The government
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
24
Very Strong
|
70 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Representative |
17
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
15
Very Strong
|
68 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Legal representative |
15
Very Strong
|
65 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Adversarial |
13
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Representative |
12
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Adversarial |
12
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
organization
the defense
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
20 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Representative |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
15 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Adversarial |
11
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
18 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
victims
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Opposing counsel |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Adversarial |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Witness prosecution |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Juror 50
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Witness prosecution |
8
Strong
|
4 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Government's document production | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Production of Giglio and Jencks Act material | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Submission of grand jury materials ex parte and under seal to the Court. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial proceedings referenced via transcript pages (Trial Tr. at 34, 2842, 2885). | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government Interviews | Unspecified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government summation. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Investigation into the conduct of Juror No. 50. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jane's Testimony | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government's Summation | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan directed the Government to confer with MDC legal counsel regarding surveillance just... | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Seating of the Jury | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government seizure of approximately 38,000 photographs. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein performed under the NPA | US | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discussions regarding jury instructions and notes. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan's ruling on bail/release conditions. | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Bail Hearings/Decisions | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Proposed Hearing regarding Juror 50 | Courtroom (SDNY) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government marshalled evidence regarding transportation of Jane and Virginia Roberts. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Video arraignment and bail hearing | Court (Video) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Initial conference in this matter | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | The Government rested its case early. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Ms. Maxwell challenged the strength of the government's case in pretrial motions pending before t... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Meeting | The witness sat down with the government for the first time on the same day she made her public s... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The filing of a superseding indictment and the addition of Accuser-4, which expanded the scope of... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | A four-and-a-half-week jury trial was held where the Government presented evidence of sexual abus... | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001287.jpg
A legal letter from defense attorney Bobbi Sternheim to Judge Alison Nathan regarding United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter disputes government claims about Maxwell's confinement conditions at the MDC, highlighting excessive physical searches (approx. 1400 times), lack of legal access, and intense surveillance measures. Sternheim explicitly links these harsh conditions to BOP negligence surrounding the death of Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00001276.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing dated March 22, 2021, discusses the legal standard for a defendant's third motion for release on bail. The central issue is whether the court has jurisdiction to decide the motion while the defendant's separate bail appeal is pending, with the document citing case law and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to outline the court's authority in such a situation.
DOJ-OGR-00001275.jpg
This document is page 2 of a court order filed on March 22, 2021 (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), denying the Defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell, implied) third motion for release on bail. The Court rejects new proposals, including renouncing French and British citizenship and asset monitoring, citing continued flight risk, substantial resources, and foreign ties. It references previous denials from July and December 2020 and confirms her continued incarceration at the Metropolitan Detention Center.
DOJ-OGR-00001262.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team, dated March 23, 2021. It argues that the government's case is weakening, citing the 2007 Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement as a bar to prosecution and claiming the government cannot prove Accuser-3 was a minor during alleged interstate travel. The defense also alleges that prosecutors misled a federal judge to obtain evidence, undermining the integrity of the case.
DOJ-OGR-00001261.jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal filing (Document 172) dated March 22, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that Maxwell has been transparent about her assets, including those held jointly with her spouse, and that the government's argument regarding asset control and flight risk is illogical. A footnote strongly defends the integrity of Maxwell's New York legal team against the government's implication that they would use escrow funds to help her flee as a fugitive.
DOJ-OGR-00001251.jpg
This document is the conclusion page (Page 9) of a legal filing submitted on March 9, 2021, by the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The filing argues that the defendant (identified by case number as Ghislaine Maxwell) poses a substantial flight risk and that their 'Third Bail Motion' should be denied. The document is signed by Assistant US Attorneys Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, and Lara Pomerantz.
DOJ-OGR-00001239.jpg
This document is page 7 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on March 23, 2021, arguing for the release of Ghislaine Maxwell on bail. The defense proposes restraining Maxwell's and her spouse's assets under the supervision of a former federal judge to prevent flight. The text also argues that pending pretrial motions—including challenges based on a non-prosecution agreement, constitutional violations, and time-barred Mann Act charges—significantly weaken the government's case.
DOJ-OGR-00001235.jpg
This is a page from a legal filing (likely a renewed bail application) for Ghislaine Maxwell, dated February 23, 2021. The defense argues that new bond conditions secure her assets to prevent flight, cites twelve pretrial motions filed by January 25 that challenge the government's case, and claims she has been unfairly demonized by the media as a 'substitute replacement' for Jeffrey Epstein. The document asserts Maxwell's determination to face her accusers at trial.
DOJ-OGR-00001230.jpg
This legal document is a court ruling denying a defendant's release from the MDC, a detention facility experiencing a significant COVID-19 outbreak. The Court acknowledges the health risks but ultimately finds that the defendant poses a substantial flight risk and has no underlying health conditions that would justify release. The Court also determines that a new hearing is unnecessary, as the reasons from a prior hearing on July 14, 2020, still apply.
DOJ-OGR-00001229.jpg
This legal document is a court ruling denying a defendant's request for release from pre-trial detention. The Court finds that the government has shown the defendant is a flight risk and rejects her argument that her conditions of confinement, including a recent COVID-19 lockdown, unconstitutionally interfere with her ability to prepare her defense. The Court concludes she has been given adequate time and resources to communicate with her attorneys.
DOJ-OGR-00001226.jpg
This legal document page discusses a bail hearing for a defendant, Ms. Maxwell. It recounts that the Court initially found her financial disclosures incomplete but notes she has since provided a more detailed report from a UK accounting firm, Macalvins, covering 2015-2020. Despite the new report, which was also reviewed by a former IRS agent, the Court remains unpersuaded that the proposed bail package, secured by property, cash, and bonds, would reasonably assure her appearance in court.
DOJ-OGR-00001225.jpg
This legal document outlines a court's reasoning for continuing the pretrial detention of a defendant. The Court finds that the defendant has demonstrated a significant 'lack of candor' regarding her finances, particularly in representations made to Pretrial Services, and therefore poses a flight risk. A proposed $28.5 million bail package is deemed insufficient to reasonably assure her appearance at future proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00001218.jpg
This legal document is a court's analysis of a defendant's renewed motion for bail, filed on August 30, 2020. The defendant argues for release, claiming the government's case is weak, lacks documentary evidence, and relies almost solely on the testimony of three unidentified accusers. The Court disagrees with the defendant's assessment and reaffirms its earlier decision to deny bail, finding that no conditions of release would reasonably assure the defendant's appearance at future proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00001215.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in Case 20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The text details the Court's rejection of the Defendant's arguments for release on bail, despite her offer to pay for private security guards, her claims of family ties in the US, and her offer to waive extradition rights from the UK and France. The Court concludes that no conditions can reasonably assure her appearance, dismissing arguments regarding COVID-19 prison conditions.
DOJ-OGR-00001195.jpg
This is page 6 of a legal defense filing (Reply Memorandum) dated December 28, 2020, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues against the government's claim that Maxwell is hiding assets to prepare for flight, stating that her transfers to her spouse were disclosed on tax returns and that her asset estimates from jail were accurate given the circumstances. The document details financial specifics, including a London property used for loans and $4 million controlled by her spouse, with specific details regarding the spouse's assets redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00001193.jpg
This document is a defense filing arguing that the government has not met its burden in opposing bail for Ms. Maxwell. It asserts that her spouse and friends have come forward to support her bond, demonstrating strong ties to the U.S., contrary to the government's claims. It also addresses footnotes regarding the government's failure to scrutinize accusers and the defense's ongoing legal challenges to the indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00001192.jpg
This page from a defense filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) argues that the government's case against Ghislaine Maxwell relies entirely on the uncorroborated testimony of three accusers, specifically noting that Counts Two and Four rely solely on 'Minor Victim-1'. The defense asserts that the government only began issuing subpoenas regarding Maxwell after Jeffrey Epstein's death, suggesting the case was assembled 'after the fact'. A large block of text regarding specific government evidence is redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00001191.jpg
This is page 6 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on December 28, 2020, arguing for the release of Ms. Maxwell on bail. The defense argues that the government has conceded its case relies almost entirely on the testimony of three unidentified witnesses regarding events from over 25 years ago, rather than 'significant contemporaneous documentary evidence' as previously claimed. The document asserts that existing documentary evidence pertains to Jeffrey Epstein, not Maxwell, and notes that specific government concessions on this matter are redacted in the text.
DOJ-OGR-00001187.jpg
This document is the Table of Contents for a legal filing (likely a reply brief in support of a bail motion) filed on December 23, 2020, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that the government's case is weak (relying on only three witnesses), that Maxwell has substantial ties to the US (including a spouse whose name is redacted), that she has disclosed all finances for bond, and that the COVID surge at the MDC justifies her release. It also refutes the claim that she is a flight risk or that extradition from France or the UK would be refused.
DOJ-OGR-00001177.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Government, argues against the release of a defendant from the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The filing asserts that the MDC has adequately addressed the defendant's complaints about her diet and security searches, and that precautionary measures taken after a potential COVID-19 exposure were effective. The Government concludes that because the defendant has no underlying health conditions, the pandemic does not warrant her release.
DOJ-OGR-00001176.jpg
This page from a government legal filing addresses defense complaints regarding discovery access and confinement conditions. The government asserts that a hard drive malfunction was caused by the defendant dropping it and that she currently has full access to materials. It also defends her confinement conditions at the MDC, detailing privileges such as 13 hours out of cell daily, private shower, computer access, and television, arguing these are superior to general population conditions.
DOJ-OGR-00001175.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Government, argues that the defendant housed at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) has been given sufficient resources to prepare for trial, refuting a defense claim to the contrary. The filing details the defendant's access to discovery materials via hard drives, a dedicated laptop, and a desktop computer, as well as arrangements for regular video and phone calls with her legal counsel. It asserts that these accommodations, even with pandemic-related restrictions, are adequate for trial preparation.
DOJ-OGR-00001169.jpg
This court document outlines the Government's argument regarding the defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) bail application, focusing on her financial assets and lack of candor. It alleges she transferred the majority of her wealth (over $20 million brought to the marriage versus her husband's $200k) into trusts for her spouse to hide assets, including funds used to buy her New Hampshire hideout. The text highlights discrepancies between her actual wealth and what she disclosed to Pretrial Services.
DOJ-OGR-00001167.jpg
This document is page 25 of a Government filing (likely opposing bail) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on December 28, 2020. It argues that Maxwell is a flight risk who evaded the FBI during her arrest (including wrapping a phone in tin foil) and was deceptive with Pretrial Services regarding her 'vast resources,' which far exceed the $3.8 million she initially disclosed. The text asserts that her wealth and willingness to deceive make detention necessary.
DOJ-OGR-00001157.jpg
This is a page from a government legal filing opposing bail for Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on December 18, 2020. The prosecution argues that despite a lack of specific documentary evidence for every abusive act, the case remains strong due to victim testimony and corroborating documents linking her to Epstein. It further argues for continued detention based on her 'significant foreign ties,' 'millions of dollars in cash' transferred to her spouse, and a 'sophisticated ability to live in hiding.'
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity