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 | Direct examination of Stephen Flatley | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court testimony (Redirect Examination) of Annie Farmer in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Cross-examination of Dr. Rocchio in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court testimony (Redirect of witness Loftus) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Courtroom (implied Southern... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court proceedings in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court proceedings in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Discussion concerns the a... | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Opening statement filed/recorded in court. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court proceeding: Cross-examination of Annie Farmer. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court hearing regarding redaction disputes in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court filing date for the transcript of the trial proceedings in US v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court testimony in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court testimony regarding the authentication and content of documents found in the investigation. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court filing of transcript for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell context). | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court testimony filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Cross-examination of witness A. Farmer regarding a journal submitted as evidence. | Courtroom (SDNY) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court proceeding in Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Cross-examination of... | Southern District (implied ... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Direct examination of witness Kate in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (US v. Maxwell). | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court hearing/trial cross-examination | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court testimony of witness Loftus regarding memory science. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Direct examination of Mr. Flatley regarding forensic evidence. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Start of Direct Examination of Michael William Aznaran | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court proceedings in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Conclusion of Professor Loftus's testimony | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court proceedings in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Maxwell). | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Cross-examination of witness A. Farmer during trial. | Courtroom | 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.
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