Trove
Sign In Sign Up

Ms. Sternheim

Person
Mentions
877
Relationships
86
Events
390
Documents
429
Search

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.
86 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
organization The Court
Legal representative
19 Very Strong
25
View
person Mr. Everdell
Co counsel
13 Very Strong
11
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Client
13 Very Strong
11
View
person Ms. Comey
Opposing counsel
12 Very Strong
10
View
person MS. POMERANTZ
Opposing counsel
12 Very Strong
11
View
person Kate
Professional
10 Very Strong
6
View
person MR. ROHRBACH
Professional
10 Very Strong
14
View
person Judge
Professional
10 Very Strong
13
View
organization The Court
Professional
10 Very Strong
116
View
person MS. POMERANTZ
Professional
10 Very Strong
7
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Professional
10 Very Strong
8
View
person Ms. Moe
Professional
10 Very Strong
13
View
person Mr. Everdell
Professional
10 Very Strong
6
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Professional
10 Very Strong
6
View
person MR. PAGLIUCA
Professional
10 Very Strong
5
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Client
9 Strong
5
View
person Ms. Moe
Professional adversarial
9 Strong
5
View
person Ms. Comey
Professional
9 Strong
5
View
person Loftus
Legal representative
8 Strong
4
View
person MR. ROHRBACH
Opposing counsel
8 Strong
4
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Legal representative
8 Strong
4
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Professional
8 Strong
4
View
person Gill Velez
Professional
7
3
View
person MR. PAGLIUCA
Co counsel
7
3
View
person Ms. Conrad
Professional
7
2
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
N/A N/A Court proceeding regarding trial schedule, closing arguments, and jury deliberation timing relati... Courtroom View
N/A N/A Court Recess pending verdict Courtroom View
N/A N/A Court proceeding sidebar or argument regarding courtroom logistics and COVID protocols. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Opening statement by Ms. Sternheim defending Ghislaine Maxwell Open Court View
N/A N/A Discussion regarding three missing jurors who are stuck on the security line or unaccounted for o... Courtroom View
N/A N/A Court hearing regarding upcoming sentencing and review of the presentence report. Courtroom (Southern District) View
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 Examination of witness 'Kate' Courtroom View
N/A N/A Reading of Jury Note regarding Count Four Courtroom View
N/A N/A Examination of Janine Gill Velez Courtroom View
N/A N/A Reading of Jury Note Courtroom View
N/A N/A Cross-examination of witness 'Kate' regarding exhibits 3513-014. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Discussion regarding jury deliberation schedule and closing arguments Courtroom View
N/A N/A Sentencing hearing where the judge discusses factors for punishment. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Court proceedings discussing jury instructions and a question from the jury regarding Count Four. Courtroom View
N/A Trial Discussion of the trial schedule. The defense case is set to begin on the 16th. Courtroom View
N/A Legal proceeding Closing arguments are anticipated for the 20th or 21st. Courtroom 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 proceeding A court hearing to discuss the schedule for jury deliberations. Courtroom View
N/A Court examination Cross-examination of DAVID JAMES MULLIGAN by Ms. Sternheim, starting on page 2242. N/A View
N/A Future court hearing The court scheduled the next session for the 23rd of the month. Courtroom View
N/A Trial An upcoming trial that Ms. Sternheim is scheduled to start on the 16th of the month. Unspecified View
N/A Court proceeding Examination of witness KATE, including direct, cross, redirect, and recross. N/A View
N/A Court proceeding The judge discusses jury deliberation scheduling with counsel, sends a note to the jury, takes a ... Courtroom (implied) View
N/A Court examination Cross-examination of witness DANIEL ALAN BESSELSEN by Ms. Sternheim. N/A View

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.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018460.jpg

This document is a court transcript from an afternoon session on August 10, 2022. An attorney, Ms. Moe, confirms with the court and opposing counsel, Mr. Everdell, an agreement regarding the '900 series' of exhibits. Following this, another attorney, Ms. Sternheim, begins to make a request for the court to order the government to disclose certain information.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018455.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed 08/10/22) documenting the cross-examination of a witness named Kate by Ms. Sternheim. The questioning focuses on Kate's immigration status, specifically her request to the government for a 'U visa' (often used for victims of crimes assisting law enforcement) and the renewability of her current 'exceptional' visa. Kate confirms she met with the government approximately 10 times to prepare for her testimony and requested an inquiry into the U visa.

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

DOJ-OGR-00018453.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate by an attorney, Ms. Sternheim. Ms. Sternheim introduces an exhibit labeled 'Defendant's K9' and questions Kate, directing her to find and confirm her 'true name' within the document.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018452.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning focuses on whether Kate has applied for a U visa, a special visa for victims who assist the government. Kate states she made an inquiry but is unsure if she filled out an application and explicitly denies wanting the U visa.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018444.jpg

This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of a witness named Kate in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The witness admits to initiating contact with Jeffrey Epstein in 2011, asking to stay with him in New York, and maintaining contact with him via email over the years. Conversely, the witness confirms she had no email correspondence with Ghislaine Maxwell.

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

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.

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

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'.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018436.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022, featuring the cross-examination of a witness named 'Kate' by Ms. Sternheim. The questioning focuses on a past custody dispute, allegations of planting drugs (which are denied), and the witness's 'acquaintanceship' with a man connected to the Royal Family during the late 1990s, specifically mentioning an interaction at the Cannes Film Festival.

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

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'.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018417.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate by an attorney, Ms. Sternheim. The questioning focuses on Kate's past acting career, specifically her roles as an extra. The examination is interrupted by a procedural issue when Ms. Sternheim refers to an exhibit, 'defense K7', which is missing from the binders of both the witness and the judge.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018410.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate by a lawyer, Ms. Sternheim. The questioning focuses on Kate's prior testimony about admiring a person named Ghislaine and probes into the wealth of her family, specifically her mother and her stepfather, who owned a private plane.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018409.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a sidebar discussion regarding '3500 material' where a prosecutor argues for the right to ask redirect questions about a witness's history as a domestic violence victim if defense attorney Ms. Sternheim raises the issue. The judge agrees, the witness is recalled, and the jury is brought back in.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018407.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a procedural discussion before the direct examination of a witness named Kate. Counsel, Ms. Sternheim, requests a sidebar with the Judge to address matters concerning the witness's anonymity status. The Court agrees, and the subsequent pages of the transcript are sealed.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018401.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness named Kate. She explains that she continued to communicate with an individual named Epstein throughout her twenties and early thirties, maintaining a 'friendly' tone. Kate states her reasons for doing so were fear of disengaging and a reluctance to acknowledge past events, and that she eventually stopped communicating with him in her early thirties.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018389.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness named Kate. Kate testifies that Ghislaine Maxwell told her about Jeffrey Epstein's sexual preferences, stating he liked 'cute, young, pretty' girls and that he 'needed to have sex about three times a day'. This testimony suggests Maxwell's role in communicating Epstein's sexual demands and grooming potential victims.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00016909.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a portion of a trial. The transcript captures the conclusion of the government's case, as confirmed by Ms. Comey, and the subsequent colloquy between the judge and the defendant, Ms. Maxwell. The judge formally advises Ms. Maxwell of her right to testify or not to testify, stressing that the decision is hers alone, despite any advice from her attorneys.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00016896.jpg

This document is page 167 of a court transcript (Document 763) filed on August 10, 2022, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The page captures the moment a recess is called immediately after Ms. Sternheim acknowledges a statement regarding a 'right to testify or not testify.' The majority of the page is blank as the proceedings continued on the next page.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00016880.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between a judge and several attorneys (Menninger, Everdell, Sternheim, and Moe). The discussion clarifies that a 'short matter' scheduled for the following Monday is the testimony of a witness from London. A potential issue is raised by Ms. Moe, who states that the witness's name was not on the witness list provided to the government.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source
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
55
As Recipient
5
Total
60

Cross-examination

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: Kate

Questioning regarding fund application vetting for fraud.

Court testimony
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Admissibility of lawyers as witnesses

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: ["The Court"]

A discussion between Ms. Sternheim and the Judge about whether lawyers who attended proffer sessions can be called as witnesses or if their testimony can be referenced.

Court dialogue
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Request for a sidebar

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: ["The Court"]

Ms. Sternheim requests a sidebar to discuss matters related to a witness with anonymity status.

Court proceeding dialogue
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Admissibility of Evidence

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Discussion regarding Exhibits 823 (employment notice) and 824 (insurance document) concerning Sky Roberts.

Court proceeding
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Proffer of Expert Witness

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Sternheim requests that Loftus be recognized as an expert in memory science; Judge agrees subject to prior rulings.

Meeting
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Redirect examination

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: Professor Loftus

Asking if testimony would differ if called by the government.

Courtroom testimony
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Exhibit Identification

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: MS. POMERANTZ

Exchange regarding identifying exhibit K-8 / 3513-019.

Meeting
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Admissibility of Insurance Records

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Argument regarding whether insurance forms constitute business records and what inferences can be drawn regarding Virginia Roberts.

Meeting
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Basis for introducing evidence

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Ms. Sternheim refers to "The papers that we filed last night" which state the basis for seeking to introduce certain evidence.

Legal filing
2022-08-09
Communication Source

Rule 29 Motion

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Defense renews motion pursuant to Rule 29 (Motion for Judgment of Acquittal).

Court proceeding
2021-12-18
Communication Source

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search