GOVERNMENT
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
15
Very Strong
|
29 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
62 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
55 | |
|
person
Recipient
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Adversarial |
11
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
THOMAS
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
24 | |
|
location
court
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Thomas
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Dr. Rocchio
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Minor Victims
|
Protective |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Epstein's counsel
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Professional |
7
|
3 |
| 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-00020363.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, outlines the government's case against a defendant named Maxwell, stating it is supported by victim testimony and other evidence like flight records. It details that Judge Nathan has denied Maxwell's three bail applications, culminating in a bail hearing on July 14, 2020. Judge Nathan's decision to detain Maxwell was based on the strength of the government's evidence and Maxwell's risk of flight.
DOJ-OGR-00020357.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim, details the allegedly abusive and overly restrictive detention conditions of Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. It claims she is subjected to constant, invasive surveillance, has been physically abused by guards, had property damaged, and had private information leaked to the press. The filing argues that these conditions are unwarranted and that her monitored communications with family demonstrate strong ties to the U.S., contradicting claims that she is a flight risk.
DOJ-OGR-00020340.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing from May 17, 2021, in case 21-58. It contains an appendix listing recent court orders and filings related to Ghislaine Maxwell's detention conditions, including a letter from her, a response from the government, and her subsequent reply. The document was respectfully submitted by her legal counsel, Leah S. Saffian and David Oscar Markus of MARKUS/MOSS PLLC.
DOJ-OGR-00017607.jpg
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It records a conversation between the judge, a government attorney (Ms. Moe), and another attorney (Ms. Sternheim) concerning the testimony of an upcoming witness. The judge acknowledges their points and adjourns the court until 8:45 a.m. on December 1, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00017601.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between the judge (THE COURT) and two attorneys (Ms. Moe and Ms. Menninger). The discussion centers on the procedure for redacting a witness's identifying information from the testimony, which the judge had previously sealed. They agree on a timeline for the government to propose redactions and for the attorneys to confer and file letters with the court by 10 PM that evening if any disagreements arise.
DOJ-OGR-00017599.jpg
This document is a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, capturing a procedural discussion between a judge and several attorneys (Ms. Comey, Ms. Menninger, Ms. Moe). The main topics are setting a 9:00 p.m. deadline for both the government and defense to submit letters regarding a dispute over Rule 16, and initiating a discussion on how to handle witness identifying information.
DOJ-OGR-00017585.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness named 'Jane'. Jane confirms that in early 2020, she sued both Ghislaine Maxwell and the Estate of Jeffrey Epstein. She also states she participated in a victim compensation fund for Jeffrey Epstein's victims, was awarded $5 million, but did not receive the full amount.
DOJ-OGR-00017575.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness testifying under the pseudonym "Jane". Jane describes being summoned by a man named Jeffrey from a pool area to his bedroom or massage room. During the testimony, an exhibit containing two pictures of Jane (Government Exhibit 245) is admitted into evidence under seal, consistent with the court's ruling allowing her to use a pseudonym.
DOJ-OGR-00017560.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details the direct examination of a witness using the pseudonym 'Jane' by prosecutor Ms. Moe. The testimony focuses on Jane identifying photographs of herself (Government Exhibits 107 and 108) and confirming she was 15 and 17 years old, respectively, when they were taken.
DOJ-OGR-00017524.jpg
This page is a transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), featuring the direct examination of a witness identified as 'Jane'. The witness identifies a photograph of herself (Government Exhibit 106) taken when she was 13 years old, which is admitted under seal to protect her anonymity. The questioning establishes her household situation in 1993, noting she lived with her mother and two brothers.
DOJ-OGR-00017521.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a trial on August 10, 2022, showing the direct examination of a witness testifying under the pseudonym "Jane". The witness identifies Government Exhibit 12 as her birth certificate. Following a request from attorney Ms. Moe and with no objection from attorney Ms. Menninger, the judge permits the jury to view the sealed exhibit.
DOJ-OGR-00017519.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022. It captures the end of a witness's, Mr. Visoski's, testimony, where he is excused by the judge. Following his departure, the counsel for the defense (Mr. Everdell) and the government (Ms. Comey) have a brief procedural exchange with the judge before the government is invited to call its next witness.
DOJ-OGR-00017451.jpg
This document is a transcript from a legal cross-examination of a witness named Visoski, filed on August 10, 2022. The questioning establishes that Jeffrey Epstein had a home and office in Columbus, Ohio, near Les Wexner's home. The witness confirms being questioned by the government about a woman referred to by the pseudonym 'Jane', whom the witness recalls seeing on Epstein's plane on one occasion in the 1990s.
DOJ-OGR-00014542.jpg
This document is a transcript of a legal summation by Ms. Menninger, likely for a defense team. Menninger argues that the witness, Juan Alessi, is not credible by pointing out that he reported directly to Epstein, not Ghislaine, and by citing an email between Ghislaine and Sally Markham where Alessi's work was called 'truly awful'. She further undermines his credibility by discussing his inconsistent testimony regarding a household manual and a black address book.
DOJ-OGR-00014525.jpg
Defense attorney Ms. Menninger delivers a closing argument attacking the credibility of a witness named Kate. Menninger highlights that Kate received $3.25 million from the victims' fund, sought a U visa claiming to be 'exceptional,' and admitted to emailing Epstein for decades while having no proof of contact with Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues Kate's memory is flawed due to substance abuse and suggestiveness, specifically challenging her claim of meeting Maxwell at 44 Kinnerton Street in 1994 to qualify for victim compensation.
DOJ-OGR-00014509.jpg
This document is a transcript of a legal summation by Ms. Menninger in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. Menninger argues against the government's claim that a woman named Michelle is a random person, citing testimony from witnesses Jane and Michelle herself to establish that she is a specific individual who was friends with another person named Emmy. The summation aims to prove that Jane is not fabricating connections but identifying real people she encountered in 'Epstein's world'.
DOJ-OGR-00014508.jpg
This document is a transcript of a legal summation by Ms. Menninger, who is analyzing the testimony of a witness named Jane. Menninger questions Jane's credibility regarding allegations of 'sexual massages' with women named Sophie and Eva, suggesting Jane may have invented the names. However, Menninger then introduces a flight log from November 1996 showing Jane, Sophie, and Eva (identified as Dr. Eva Dubin) on a flight together, using this evidence to re-contextualize their relationship and challenge Jane's narrative.
DOJ-OGR-00014504.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a defense summation by Ms. Menninger in a criminal trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The attorney argues that a witness's testimony is unreliable due to significant memory lapses and inconsistencies, specifically highlighting contradictory accounts given to the FBI versus in court regarding the location and circumstances of the first instance of sexual abuse involving Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00014493.jpg
This document is a page from a defense attorney's (Ms. Menninger) summation in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The attorney argues that the government failed to prove its case, specifically challenging the narrative that Maxwell targeted and recruited young women. The defense points to testimony indicating that other individuals, such as Virginia Roberts and Maria Farmer, were responsible for introducing victims like Carolyn and Annie Farmer to Jeffrey Epstein, not Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00011719.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between Ms. Sternheim and the Judge. Ms. Sternheim argues that lawyers who attended proffer sessions with the government can be considered witnesses, but the Judge denies this, stating that such an action would have required a specific briefing that was never submitted. The core issue is the admissibility of testimony from these lawyers during the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00011717.jpg
This document is page 52 of a court transcript (Document 741, filed Aug 10, 2022) featuring the opening statement by defense attorney Ms. Sternheim in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Sternheim argues there is a lack of documentation or eyewitnesses to corroborate the government's charges. She characterizes Jeffrey Epstein as a wealthy, mysterious 'manipulator' comparable to James Bond, who lived a compartmentalized life with specific eccentricities, and alleges that accusers are motivated by financial gain ('shaking the money tree').
DOJ-OGR-00011692.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing the beginning of an opening statement by Ms. Pomerantz for the government. Ms. Pomerantz begins to narrate the story of a girl named Jane, who, at age 14 in 1994, met an older man and woman at a summer camp. This meeting is framed as the start of a long-term, nightmarish relationship for Jane with the couple, who were more than double her age.
DOJ-OGR-00011689.jpg
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. In it, a judge provides preliminary instructions to the jury, emphasizing their duty not to discuss the case with anyone and explaining that all parties and counsel are forbidden from interacting with them. The judge also details the courtroom's specific COVID-19 safety protocols, which require witnesses and lawyers to use a Plexiglas enclosure with a HEPA filter when speaking.
DOJ-OGR-00011681.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript, likely a judge's instructions to a jury. It outlines the sequence of a criminal trial, clarifying that only testimony from witnesses and exhibits constitute evidence, not the lawyers' opening or closing statements. The text emphasizes the defendant's presumption of innocence, stating she is not required to offer proof, and concludes by noting that jury deliberations are secret.
DOJ-OGR-00011674.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding on August 10, 2022. Government counsel, Ms. Moe, raises a concern about the defense's plan to show documents to a witness on a screen that the government cannot see, making it difficult to follow. The judge (The Court) proposes a solution where the defense can use the screen as long as they verbally describe their actions, and offers the same allowance for the government to use paper documents if projection is not possible.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity