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.

Event Timeline

Interactive Timeline: Hover over events to see details. Events are arranged chronologically and alternate between top and bottom for better visibility.
86 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person Professor Loftus
Legal representative
7
3
View
person Elizabeth Loftus
Legal representative
6
2
View
person Mulligan
Professional
6
2
View
organization GOVERNMENT
Professional
6
2
View
person Unnamed witness
Legal representative
6
2
View
person Elizabeth Loftus
Professional
6
1
View
person Kate
Legal representative
6
2
View
person Loftus
Professional
6
2
View
person Ms. Moe
Opposing counsel
6
2
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Co counsel implied
6
2
View
person Jury
Legal representative
5
1
View
person MR. ROHRBACH
Legal representative
5
1
View
person Ghislaine
Legal representative
5
1
View
person Ms. Lundberg
Business associate
5
1
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Business associate
5
1
View
organization Defense
Representation
5
1
View
person DAVID JAMES MULLIGAN
Legal representative
5
1
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Co counsel defense
5
1
View
person THE WITNESS (Loftus)
Professional
5
1
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Defense counsel implied
5
1
View
person Dr. Loftus
Legal representative
5
1
View
person MS. POMERANTZ
Adversarial professional
5
1
View
organization The government
Legal representative
5
1
View
person Mr. Hamilton
Legal representative
5
1
View
person Judge
Legal representative
5
1
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
2022-08-22 N/A Sentencing Hearing for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Courtroom (Southern Distric... View
2022-08-22 N/A Court filing date of the transcript document. Southern District of New York View
2022-08-10 N/A Courtroom discussion regarding logistics of presenting evidence on screens. Courtroom (Southern District) View
2022-08-10 N/A Filing of court document 761 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Court View
2022-08-10 N/A Discussion of Exhibits 823 and 824 Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Trial Resumed Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court proceedings in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Recess pending verdict Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Discussion on Deliberation Schedule Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Filing date of the court transcript document. Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court Recess Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court proceedings in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (US v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Discussion regarding witne... Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court hearing regarding opening statements and admissibility of arguments about witness coaching. Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Conclusion of testimony for witness 'Kate'. Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court filing date for the transcript document. Southern District of New Yo... View
2022-08-10 N/A Direct examination of Professor Loftus in court regarding memory stages. Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court filing of transcript Court View
2022-08-10 N/A Filing of Document 741 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. Court View
2022-08-10 N/A Court proceeding regarding jury selection procedure (alternating strikes). Courtroom (Southern Distric... View
2022-08-10 N/A Closing Arguments (Summation Phase) Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court proceedings (Direct examination of Parkinson) Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court proceedings without the jury present. Discussion regarding the provision of transcripts to ... Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court proceeding regarding jury charges and closing arguments. Courtroom View
2022-08-10 N/A Court hearing regarding Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Discussion of evidence... Southern District Court View
2022-08-10 Legal proceeding Opening statement delivered by Ms. Sternheim in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. courtroom View

DOJ-OGR-00011600.jpg

This document is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, capturing a defense attorney's argument during a sentencing hearing. The attorney, Ms. Sternheim, asks the Court for a sentence below the recommended guidelines, arguing the government's request is disproportionate and that the more culpable Jeffrey Epstein would have faced the same sentencing guidelines as her client, Ghislaine Maxwell.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011598.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript filed on July 22, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. A victim, Ms. Stein, delivers a powerful impact statement describing how Maxwell's actions affected her for 25 years and calls for Maxwell to be imprisoned. Following the statement, another individual, Ms. Sternheim, addresses the court to speak to the victims.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011574.jpg

This is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, detailing a procedural discussion about the order of statements. Counsel Ms. Moe asks the judge if victims should speak before or after the main parties. The judge clarifies the intended sequence is government, victims, defense counsel, and then Ms. Maxwell, to which all parties present agree before the court takes a luncheon recess.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011523.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated July 22, 2022, involving Ms. Sternheim (defense) and Ms. Moe (government). The proceedings cover administrative confirmations of filings on ECF and a substantive discussion regarding the government's compliance with the 'Justice For All Act.' Specifically, Ms. Moe confirms that the government has notified six victims, proven at trial to be impacted, about the upcoming sentencing and their right to be heard.

Court transcript
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

Witness Testimony Objection

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Discussing objections to the relevance of testimony from upcoming witnesses called out of order.

Dialogue
N/A
Communication Source

Scheduling concerns

From: THE COURT
To: Ms. Sternheim

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

Court proceeding
N/A
Communication Source

Confidentiality for Ms. Conrad's testimony

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

A letter submitted by Ms. Sternheim regarding Ms. Conrad's confidentiality, medical conditions, disciplinary proceedings, and intention to assert her Fifth Amendment right.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Format inquiry

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Inquiring if a specific format was satisfactory.

Courtroom dialogue
N/A
Communication Source

Checking on Mr. Hamilton's availability

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: Mr. Hamilton

The Court instructs Ms. Sternheim to 'make that call' to check on Mr. Hamilton's availability, and she confirms she is doing so.

Phone call
N/A
Communication Source

Witness's positive COVID test

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

A letter was apparently sent to the Court, mentioned by the judge, which stated that Ms. Sternheim's side had the witness's positive COVID test result.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Sentencing Arguments

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Argument regarding sentencing guidelines, probation recommendations, and culpability comparison between Maxwell and Epstein.

Court proceeding
2023-06-29
Communication Source

Request to speak

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Request to stand at the podium and address the victims directly.

Meeting
2023-06-29
Communication Source

Sentencing and Fines

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Discussion regarding the imposition of a fine, the status of a bequest in a will, and the formal imposition of the sentence.

Meeting
2023-06-29
Communication Source

Sentencing of Ms. Maxwell

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: ["THE COURT", "Judge N...

Ms. Sternheim addresses the court during Ms. Maxwell's sentencing. She acknowledges the victims, confirms the judge can hear her, and begins to argue against the government's sentencing recommendation.

Courtroom dialogue
2023-06-29
Communication Source

Sentencing Arguments

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Defense argues for a lower sentence, citing the probation department's recommendation and comparing Maxwell's culpability to Epstein's.

Meeting
2022-08-22
Communication Source

Opening Statement

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Ms. Sternheim describes the circumstances of Annie's meetings with Epstein in New York and Ghislaine in Santa Fe when Annie was 16.

Court testimony
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Defense opening statement in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: Jury/Court

The defense lawyer argues that the case is about Epstein's conduct, not Maxwell's, and that the government's case relies on four accusers whose memories are corrupted and motivated by money.

Opening statement
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Objection to closing argument statement

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

Ms. Sternheim argues that a statement made by Ms. Moe during closing arguments is incorrect. The statement claimed that a massage table from California affects interstate commerce, which Ms. Sternheim disputes as an inaccurate application of the law.

Court dialogue
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Request for a sidebar

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: ["Judge"]

Ms. Sternheim requests to raise an issue at sidebar with the Judge, and the Judge agrees.

Courtroom dialogue
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Court proceedings

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

Ms. Sternheim responds to the Court's questions and begins to address the Court on a matter before being instructed to use the microphone.

Courtroom dialogue
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Pending redaction issues

From: Ms. Moe
To: Ms. Sternheim

Ms. Moe informed the court that she had spoken with Ms. Sternheim that morning about the redaction issues being discussed.

Spoken conversation
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Cross-examination of Gill Velez

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: ["Gill Velez"]

Ms. Sternheim questions Gill Velez about her employment history with a property management company and her lack of personal knowledge regarding a document dated 2000, as she only started working there in 2007.

Court testimony
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Cross-examination regarding exhibit 'Defendant's K9'

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: ["Kate", "THE COURT"]

Ms. Sternheim questions the witness, Kate, about an exhibit marked 'Defendant's K9'. She directs Kate to a specific part of the document to identify her 'true name'.

Court testimony
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Opening Statement (Defense)

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: Members of the jury

Ms. Sternheim begins her opening statement for the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell, by arguing that women are often unfairly blamed for men's actions and that Maxwell is not Jeffrey Epstein, despite the charges relating to his conduct.

Courtroom statement
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Defense's argument against the credibility of accusers an...

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: Court/Jury (implied)

Ms. Sternheim argues that the government's case lacks substantive evidence and relies on the thin, uncorroborated stories of four accusers. She suggests the accusers' testimonies are unreliable, having been influenced by lawyers, media, and the prospect of large financial rewards from the Epstein fund.

Opening statement
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Relevance objection

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

Ms. Sternheim objects to evidence based on relevance and foundation as a business record.

Court dialogue
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Opening statement regarding 'Annie'

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Ms. Sternheim describes Annie's meetings with Epstein in New York and Ghislaine in Santa Fe when Annie was 16, asserting that nothing criminal occurred and she was above the age of consent in New Mexico.

Court testimony
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Evidentiary objection regarding witness credibility

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

A dialogue between Ms. Sternheim and the Court regarding the legal basis for an objection to testimony. The Court argues that since Ms. Sternheim's side attacked a witness's credibility regarding her upbringing, the opposing side can bring in evidence to support it. The Court presses Ms. Sternheim for the specific rule (e.g., Relevance, 403) underpinning her objection.

Courtroom dialogue
2022-08-10
Communication Source

Relevance of a question

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

Ms. Sternheim argues that the question is relevant because it sheds light on the witness's knowledge of what other accusers are doing.

Court dialogue
2022-08-10
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