definite scientific consensus on the phenomena of grooming and child sexual abuse.

Court transcript (direct examination)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014929.jpg

This document is a court transcript from January 15, 2025, capturing the direct examination of a witness named Rocchio by Ms. Pomerantz. Rocchio explains the psychological concepts of validity and reliability as they apply to identifying grooming behaviors, defining validity by the consistency between victim and offender reports and reliability by the consensus among professionals. The examination concludes with Ms. Pomerantz directing the witness to a specific section of another document.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014928.jpg

This document is a court transcript from January 15, 2025, detailing the direct examination of a witness, Dr. Rocchio, by an attorney, Ms. Pomerantz. Dr. Rocchio is questioned about an article and states that he disagrees with its conclusions. He specifically identifies a highlighted portion of the text as being incomplete.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014926.jpg

This document is an excerpt from a legal transcript, dated January 15, 2025, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It features testimony, likely a direct examination by Rocchio, discussing a study on 'grooming' behaviors, including stages like gaining access, isolation, and trust development. The testimony validates the study's empirical approach to understanding and modeling the grooming process.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
56
As Recipient
4
Total
60

Displaying Government Exhibit 604

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Ms. Drescher"]

Ms. Pomerantz asks Ms. Drescher to pull up Government Exhibit 604 for the witness, parties, and the Court.

Court testimony
N/A

Scheduling concerns

From: THE COURT
To: MS. POMERANTZ

Asking if there are concerns regarding the Friday morning session plan.

Court proceeding
N/A

A peer-reviewed article from October 2020

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Dr. Rocchio"]

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.

Court testimony
2025-01-15

Conferring

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: co-counsel

(Counsel confer) noted in transcript.

In-court discussion
2025-01-15

Grooming by proxy

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Dr. Rocchio"]

Ms. Pomerantz questions Dr. Rocchio about their knowledge of the term 'grooming by proxy' in scientific or clinical literature.

Court testimony
2025-01-15

Agreement with an article's conclusions

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Dr. Rocchio"]

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.

Court testimony
2025-01-15

Professional Capacity

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: Rocchio

Questioning regarding duties as president-elect of the division of trauma psychology.

Courtroom dialogue
2025-01-15

A peer-reviewed article from October 2020

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Dr. Rocchio"]

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.

Court testimony
2025-01-15

Reliability and validity of psychological judgments on gr...

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Rocchio"]

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.

Testimony / direct examination
2025-01-15

Witness's professional qualifications in psychology

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: Rocchio

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.

Court testimony
2025-01-15

Exhibit management

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: THE COURT

Discussion regarding providing binders and locating Tab 6 for the witness and judge.

Meeting
2025-01-15

Audio volume

From: THE COURT
To: MS. POMERANTZ

Instruction to speak into the microphone.

Courtroom dialogue
2025-01-15

Identification of Government Exhibits 418 and 418R

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Mr. Flatley"]

Ms. Pomerantz questions the witness, Mr. Flatley, to establish his recognition and the authenticity of Government Exhibits 418 and 418R. Mr. Flatley confirms he recognizes them, that they were printed from 'Government 54', and that they are a true and accurate copy.

Court testimony
2022-08-10

Request for a lunch break

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["The Court"]

Ms. Pomerantz requests that the proceedings break for lunch and resume afterward.

Court dialogue
2022-08-10

Calling next witness

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["The Court"]

Ms. Pomerantz calls the witness 'Kate' on behalf of the government.

Court dialogue
2022-08-10

Cross-examination

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Ms. Espinosa"]

Ms. Pomerantz begins her cross-examination of the witness, Ms. Espinosa.

Court testimony
2022-08-10

Allegations of sexual abuse against Epstein and the defen...

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: Court/Jury

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.

Opening statement
2022-08-10

First meeting with Jeffrey Epstein

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Annie"]

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.

Court testimony
2022-08-10

Explanation of a forensic practice

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Dr. Rocchio"]

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.

Court testimony
2022-08-10

Direct examination of Dr. Lisa Rocchio's professional qua...

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["Lisa Rocchio"]

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.

Court testimony
2022-08-10

Clarification on questioning a witness

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["THE COURT", "MS. STE...

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.

Court proceeding dialogue
2022-08-10

Allegations of sexual abuse and recruitment against the d...

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: Court (Ladies and gent...

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.

Opening statement (court proceeding)
2022-08-10

Relationship between Epstein and Maxwell; events at a ranch

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["A. Farmer"]

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.

Court testimony
2022-08-10

Basis of witness testimony and knowledge of the case

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: Dr. Rocchio

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.

Court testimony
2022-08-10

Relationship between Epstein and Maxwell; events at a ranch

From: MS. POMERANTZ
To: ["A. Farmer"]

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.

Court testimony
2022-08-10

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity