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 | N/A | Court testimony in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Expert witness Lo... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court hearing regarding the admissibility of photographic evidence and witness anonymity protocols. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court recess during the cross-examination of A. Farmer. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Sidebar conference during court proceedings (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court redirect examination of A. Farmer. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Filing of Document 741 (Transcript of Opening Statement) | Court (Southern District) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Direct examination of Elizabeth Loftus in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxw... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court filing of document from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Maxwell). | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion during a court case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE) about the scope of cross-examination. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness Loftus regarding the nature of memory studies they have conducted. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court filing date of the transcript containing the testimony. | Southern District of New Yo... | 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 |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Direct examination of Mr. Flatley regarding metadata in Word documents, specifically Government E... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Direct examination of witness Loftus regarding the nature of memory, trauma, and confidence. | Courtroom (implied) | 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 | Meeting | The attorneys agree to confer to narrow the issues regarding prior inconsistent statements. | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Legal proceeding | A cross-examination during which Ms. Pomerantz argues for the relevance of a witness's experiment... | Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | An opening statement by Ms. Sternheim in the trial of Ghislaine, where she argues that her client... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Cross-examination | Cross-examination of Kate regarding money for therapy and her acquaintance with Ray Hamilton. | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Cross-examination of witness Flatley regarding the location of a desktop computer used to create ... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Direct examination of a witness named Flatley by an attorney named Ms. Pomerantz regarding Govern... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Direct examination of Ms. Espinosa in open court. | In open court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Identification of Government Exhibit 16 (GX16) | 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 | Court testimony | Cross-examination of witness Kate regarding her involvement in a publicized scandal. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
DOJ-OGR-00018443.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It features the cross-examination of a witness named Kate, who admits to initiating email contact with Jeffrey Epstein to arrange a meeting and asking to stay at his residence in New York. Ms. Pomerantz objects to several lines of questioning during the proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00018442.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. It details the cross-examination of a witness named 'Kate' by defense attorney Ms. Sternheim. The questioning focuses on establishing that the witness maintained email correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein in 2008 (regarding pictures) and in 2011, even after he had been in jail.
DOJ-OGR-00018441.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning, led by Ms. Sternheim, focuses on Kate's correspondence with Jeffrey Epstein while he was in jail. Kate confirms the correspondence, admits she told Epstein she would send pictures (but denies actually sending them), and confirms she signed her letters with 'Best love always, Kate'.
DOJ-OGR-00018438.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning focuses on her involvement in an embarrassing event that was reported in the paper, an alleged payment of £40,000 which she denies receiving, and a recorded conversation she had with a male acquaintance about obtaining drugs that was publicized in a British tabloid.
DOJ-OGR-00018433.jpg
This document is a court transcript of a sidebar discussion from a trial, filed on August 10, 2022. During the cross-examination of a witness named Kate, defense attorney Ms. Sternheim is questioned by the judge about the relevance of asking about the witness leaving her husband to travel with Ghislaine and Jeffrey Epstein. Opposing counsel, Ms. Pomerantz, objects to the line of questioning, arguing it is suggestive and should have been raised as a '412 issue'.
DOJ-OGR-00018432.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning focuses on an incident where Kate missed a flight from the US to London, met a man named Kevin, and went to his home. The prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) objects to this line of questioning on grounds of relevance, leading the judge to call for a sidebar.
DOJ-OGR-00018425.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 her participation in a chat group with other women who claimed abuse by Jeffrey Epstein, her contact with Virginia Roberts, and whether they share the same attorney, Bradley Edwards. An attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, successfully objects to a line of questioning on the grounds of hearsay.
DOJ-OGR-00018423.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning establishes a timeline of events following the death of Jeffrey Epstein: Kate made a public statement in a courthouse at the invitation of Judge Berman, met with the government for the first time on that same day, and subsequently appeared on television. The transcript also confirms that during her public statement, Kate spoke about Jeffrey Epstein but not about Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00018418.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate by an attorney, Ms. Sternheim. The questioning concerns Kate's filmography, referencing specific numbered items on a list and the IMDB system. An objection for lack of foundation is made by another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, which the court sustains.
DOJ-OGR-00018411.jpg
This document is page 74 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The testimony establishes that Kate grew up in the wealthy Belgravia section of London, very close to 44 Kinnerton Street, where Ghislaine Maxwell lived. The questioning also touches on Kate's mother's beauty and the attention she received.
DOJ-OGR-00018408.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a sidebar discussion where a judge rules to exclude evidence of a single sexual harassment allegation due to a lack of a pattern or proffer of falsity. Following the ruling, two attorneys, Ms. Pomerantz and Ms. Sternheim, discuss a planned line of questioning for a witness. Ms. Sternheim clarifies her intent is not to ask about the witness's ex-husband, but rather to ask if the witness had requested a friend to plant drugs on the father of her child.
DOJ-OGR-00018406.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Kate. The witness testifies that she does not plan to sue Maxwell, is not expecting more money from Epstein and Maxwell, and has no financial stake in the outcome of the current trial. After the questioning concludes, the court announces a morning break.
DOJ-OGR-00018400.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the direct examination of a witness named Kate. Kate testifies that when she was 23 or 24, Ghislaine Maxwell invited her to 'the island' and asked her to massage Jeffrey Epstein, confirming that sexualized massages took place. She also recalls seeing a very young blond girl on the island and states that she initially associated with Maxwell and Epstein because she sought a friendship with Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00018374.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 Kate by Ms. Pomerantz regarding a visit to a townhouse in Belgravia owned by Ghislaine Maxwell. The witness describes seeing numerous silver-framed photographs of Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, noting specifically that in many photos, Maxwell was looking at Epstein while he looked at the camera.
