The government
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Rocchio
|
Expert witness prosecution |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Investigative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Rocchio
|
Expert witness prosecution |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. OKULA
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MDC legal counsel
|
Cooperative professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Robin L. Rosenberg
|
Judicial ruling |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Witness evidence provider |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Lisa Rocchio
|
Retainer expert witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Brian
|
Cooperating witness informant |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
McHugh
|
Witness prosecution |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Adversarial opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Minor Victim-4
|
Victim prosecution |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Employee |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
other Epstein accusers
|
Source of information |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Judicial oversight |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed witness
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed Witnesses
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
the defense
|
Opposing parties |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Representative prosecutor |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein/Maxwell
|
Prosecutor investigator |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Minor Victim-4
|
Investigator witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mario Biaggi
|
Legal representative |
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-00020319.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on April 7, 2021. It details complaints regarding Maxwell's confinement conditions at the MDC, including delayed legal mail, unreadable discovery discs, moldy food, sleep deprivation due to lighting and flashlight checks, and 'de facto solitary confinement.' The filing also argues that inadequate computer access hinders her ability to review millions of pages of discovery for her defense.
DOJ-OGR-00020318.jpg
This document is page 3 of a legal filing by attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim regarding the confinement conditions of Ghislaine Maxwell at the MDC. The letter alleges HIPAA violations regarding the release of Maxwell's medical data and details an incident of physical abuse where a guard shoved Maxwell into an isolation cell. The defense requests the Court order the MDC to stop releasing health info and demands video evidence of the abuse incident, which the government disputes.
DOJ-OGR-00020316.jpg
A legal letter from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter refutes the government's claims about Maxwell's detention conditions, arguing they are overly restrictive and punitive. It details unsanitary conditions at the MDC, specifically a recent incident involving a severe sewage stench, overflowing toilets from the floor above, and plumbing issues in Maxwell's isolation cell.
DOJ-OGR-00020312.jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal filing by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell, dated April 19, 2021. The defense is requesting a 90-day continuance (delay) of the trial scheduled for July 12, 2021, citing a recent government disclosure regarding 226 witnesses and scheduling conflicts. The document highlights the defense's need for time to investigate exculpatory information and complains about the government's unilateral expansion of the prosecution.
DOJ-OGR-00005863.jpg
This is a page from a Government legal filing (dated Oct 29, 2021) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It argues that witnesses, including expert Dr. Rocchio and the Minor Victims themselves, should be permitted to use the term 'victim' during testimony. Furthermore, it discloses that the Government expects testimony describing Jeffrey Epstein raping a minor, arguing this is directly relevant to the charges of trafficking and enticing minors.
DOJ-OGR-00005861.jpg
This legal document is a portion of the Government's response to a defense motion in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on October 29, 2021. The Government argues against the defendant's request to prohibit the use of the word 'victim' when referring to the 'Minor Victims' during the trial. The prosecution contends that using the term is part of its legitimate litigating position and not improper vouching for witness credibility, citing legal precedent from the Second Circuit to support its stance.
DOJ-OGR-00005843.jpg
This legal document is a filing by the Government in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, dated October 29, 2021. The Government argues that the defense is mistaken in its belief that the Court ordered the specific itemization and isolation of co-conspirator statements from other evidence. The filing asserts that the Court's orders only required the 'disclosure' of these statements and that compelling the Government to segregate them would be unsupported by precedent in the Second Circuit.
DOJ-OGR-00005825.jpg
This document is page 42 of a legal filing (Document 397) from October 29, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (implied by case number). The Government argues that the testimony of 'Minor Victim-3' is admissible as direct evidence of the charged offenses, specifically citing the sexual abuse committed by the defendant and Jeffrey Epstein. It also addresses procedural arguments regarding Rule 404(b) notices.
DOJ-OGR-00005817.jpg
This is page 34 of a legal filing (Document 397) in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. The Government argues against the defendant's motion to exclude certain evidence under Rule 404(b), asserting they provided sufficient notice and Jencks Act materials. The text cites Second Circuit case law to define relevant evidence and justify the admission of uncharged crimes if they are inextricably intertwined with the charged offense.
DOJ-OGR-00005786.jpg
This document is the Table of Contents (page 2 of the brief, page 3 of the PDF) for a court filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It outlines legal arguments by the Government opposing Defense motions, specifically concerning the identification of the defendant by 'Minor Victim-4', the admission of government exhibits, and the use of the terms 'Victims' and 'Rape' during the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00005785.jpg
This document is the Table of Contents for a legal filing (Document 397) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. The filing argues for the admissibility of testimony from expert witness Dr. Lisa Rocchio regarding abuse dynamics and from 'Minor Victim-3.' It also argues for the admission of evidence from an October 11, 2021 Government letter and co-conspirator statements at trial.
DOJ-OGR-00005784.jpg
This is the cover page for a legal document filed on October 29, 2021, in the case of the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York. The document is the government's omnibus memorandum opposing motions in limine filed by the defendant. It lists the prosecution team, led by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams.
DOJ-OGR-00005732.jpg
This document is Page 7 of a defense filing (Document 391) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on October 29, 2021. The defense argues that evidence collected by the Palm Beach Police Department—specifically message pads, electronic storage devices (CPUs, CDs, Flash Cards), and photos—should be inadmissible due to lack of authenticity, poor chain of custody ('unreliable mess'), and lack of proper inventory. The text cites legal precedents regarding the requirements for authenticating physical evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00005729.jpg
This legal document, filed on October 29, 2021, is part of the case against Ms. Maxwell. It argues for the exclusion of evidence obtained from a 2005 search of Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach residence, citing issues with authentication and relevance. The document also details a separate Palm Beach Police investigation from 2005, noting that Ms. Maxwell was never a target and that an alleged victim in that investigation eventually admitted to contact with Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00005717.jpg
This document is the introduction to a Motion in Limine filed by Ghislaine Maxwell on October 29, 2021, seeking to exclude 'Government Exhibit 52.' The defense argues the exhibit is an unauthenticated, altered compilation of hearsay with no identified author or custodian, originating from lawyers representing Epstein accusers in the 'Giuffre v. Maxwell' civil case. The text details physical irregularities in the exhibit, such as inconsistent staple marks and tab shadows, suggesting tampering or cut-and-paste compilation.
DOJ-OGR-00002911.jpg
This legal document is a letter from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to the court, filed on April 7, 2021, concerning her client, Ms. Maxwell. Sternheim argues that the government's public updates on Maxwell's confinement conditions are detrimental, fueling negative media attention and jeopardizing her right to a fair trial. The letter requests that any future updates be limited in scope and filed under seal to protect Ms. Maxwell's privacy.
DOJ-OGR-00002910.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing by attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim regarding the confinement conditions of Ghislaine Maxwell at the MDC. It details complaints including delayed mail, unreadable discovery discs, moldy food, sleep deprivation due to constant lighting and flashlight checks, and 'de facto solitary confinement.' The filing also argues that inadequate computer equipment is hindering Maxwell's ability to prepare for trial given the massive amount of discovery documents.
DOJ-OGR-00002906.jpg
This document is the final page of a court filing (Document 196) in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on April 6, 2021. Submitted by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, it concludes a submission to the court by stating the Government's willingness to provide further information and is signed by Assistant U.S. Attorneys on behalf of U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss.
DOJ-OGR-00002905.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated April 6, 2021, addressing the confinement conditions of the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell). It details that her meals are heated in thermal ovens and defends the quality of tap water at the MDC, noting that staff drink the same water and bottled water is provided during maintenance. The filing also reports on the defendant's health, stating she is weighed weekly (fluctuating between 130s and 140s lbs), has a normal BMI, has not experienced hair loss, and is fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
DOJ-OGR-00002903.jpg
This document is page 3 of a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated April 6, 2021, detailing the detention conditions of a female defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell) at the MDC. It confirms the defendant is fully vaccinated against COVID-19 and communicates with counsel via VTC and email, as counsel has declined in-person visits. The text also describes security protocols, including daily pat-down searches during movement between the isolation cell and day room, as well as weekly body scans.
DOJ-OGR-00002885.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing from the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim, dated March 31, 2021, regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that any delay in the trial schedule is the fault of the government for filing a late superseding indictment despite previous assurances (cited from a July 14, 2020 transcript) that they did not anticipate doing so. The defense claims this expansion of the case prejudices Maxwell, prolongs her detention, and transforms the proceedings from a 'two-week' trial into a much longer affair.
DOJ-OGR-00002834.jpg
This page is from a legal filing (Document 189) in the case of United States v. Schulte (Case 1:17-cr-00548-PAC), filed on March 24, 2021. The text discusses a legal dispute regarding jury selection venues, specifically distinguishing the current case from *United States v. Johnson*. The court argues that unlike in *Johnson*, Schulte's grand and petit juries were drawn from different courthouses, invalidating his argument regarding the 'relevant community' for the jury pool. The document mentions the 'underrepresentation analysis' and the 'absolute disparity method' for assessing jury fairness. While comprised in a dataset potentially related to Epstein, the text explicitly concerns Joshua Schulte (likely the CIA Vault 7 case).
DOJ-OGR-00002820.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated March 26, 2021, from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan, who is presiding over the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecution informs the court of a recent ruling in a separate case, U.S. v. Schulte, where Judge Crotty denied a motion to dismiss the indictment that was 'virtually identical' to one filed by Maxwell. The government argues that this precedent supports their position that Maxwell's motion should also be denied.
DOJ-OGR-00002786.jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal filing (Document 171) from March 2021 in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, arguing for bail release conditions. The defense proposes appointing retired Judge William S. Duffey, Jr. to monitor Maxwell's and her spouse's assets, specifically including proceeds from the sale of her London home. The text counters government arguments regarding Maxwell's 'lack of candor' by noting she was questioned by Pretrial Services while under extreme conditions including solitary confinement and suicide watch.
DOJ-OGR-00002712.jpg
This document is page 19 of a legal filing (Document 148) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on February 4, 2021. It details the defense's motion requesting the Court to order the government to disclose Jencks Act material (witness statements, notes, emails, texts) by March 12, 2021, citing the complexity of the case and the global pandemic. The page also begins a section (VI) requesting a list of government witnesses intended for trial.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity