The government
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Accuser 2
|
Witness prosecution |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Informant witness |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Boies Schiller
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Judicial oversight |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Adversarial prosecution vs defense |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
any other party
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Rocchio
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
alleged coconspirators
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Thomas
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
TOVA NOEL
|
Adversarial prosecution vs defendant |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Schulte
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MDC legal counsel
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Michael Thomas
|
Adversarial prosecution vs defendant |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Prosecution witness |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Cooperative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Rocchio
|
Professional contractual |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Adversarial prosecution vs defendant |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MDC legal counsel
|
Professional consultative |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MR. COHEN
|
Adversarial professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
prosecutors
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Court proceedings/Trial discussions | Courtroom (referenced by Tr... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Modification of a Protective Order | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal Argument regarding NPA applicability | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Limited Hearing | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Closing Arguments and Jury Charge | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Modification of Protective Order | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Boies Schiller began producing materials not covered by protective orders in response to subpoenas. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial Testimony (Trial Tr. at 2518–22) | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Submission of evidence (Journal) | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Anticipated trial where evidence regarding victims and terms like 'rape' will be used. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Review of Motion to Unseal Grand Jury Materials | Court (Southern District of... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government's motion to unseal testimony and exhibits | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Entry of Non-Prosecution Agreement | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Previous hearing where government touted documentary evidence. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Three bail renewal hearings | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Proffer session | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Hearing regarding requested discovery | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Transfer of legal materials | Court / MDC | View |
| N/A | N/A | The government served a redacted party with a subpoena to produce [redacted items]. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal defense against charges | United States | View |
| N/A | N/A | Criminal indictment alleging Ms. Maxwell committed perjury. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness preparation for trial where the government asked McHugh to review exhibits. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government charged Jeffrey Epstein with conduct falling within the NPA time scope. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Bail hearing argument. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government secret deal (Non-Prosecution Agreement) | Florida (implied context of... | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001064.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021, concerning a bail application. The defense attorney argues against a deep investigation into the detained client's finances, specifically addressing a 2016 real estate transaction of $15 million (likely Ghislaine Maxwell's townhouse sale). The defense disputes the government's claim that the client retains $14 million in liquid assets, citing liabilities and litigation expenses, while referencing legal precedents (Khashoggi, Dreier) regarding bail amounts.
DOJ-OGR-00001062.jpg
This page is a transcript from a court hearing dated April 1, 2021 (Case 21-770), likely related to Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal regarding detention. The defense attorney argues that the defendant is not a flight risk ('opposite of hiding') and contends that the perjury charge—stemming from a denial of guilt during a deposition—should not heavily weigh the 3142 analysis against release. The attorney notes the government has been investigating the case for ten years.
DOJ-OGR-00001061.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, regarding Case 21-770. Defense counsel is arguing before a judge regarding Ghislaine Maxwell's 'risk of flight' status. The defense contends that Maxwell's use of tinfoil or Faraday bags was to prevent phone hacking, not to destroy evidence, and describes a security sweep where agents confirmed with a security guard that Maxwell lives at the house and relies on the guard for groceries.
DOJ-OGR-00001060.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021) where a defense attorney argues against the government's claim that the defendant is a flight risk for changing her contact information. The attorney explains that the defendant changed her email and phone number because she was hacked and received 'strange e-mails' after the Second Circuit unsealed civil case documents—revealing her personal data—around the time of Jeffrey Epstein's arrest in August 2019. The attorney asserts she kept the hacked phone to preserve evidence for ongoing civil litigation.
DOJ-OGR-00001059.jpg
A transcript page from a court proceeding (dated April 1, 2021) where a defense attorney argues that the government is misrepresenting the circumstances of their client's arrest to influence the judge and media. The attorney details that the client (likely Ghislaine Maxwell based on the description) was in pajamas with one security guard, the doors were unlocked, and she moved to another room as a safety protocol rather than attempting to flee when FBI agents raided the property.
DOJ-OGR-00001058.jpg
This document is page 117 of a court transcript from Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues before the Court that his legal team (including Haddon Morgan) had informed the government they were available for the voluntary surrender of their client, Ms. Maxwell, should an indictment occur. Cohen expresses frustration that the government arrested Maxwell without contacting them first and criticizes the government's reply brief for attempting to 'throw dirt' on his client.
DOJ-OGR-00001057.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. A defense attorney, Mr. Cohen, argues that his client has remained in the U.S. and that counsel has been in frequent contact with the government, suggesting a voluntary surrender could have been arranged. The judge interrupts to seek explicit clarification on whether the defense actually offered to arrange a surrender in the event of an indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00001056.jpg
This document is page 115 of a court transcript from April 1, 2021, involving a defense attorney arguing before a judge regarding bail conditions for a female client (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell). The attorney rebuts the government's claim that the client is a flight risk or 'hiding out,' arguing instead that she has been actively litigating civil cases since 2015 and denying impropriety regarding Mr. Epstein. The attorney also notes that a plaintiff seeking millions of dollars had spoken earlier in the proceeding.
DOJ-OGR-00001052.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. An attorney, Mr. Cohen, is arguing a point by citing past high-profile cases like Madoff, Dreier, and Esposito. The judge interrupts to question the relevance of these precedents, specifically asking if those defendants had substantial international connections, which distinguishes them from the current case. Mr. Cohen admits they did not, highlighting that the current defendant's foreign ties are a key point of contention.
DOJ-OGR-00001048.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript where an attorney is addressing a judge. The attorney argues that their client, people close to the client, and even the law firm (Haddon Morgan) have received serious physical and death threats, which they present as a significant factor for the court's consideration. The attorney contrasts the reality of these threats with the government's alleged attempts to downplay them.
DOJ-OGR-00001047.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues to the Judge that the government is unfairly introducing new facts late in the process, depriving the defense of a written response. Cohen then pivots to defending his client's character, explicitly stating she is 'not Epstein' and not a 'monster,' emphasizing her strong family and professional support network present on the call anonymously for safety reasons.
DOJ-OGR-00001046.jpg
A transcript from an April 2021 court hearing where defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues for the release of his client (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) on bail. Cohen cites the Bail Reform Act, the difficulty of preparing a defense during the COVID crisis while in custody, and explicitly argues that his client is 'not Jeffrey Epstein' and is being unfairly portrayed by the government and media as a 'sinister person.'
DOJ-OGR-00001042.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. Prosecutor Ms. Moe reads a written statement from an anonymous victim ('Jane Doe') to the court. The statement accuses Ghislaine Maxwell of sadistic manipulation, claiming she was 'in charge,' recruited other victims for amusement, and was essential to Jeffrey Epstein's ability to commit abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00001040.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding on April 1, 2021, where a government representative argues against granting bail to a defendant. The government contends the defendant is a flight risk due to her unexplained wealth, lack of ties, and willingness to hide, pointing out that she has refused to provide financial details and has proposed an unstable living arrangement of staying indefinitely at a luxury hotel in Manhattan.
DOJ-OGR-00001037.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021. It features a dialogue between the Court and prosecutor Ms. Moe regarding the details of the defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) arrest. The discussion focuses on the defendant's refusal to open the door for law enforcement and the specific allegation that she attempted to block location monitoring by wrapping a mobile phone in foil.
DOJ-OGR-00001036.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a court hearing dated April 1, 2021, involving prosecutor Ms. Moe and the Judge. Ms. Moe argues that the defendant (contextually Ghislaine Maxwell) poses a flight risk because she successfully purchased real estate under a fake name and lived undetected for a year. The Judge questions why this specific information was not presented until the government's reply brief.
DOJ-OGR-00001029.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, concerning the case against Ms. Maxwell. A speaker, likely the prosecutor, argues that Maxwell is a flight risk due to the seriousness of the charges, which involve an "ongoing scheme to abuse multiple victims" with Jeffrey Epstein, and her recent efforts to conceal her whereabouts in New England. The judge then questions a lawyer, Ms. Moe, about a defense claim that Maxwell had maintained contact with the government through her counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00001027.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) involving a detention hearing. Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues that the female defendant (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) should be denied bail because she poses an extreme flight risk, has significant undisclosed financial means, strong international ties, and is charged with the sexual abuse of minors. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen is present, and the judge indicates that alleged victims will also be heard.
DOJ-OGR-00001026.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. The Judge sets a firm trial date for July 12, 2021, and rules to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act to allow for discovery and defense preparation. The proceedings then transition to arguments regarding the government's motion for detention (bail hearing), involving attorneys Mr. Cohen (Defense) and Ms. Moe (Government).
DOJ-OGR-00001024.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021, documenting a scheduling hearing. The Judge sets the trial commencement date for July 12, 2021, and establishes a timeline for discovery disclosures and pretrial motions running from August 2020 through January 2021. Ms. Moe, representing the government, estimates the prosecution's case will take two weeks, but suggests blocking out three weeks total for the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00001023.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a court proceeding dated April 1, 2021 (likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell bail hearing). The text details the government's protocol for notifying victims via an opt-in process and outlines how three specific victims will participate in the bail hearing: one via memorandum, one via a statement read by the government, and one speaking directly. Attorneys Ms. Moe and Mr. Cohen confirm they have conferred and agreed upon a schedule with the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00001011.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, concerning Case 21-770. It details a discussion between the Judge, Ms. Moe (Government), and Mr. Cohen regarding the necessity of conducting the arraignment and bail hearing remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court affirms that the proceeding cannot be delayed as the detained defendant is seeking bail and notes the significant public interest in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00000996.jpg
This document is a page from a Government filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) arguing against bail for the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell). It highlights her significant flight risk due to access to millions of dollars in foreign accounts (Swiss and English banks), recent large financial transfers into a trust, and the cash purchase of a New Hampshire hideout property. The prosecution argues the proposed $5 million bond is insufficient given her wealth.
DOJ-OGR-00000995.jpg
This legal document is a filing by the Government arguing against granting bail to a defendant charged with serious crimes. The Government asserts the defendant is a significant flight risk due to her extensive foreign ties, significant assets including a multi-million dollar property in the United Kingdom, and citizenship in a country that does not extradite to the United States. The filing dismisses the proposed bail package, which relies on foreign property as collateral, as providing "effectively no security at all" because the U.S. Government cannot seize foreign assets.
DOJ-OGR-00000994.jpg
This legal document is a portion of a filing by the Government arguing against granting bail to the defendant. The prosecution contends that the defendant is a significant flight risk due to her considerable but undisclosed financial resources and her history of dishonesty, including alleged perjury in a 2016 civil suit. The document criticizes the defendant's bail proposal for offering no security and for her failure to submit a financial affidavit, which prevents the Court from assessing her true ability to flee.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity