Trove
Sign In Sign Up

GOVERNMENT

Organization
Mentions
2805
Relationships
178
Events
870
Documents
1344
Also known as:
Government of Australia Government of the Republic of Cyprus United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) Office of Government Relations PRC Government US Government (The Americans) Government Exhibit Office of Government Information Services Government / USA Orban Government Palestinian government IRS Tax Exempt and Government Entities Division (IRS-TEGE) Hamas Government Saudi Arabian government Orange County, California (Government) Netanyahu government British Government American government Pakistan Government/Military Canadian Government Australian government Government of Ecuador New Zealand Government Government of the U.S. Virgin Islands Gov't (Government) Government / DOJ American Federation of Government Employees/Council of Prison Locals United States of America (Government) US Government (implied by SDNY context)
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.
178 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person MAXWELL
Legal representative
15 Very Strong
29
View
organization Defense
Legal representative
13 Very Strong
21
View
person defendant
Legal representative
13 Very Strong
62
View
person Defense counsel
Legal representative
12 Very Strong
14
View
person GHISLAINE MAXWELL
Legal representative
12 Very Strong
14
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
55
View
person Recipient
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
5
View
organization Defense
Adversarial
11 Very Strong
10
View
person MAXWELL
Adversarial
10 Very Strong
14
View
person the defendant
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
6
View
person THOMAS
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
9
View
person Defense counsel
Professional
10 Very Strong
6
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Adversarial
10 Very Strong
21
View
person the defendant
Adversarial
10 Very Strong
7
View
person defendant
Adversarial
10 Very Strong
24
View
location court
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
5
View
person Ms. Comey
Professional
9 Strong
4
View
person MR. ROHRBACH
Professional
8 Strong
4
View
organization Defense
Professional
8 Strong
3
View
person MR. EPSTEIN
Legal representative
7
2
View
person Thomas
Legal representative
7
3
View
person Dr. Rocchio
Professional
7
2
View
person Minor Victims
Protective
7
2
View
person Epstein's counsel
Professional
7
2
View
person Ms. Moe
Professional
7
3
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
N/A N/A Maxwell's motion to compel discovery from the Government, including Jencks Act, Brady, Giglio mat... Court proceedings View
N/A N/A Court's ruling on Maxwell's discovery requests, concluding she is not entitled to expedited disco... Court proceedings View
N/A N/A Court accepts Government's representations that it has disclosed all Brady and Giglio Material. Court proceedings View
N/A N/A Accusation by the government that Epstein paid Maxwell millions for recruiting young, underage wo... N/A View
N/A N/A Government's intention to produce 'Materials' to the defendant (Maxwell) under a protective order... N/A View
N/A N/A Argument that defendants should be able to rely on government promises in written agreements and ... N/A View
N/A N/A Maxwell's attempt to dismiss Mann Act counts for lack of specificity or to compel Government to s... N/A View
N/A N/A Broader investigation into Epstein's sexual abuse of minors, covering periods beyond the Indictment. N/A View
N/A N/A Government's review of 'Materials' (documents and photographs) related to Epstein's sexual abuse ... N/A View
N/A N/A Maxwell's attempt to dismiss indictment due to alleged actual prejudice from Government's delay i... N/A View
N/A N/A Ex parte proceeding where government allegedly misled Chief Judge McMahon to obtain a subpoena. Court View
N/A N/A Client's arrest and detention despite voluntary surrender. N/A View
N/A N/A Discussion of discovery timeline, with the government requesting until November. Court View
N/A N/A Government initiated a massive OPR investigation into the execution of the NPA. N/A View
N/A N/A Court agrees that some of Maxwell's concerns are overstated but acknowledges defamation action re... N/A View
N/A N/A NPA (Non-Prosecution Agreement) not disclosed to victims N/A View
N/A N/A Search warrants executed at properties of Jeffrey Epstein. New York and Virgin Islands View
N/A N/A Lefkowitz argued that the government was not required to notify victims under the § 2255 provisio... N/A View
N/A N/A Depositions taken as a result of government-supported civil suits against the speaker. N/A View
N/A N/A Indictment of Thomas S.D.N.Y. View
N/A N/A Opening of Grand Jury Investigation Unknown View
N/A N/A Sentencing hearing regarding fines, restitution, and guideline calculations. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Planned resolution of pending redaction issues N/A View
N/A N/A Victims' lawsuit against the government Court View
N/A N/A Ex parte modification of the protective order by Judge McMahon. Court View

DOJ-OGR-00013094.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the redirect and recross examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley. Attorney Pomerantz questions him about emails he reviewed in Government Exhibit 54, specifically concerning the email address gmax1@mindspring.com. Attorney Menninger then conducts a recross examination, focusing on Mr. Flatley's technical understanding of email clients like Outlook and Mail.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013075.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. It details the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley by prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz regarding the authentication of Government Exhibits 420, 421, and 422, which are identified as Word documents printed from Government Exhibit 54. The defense attorney, Ms. Menninger, offers no objection, and the exhibits are admitted into evidence by the Court.

Court transcript (direct examination)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013074.jpg

This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a portion of the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Flatley, by an attorney, Ms. Pomerantz. Flatley testifies that he reviewed evidence using forensic software, and Ms. Pomerantz successfully enters Government Exhibit 418B into evidence without objection from opposing counsel, Ms. Menninger. Ms. Pomerantz then prepares to present additional exhibits (420, 421, and 422) for the witness's review.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013073.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a portion of the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Flatley, by counsel Ms. Pomerantz. During the testimony, Government Exhibits 418 and 418R are admitted into evidence, with the court noting that 418 is sealed due to third-party phone numbers, and Mr. Flatley identifies another exhibit (418B) as showing the properties of exhibit 418.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013072.jpg

This page is a transcript from a court proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz questions witness Mr. Flatley to authenticate Government Exhibits 418 (unredacted) and 418R (redacted), establishing they were printed from 'Government 54' (a master evidence source). The government moves to offer Exhibit 418 under seal and 418R publicly.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013068.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Flatley, by an attorney, Ms. Pomerantz. The primary action is the successful authentication and admission of an email, labeled Government Exhibit 424, into evidence. The court admits the exhibit without objection from the opposing counsel, Ms. Menninger.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013066.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Flatley, by an attorney, Ms. Pomerantz. Mr. Flatley identifies Government Exhibit 419 as software registry information derived from Government Exhibit 54 and explains that a registry is a database used by Windows. The exhibit is subsequently admitted into evidence by the court without objection from the opposing counsel, Ms. Menninger.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013065.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of Mr. Flatley. He explains the forensic process of copying a fragile, old hard drive (Government Exhibit 54) using a TX1 disc duplicator to preserve the original. Mr. Flatley confirms the copy's accuracy using a hash algorithm before analyzing the data with AccessData's software.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013063.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing counsel Ms. Pomerantz questioning a witness, Mr. Flatley. Mr. Flatley identifies Government Exhibit 54 as a hard drive he examined, explaining his evidence identification method which includes a unique 'NYC number' (NYC024350), his initials, the case number, and the date.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013049.jpg

This document is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Comey questions witness Ms. Meder regarding Government Exhibit 313, which is identified as a photo of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein retrieved from a CD (Evidence Log 1B75) during the investigation. The government successfully moves to admit this exhibit under seal to protect the privacy of a party involved.

Court transcript (testimony)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013041.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Meder. A government attorney, Ms. Comey, questions the witness about a photograph of Ghislaine Maxwell, which the witness confirms was sourced from a CD (logged as 1B63) reviewed during the 'Epstein and Maxwell investigation'. The photograph is successfully entered into evidence as Government's Exhibit 340 by the Court.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013038.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Meder by an attorney, Ms. Comey. The witness identifies a photograph, admitted as Government Exhibit 324, as originating from a CD related to the 'Epstein and Maxwell investigation.' The witness confirms the photograph depicts Jeffrey Epstein on the left and Ghislaine Maxwell on the right.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013037.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Comey examines a witness named Meder, who identifies Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell in a photograph marked as Government Exhibit 322. The photo originated from a CD logged as evidence number 1B78 during the investigation, and the exhibit is formally admitted into evidence by the Court.

Court transcript / legal proceeding
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013034.jpg

This page is a transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). A witness named Meder is under direct examination by Ms. Comey regarding evidence collected during the Epstein and Maxwell investigation. The witness identifies Government Exhibit 307 as a photograph of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, retrieved from a CD logged as evidence number 1B26.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013031.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures the beginning of a court session where the direct examination of witness Kimberly Meder is continued by Ms. Comey, who is representing the Government. The examination picks up from the previous day, referencing 'Government Exhibit 1101'.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013029.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It details a conversation between the judge, government counsel (Mr. Rohrbach), and opposing counsel (Ms. Menninger) regarding the scope of testimony for a witness named Mr. Flatley. The government agrees not to question Mr. Flatley about 'CDs' on direct examination, resolving the issue and making prior preparation on the topic moot for the time being.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013027.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a legal argument between prosecutor Mr. Rohrbach and defense attorney Ms. Menninger regarding the upcoming testimony of a witness named Mr. Flatley. The dispute centers on whether Flatley's testimony regarding file dates on CDs constitutes expert opinion or purely factual testimony based on '3500 material'.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013017.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between the judge (THE COURT) and an attorney (MS. MOE). The discussion centers on the rules of witness sequestration, specifically concerning communications between two witnesses, Jane and Brian, who are implied to be family members. The judge questions the legality and propriety of sequestered witnesses being provided with trial transcripts, testing the boundaries of the sequestration order.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013004.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It details a legal argument between the defense, the prosecution (Ms. Moe), and the judge over the admissibility of a photograph. The key points of contention are the photo's metadata, whether the person depicted was a minor at the time, and the defense's accusation that the prosecution's actions constitute 'slut shaming'.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00010561.jpg

This legal document is a page from a court filing in which the Government argues for a sentencing enhancement for a defendant. The Government contends that the defendant's criminal activity was "otherwise extensive" under U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(a), citing Second Circuit case law to counter the defense's argument that the enhancement requires supervision of a knowing participant.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00010539.jpg

This document is a legal filing arguing for a severe sentence for the defendant due to her extensive involvement in the sexual abuse of minors, emphasizing the seriousness of the offense and the defendant's lack of remorse. It rejects the defendant's claims regarding prison conditions and her attempts to shift blame, asserting that she willingly participated in and facilitated Jeffrey Epstein's crimes.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00009210.jpg

This legal document argues against accepting a juror's claim of having 'missed' or 'forgotten' a question, labeling it self-serving nonsense. It draws a parallel to bankruptcy law, where untruthful statements are treated severely, citing case law to support the idea that reckless indifference to the truth is equivalent to fraud. The author finds it ironic that the government is excusing 'Juror No. 50's' false answers while being unwilling to afford the same leniency to the defendant, Ms. Maxwell.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00009192.jpg

This document is the table of contents for a legal motion filed on February 24, 2022, on behalf of Ms. Maxwell. The motion argues for a new trial, primarily on the grounds that Juror No. 50 provided deliberately false answers during the jury selection process (voir dire). The document outlines the legal arguments, challenges the government's position, and discusses the procedures for a potential hearing on the matter.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00009156.jpg

This document is page 37 of a legal filing (Doc 615) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues against the defendant's claim that the Court should have further probed 'Juror 50' regarding his ability to set aside past traumatic experiences and fairly evaluate the testimony of defense expert Dr. Loftus. The filing cites voir dire transcripts from November 16, 2021, where Juror 50 affirmed his ability to be impartial, and references case law (*United States v. Pirk*, *United States v. Barnes*) regarding the limited purpose of voir dire.

Court filing / legal memorandum
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00009153.jpg

This legal document is a filing by the Government arguing that the Court should personally conduct a narrow questioning of Juror 50 to investigate potential bias. The Government contends this approach is necessary to prevent juror harassment and protect the integrity of jury deliberations, citing numerous legal precedents where courts have similarly controlled such inquiries. The Government also argues against the defendant's request for "pre-hearing discovery" and calling other jurors as witnesses.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
0
As Recipient
0
Total
0
No communications found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search