DOJ-OGR-00018365.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It portrays the Judge instructing the jury that the current witness is not a victim of the crimes charged in the indictment and that testimony regarding sexual conduct with Jeffrey Epstein should not be used to judge the character or propensity of Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell. Additionally, the Judge orders courtroom sketch artists not to draw the exact likeness of witnesses testifying under pseudonyms to protect their anonymity.
DOJ-OGR-00016387.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 her public identity as a 'survivor of sexual abuse,' her participation in legal proceedings related to a 'Mr. Epstein,' and her association with other accusers and her attorneys at events like press conferences. The witness confirms these activities.
DOJ-OGR-00016382.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer. The questioning focuses on the consistency of her statements regarding alleged incidents in New York and New Mexico, and specifically probes the details she provided to a victims compensation fund about a foot massage involving Mr. Epstein. The witness confirms submitting a narrative claim and affirms the general details of the incidents while not recalling the exact words used.
DOJ-OGR-00016374.jpg
This document is a page of a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer. An attorney, Ms. Menninger, questions Farmer about potential inconsistencies in her statements to the government and her mother regarding an alleged sexual assault, specifically about feeling an erect penis and whether she said she was "not raped". Another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, repeatedly objects to the line of questioning, and the court sustains the objections.
DOJ-OGR-00016371.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, documenting the cross-examination of witness A. Farmer by Ms. Menninger. The questioning focuses on a prior statement Farmer made to government agents on May 9, 2020, regarding a massage involving Epstein; the defense attempts to establish that Farmer previously characterized the event as 'awkward and uncomfortable' but 'not explicitly sexual,' which the witness disputes as being the agents' notes rather than her exact words. The witness confirms she felt Epstein could see her during the massage.
DOJ-OGR-00016370.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 a massage performed by someone named Ghislaine, with the witness stating her entire breast was exposed and refuting the suggestion that the massage was not explicitly sexual. Attorneys Ms. Pomerantz and Ms. Menninger are present, with the former making objections and the latter conducting the examination.
DOJ-OGR-00016367.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 centers on a statement Farmer gave to Mr. Baker of The New York Times in August 2019 regarding her state of dress during a massage. Another attorney, Ms. Pomerantz, makes an objection which is overruled by the court.
DOJ-OGR-00016366.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Menninger is cross-examining witness A. Farmer regarding potential inconsistencies between her testimony about being nude during a massage and statements she made to Mr. Baker of The New York Times. The prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) objects to the line of questioning, and the Judge sustains the objection, ruling it is not a prior inconsistent statement.
DOJ-OGR-00016364.jpg
This document is a transcript page from the cross-examination of witness A. Farmer in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The questioning focuses on a specific interaction involving a foot massage given by Jeffrey Epstein, whether the witness recalled it being sexualized at the time she spoke to the government in May 2020, and whether any private body parts were touched. The witness clarifies that while there was no touching of private parts, she considered the interaction sexualized.
DOJ-OGR-00016363.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. It features the cross-examination of witness A. Farmer by Ms. Menninger regarding a prior interview with the government and FBI on May 9, 2020. The questioning focuses on whether the witness previously stated that a specific 'foot massage' was not sexualized.
DOJ-OGR-00016360.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a sidebar conversation between a judge and two attorneys, Ms. Pomerantz and Ms. Menninger. They are arguing over the relevance of an August 2019 email in which the witness, A. Farmer, recounts her memory of a 2007 meeting with the FBI. Ms. Menninger argues it tests the witness's memory regarding events in 1996, but the judge ultimately sustains an objection, ruling the evidence is 'two steps removed' and irrelevant.
Displaying Government Exhibit 604
Ms. Pomerantz asks Ms. Drescher to pull up Government Exhibit 604 for the witness, parties, and the Court.
Scheduling concerns
Asking if there are concerns regarding the Friday morning session plan.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Redirect Examination
Questioning regarding memory of abuse and reliance on documentation.
Topics for cross-examination
Conferred with defense counsel regarding topics for cross-examination of Dr. Rocchio.
Cross-examination
Ms. Pomerantz begins her cross-examination of the witness, Ms. Espinosa.
Direct Examination
Questions regarding Flatley's background, role in CART, and experience.
Clarification on Detective Byrne
Disputing a representation regarding Detective Byrne and noting tech support was available.
Questioning about Jeffrey Epstein's actions
Ms. Pomerantz asks the witness, A. Farmer (Annie), to describe what Jeffrey Epstein did when he got into bed with her. This follows objections from Ms. Menninger which were overruled by the court.
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.
Scheduling and Scope of Cross-Examination
Ms. Pomerantz asks about the timing for the next witness and flags an issue regarding 'hindsight bias' questions being asked of a lay witness who happens to be a psychologist.
CBP Record Keeping
Questioning regarding whether CBP records in the 1990s were paper and if they were logged in systems prior to 9/11.
Diary entry from January 25, 1996
Ms. Pomerantz questions the witness, Annie (A. Farmer), about a diary entry dated January 25, 1996, and asks her to read it to the jury. The entry details the witness's activities in New York.
Direct Examination
Questioning regarding metadata dates and titles of Government Exhibits 420, 418R, and 418B.
Redirect Examination
Questioning regarding Epstein's actions in bed and previous cross-examination questions about his penis.
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.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity