the Countess
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Mr. Alessi
|
Professional knowledge denied |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Professional |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Alternative suspects |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Employer contractor |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Creation of the Household Manual (Government Exhibit 606). | Unknown | View |
DOJ-OGR-00018175.jpg
In this transcript from the trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330), witness Mr. Alessi is cross-examined by defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca. Alessi admits he did not follow the specific household manual or use its checkmarks, though he asserts he did his work. Pagliuca attempts to establish that a 'countess' was hired to write this manual, which Alessi claims not to know.
DOJ-OGR-00021023.jpg
This legal document is a court's analysis of a defendant's claim that missing evidence—such as financial records, phone records, and flight manifests—was prejudicial to her case. The court rejects this argument, stating the defendant failed to demonstrate what the absent documents would have shown or how they would have been beneficial, concluding the claims are purely speculative. The court notes that the missing evidence could just as easily have further substantiated the government's case.
DOJ-OGR-00008959.jpg
This document is page 35 of a defense motion filed on Feb 11, 2022, in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It argues for a new trial or acquittal, citing potential testimony from two witnesses, Sally Markham (property manager) and Lynn Fontanilla (housekeeper), who could have rebutted government claims about Maxwell's role as 'lady of the house' and her presence at the 71st Street townhouse. The defense contends that a 'household manual' used as evidence against Maxwell was actually created by an individual known as 'the Countess.'
DOJ-OGR-00010406.jpg
This document is page 40 of a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) from April 29, 2022, likely rejecting a motion by Ghislaine Maxwell. The text discusses the defense's failure to prove that missing evidence (financial records, phone records, and pre-9/11 flight manifests) prejudiced the case. The court notes that the defense's claim that these missing records would show an absence of incriminating connections (payments, calls to victims) is purely speculative.
DOJ-OGR-00009603.jpg
This document is a page from a government legal filing in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated February 25, 2022. The text argues against the defense's claims regarding missing witnesses (Sally Markham, Fontanilla) and disputes the origin of the 'household manual' (Gov Ex 606), citing email evidence (Gov Ex 424) that proves Maxwell was involved in its creation alongside Markham, rather than it being solely the work of 'the Countess.' The prosecution asserts that the absence of these witnesses did not prejudice the defendant's ability to defend herself or impact the facts of the abuse.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity