| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Chapell
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
the defense
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Boies Schiller
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Adversarial prosecution defense |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Adversarial defendant prosecution |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Complainants' civil attorneys
|
Professional collaboration |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
victims and witnesses
|
Cooperative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Rocchio
|
Expert witness counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Cooperation |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Prosecutorial focus |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Cohen & Gresser LLP
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge Alison J. Nathan
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
victims
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Cooperative witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendants
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. SCAROLA
|
Informational |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Adversarial investigative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALEX ROSSMILLER
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Judge Nathan
|
Judicial oversight |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Informant witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Investigative subject |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Cooperative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
David Boies
|
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 |
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. The questioner presses Jane on whether she recalls telling the government in December 2019 that she was introduced to the dean of Interlochen by Epstein at a cocktail party. Jane repeatedly states she does not remember or recall this event, though she does confirm remembering meeting the dean of admissions for Julliard.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) featuring the cross-examination of a witness referred to as 'Jane.' Attorney Ms. Menninger questions Jane about a prior interview with the government, specifically regarding whether Jane remembered any specific abuse occurring during trips to New Mexico. The witness states she does not recall making the statements presented to her, and the prosecution (Ms. Moe) objects to the form of the questioning.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. An attorney, Ms. Menninger, questions Jane about her recollection of an alleged abuse incident in New Mexico and her prior statements to the government. Jane repeatedly states that she does not recall the events or making the statements in question.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the cross-examination of a witness named 'Jane'. The defense attorney questions Jane about her first trip to New Mexico on a private plane and attempts to impeach her testimony using a government interview record from February 2020 (referenced as document 3509-008). Jane explicitly denies the accuracy of the government record, stating she did not tell them she recalled 'no specific abuse' during that trip.
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. An attorney, Ms. Menninger, questions Jane about a trip she took on "Epstein's plane" to New Mexico and what she previously told "the government" about being ignored on that trip. Jane repeatedly responds that she does not recall the events or her prior statements, leading to objections and a request for clarification from the court.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. The questioning focuses on a discrepancy in her prior statements to the government regarding a trip to New York with Maxwell and Epstein at age 14, specifically about seeing the Broadway show 'The Lion King,' which did not premiere until she was 17. The transcript reveals communications between the government and Jane occurred through her legal representatives, including a Mr. Glassman.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. A witness identified as 'Jane' is being cross-examined about her recollection of attending 'The Lion King' on Broadway with Jeffrey Epstein. Jane confirms that they saw the show (not the movie), sat in mezzanine seats, and that Epstein bragged about securing the seats because he knew the director.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. The questioning focuses on inconsistencies in her prior statements to the government about a trip to New York with Epstein and Maxwell, specifically a trip to see 'The Lion King'. The witness's attorney, Ms. Moe, objects to the line of questioning, which is overruled by the court.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, recording the cross-examination of a witness named 'Jane'. Defense attorney Ms. Menninger questions Jane about a statement she made to the government regarding being flown to New York by Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to see 'The Lion King'. The proceedings are briefly interrupted when a juror suffers a coughing fit, causing a recess.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the cross-examination of a witness named 'Jane' by attorney Ms. Menninger. The testimony focuses on clarifying Jane's memory regarding statements made to the FBI and the government in November 2019 and April 2020. Specifically, Jane confirms reporting that she was abused '90 percent of the time' she traveled with Epstein and Maxwell.
This is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Defense attorney Ms. Menninger is cross-examining a witness identified as 'Jane' regarding inconsistencies between her current testimony and notes taken by the government during interviews in September 2019 and February 2020. Jane disputes the accuracy of the government's notes regarding her 'first trip to New York,' stating she was never recorded and the notes are 'out of sequence and incorrect.'
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 'Jane' by Ms. Menninger. The questioning focuses on inconsistencies between Jane's current testimony (stating abuse began at Epstein's Palm Beach pool house) and a prior statement given to the government in December 2019 (where the defense suggests she claimed it began in New York while taking headshots).
This document is a page from the court transcript of Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It details a procedural discussion between the Judge and defense attorney Mr. Everdell regarding a juror's question about a 'letter of recommendation' and 'Interlochen applications' contained in evidence binders. Following this discussion, the jury enters, and the court instructs Ms. Menninger to resume her cross-examination of the witness identified as 'Jane'.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It features the cross-examination of a witness named 'Jane' by Ms. Menninger. The questioning focuses on inconsistencies or gaps in Jane's memory regarding whether Ghislaine Maxwell was present for, or touched Jane during, sexual encounters (specifically oral sex) with Jeffrey Epstein, and what Jane previously told the government about these details.
This document is a page of a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named 'Jane'. The questioning focuses on her past interactions with 'Ghislaine' and 'Epstein' and a statement she allegedly made to the government in December 2019. The witness states she does not recall making the statement and is directed to review a document (3509-005) to refresh her memory.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It depicts the cross-examination of a witness identified as 'Jane' by defense attorney Ms. Menninger. The questioning focuses on a statement Jane made to the government on February 27, 2020, where she admitted she was 'not sure' if she had ever been alone in a room with just Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, contradicting or challenging her current memory.
This document is a page from the cross-examination of a witness named 'Jane' in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The defense attorney questions Jane about prior statements she made to the government, confirming that she previously stated Maxwell was not present or did not witness specific sexual acts (oral sex, intercourse) between Jane and Jeffrey Epstein. The witness confirms several of these prior statements while stating she does not recall others.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. The questioner challenges Jane's memory and consistency regarding her prior statements to the government about encounters involving herself, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Epstein. The questioning focuses on whether Jane was ever alone with the two and whether Maxwell ever touched her, with Jane repeatedly stating she does not recall specific details but denying the assertion that she doesn't recall being touched.
This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of a witness identified as 'Jane' in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The defense attorney attempts to impeach the witness's credibility by highlighting inconsistencies between her current testimony, a statement given in December 2019 (where she had no specific memory), and a statement from February 2020 (where she recalled two other girls being present). The witness claims the government's written record of her statement contains a 'typo' or incorrect wording.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) documenting the cross-examination of a witness named 'Jane' by attorney Ms. Menninger. The defense attorney questions the consistency of Jane's memory regarding her first encounter with Ghislaine Maxwell, suggesting she fabricated a memory recently that she did not possess in December 2019. The dialogue also references a meeting between Jane and the government in February 2020.
This document is a page from a court transcript of the cross-examination of a witness named Jane, filed on August 10, 2022. The questioning focuses on Jane's prior testimony about seeing Ghislaine Maxwell undressed and an alleged incident where she, Epstein, and Maxwell went upstairs to a room. The transcript includes objections from an attorney, Ms. Moe, and rulings from the court.
This document is a page of a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. The questioning focuses on Jane's prior statements to government agents about Jeffrey Epstein's behavior, specifically whether he controlled where people sat in movie theaters. The transcript includes a legal objection by an attorney, Ms. Moe, which is overruled by the court.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a legal argument between attorney Ms. Moe and the Judge (The Court) regarding the proper procedure for impeaching a witness ('Jane') versus refreshing her recollection using prior statements or documents. Ms. Menninger is mentioned as the attorney questioning the witness.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. The questioner challenges Jane's testimony regarding the frequency with which she was picked up by an unnamed man and the method by which meetings at Epstein's house were arranged. The questioner points out a discrepancy between her current testimony about Ghislaine arranging meetings and a statement she gave to the government in November 2019.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. The questioning attorney, Ms. Menninger, confronts Jane with her alleged prior statements about being at Epstein's house with her mother and brothers, and being driven there by a chauffeur. Jane repeatedly responds that she does not recall making the statements about her family but confirms discussing the chauffeur.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity