SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
LocationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00016984.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between the Judge, Mr. Rohrbach, and Mr. Everdell regarding edits to Jury Instruction No. 36. The discussion focuses on semantic changes, such as replacing 'the defendant' with 'Ms. Maxwell,' and addresses the removal of an individual named 'Kate' from the list of overt acts.
DOJ-OGR-00016975.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a discussion between attorneys Mr. Everdell and Mr. Rohrbach, and the Judge ('The Court'), regarding specific wording changes to Jury Instruction No. 34. The prosecution (Rohrbach) successfully argues that the phrase 'an individual under the age of 18' should be changed to 'individuals under the age of 18' to accurately reflect that the conspiracy charge involved multiple minors.
DOJ-OGR-00016959.jpg
This document is page 33 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The dialogue captures a legal argument between the Judge ('The Court') and defense attorney Mr. Everdell regarding jury instructions for a charge under 18 U.S.C. § 2421 (Mann Act). The Judge cites *United States v. An Soon Kim*, arguing that the word 'dominant' is not required in the statutory language for proving the purpose of transportation, while Everdell attempts to distinguish the case.
DOJ-OGR-00016950.jpg
This document is page 24 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell is arguing for specific jury instructions regarding the definition of 'persuasion,' 'inducement,' and 'enticement' based on the precedent *U.S. v. Broxmeyer*. He proposes language stating that these elements are only satisfied if they specifically *caused* the victim, referred to as 'Jane,' to travel in interstate commerce.
DOJ-OGR-00016932.jpg
A page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022. The government attorney, Mr. Rohrbach, withdraws a request regarding Counts Five and Six due to statutory changes regarding 'foreign commerce.' The Judge works with defense attorney Mr. Everdell to specifically remove the words 'and foreign' from page 15 of the document under discussion.
DOJ-OGR-00016927.jpg
This document is the cover page of a court transcript for the jury trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The proceedings took place on December 18, 2021, at 9:10 a.m. in the Southern District of New York before Judge Alison J. Nathan. The document lists the legal appearances for both the prosecution (US Attorneys including Maurene Comey) and the defense (including Jeffrey Pagliuca and Christian Everdell).
DOJ-OGR-00016924.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on 08/10/22. It records the end of a day's proceedings where the defense (Ms. Sternheim) renews a Rule 29 motion for acquittal. The Judge coordinates scheduling for a charging conference with staff member Ms. Williams and adjourns the court until December 18, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00016921.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Judge (The Court) informs the jury that the evidence portion of the trial has concluded. The Judge sets the schedule for the following Monday, starting early at 9:00 a.m. for closing arguments and jury instructions, with a potential extension until 6:00 p.m. to finish in one day.
DOJ-OGR-00016910.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022. It records a critical moment where the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell ('Ms. Maxwell'), formally confirms to the Court that she has decided not to testify in her trial, following consultation with her attorney, Ms. Sternheim. The proceedings include a brief recess, after which attorneys Ms. Comey and Mr. Everdell confirm their readiness to proceed.
DOJ-OGR-00016840.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the resumption of the direct examination of witness Dr. Dubin by attorney Mr. Pagliuca after the jury is brought in. During this segment, Exhibit 662-RR (identified as a redacted version of Exhibit 662) is offered by the defense and admitted into evidence without objection from the government (Ms. Moe).
DOJ-OGR-00016837.jpg
This document is a transcript page from the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), dated August 10, 2022. It details procedural discussions between the defense (Mr. Pagliuca) and the prosecution (Ms. Comey, Ms. Moe) regarding the admissibility of flight records and the submission of legal applications. The court sustains an objection based on Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403 during the direct examination of a witness named Dubin.
DOJ-OGR-00016826.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Sidebar) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Prosecutor Ms. Moe objects to the Defense's line of questioning for witness Dubin, arguing against the relevance of 'uncharged conduct' regarding the defendant or Epstein. Moe also argues there is no foundation to suggest Dubin was present for sexualized massages involving a victim identified as 'Jane'.
DOJ-OGR-00016819.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. It records the conclusion of Agent Young's testimony and the calling of the next defense witness, Dr. Eva Dubin (Eva Andersson Dubin). The transcript captures the swearing-in process and the initial spelling of her name for the record.
DOJ-OGR-00016818.jpg
This document is page 89 of a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). It captures a brief exchange during the redirect examination of a witness named Young, where Ms. Comey discusses transcript availability and the Court sustains an objection as 'beyond the scope.'
DOJ-OGR-00016812.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on August 10, 2022. It depicts a brief exchange during the cross-examination of a witness named Young, where prosecutor Ms. Comey interrupts questioning to request a moment, confer with defense counsel, and approach the bench (a sidebar).
DOJ-OGR-00016800.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. The testimony features witness Young being questioned by Ms. Menninger regarding the timeline of drafting and filing a specific report in late 2019. The Judge intervenes to ensure a specific name is not mentioned in open court, instructing the attorney to use the pseudonym 'Jane' instead.
DOJ-OGR-00016772.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues to revisit a ruling to allow the defense to call FBI case agents as witnesses to question their investigative thoroughness, arguing that 'Jane's testimony' made this a live issue. The Court pushes back, citing the Second Circuit case 'Saldarriaga' and maintaining that the government's investigative techniques do not prove the defendant's innocence.
DOJ-OGR-00016763.jpg
This document is a transcript page from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues to the Judge that he should be allowed to question an agent to explain the absence of modern evidence (like geo-location and phone records) due to the age of the allegations. Prosecutor Mr. Rohrbach questions the necessity of this, noting that a custodian has already testified regarding recordkeeping.
DOJ-OGR-00016757.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It records a legal debate between Ms. Menninger (defense) and Ms. Comey (prosecution) regarding the scope of closing arguments related to impeachment and witness statements. Additionally, Ms. Comey notes that due to rulings on 'Annie Farmer statements,' it is no longer necessary to call AUSA Rossmiller as a witness.
DOJ-OGR-00016751.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The text records a judge providing legal guidance regarding the admissibility of prior inconsistent statements and extrinsic evidence under Rule 613(b). The judge cites specific case law (Almonte, Leonardi) to explain that law enforcement notes generally do not prove inconsistency unless the witness subscribed to them or the interviewing officer is called as a witness.
DOJ-OGR-00016749.jpg
This document is page 20 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on August 10, 2022. The content captures a procedural discussion where the Judge ('The Court') outlines the legal requirements for introducing extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement to impeach a witness, citing United States v. Gulani. Ms. Menninger briefly responds to a question about a pseudonym.
DOJ-OGR-00016737.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The transcript details a discussion where defense attorney Ms. Sternheim confirms the defense will not call a witness named Mr. Hamilton, citing concerns over public access limitations during remote testimony. Additionally, prosecutor Ms. Comey discusses the scheduling of custodian witnesses for a brief rebuttal presentation.
DOJ-OGR-00016734.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) involving a procedural discussion between the Judge, Defense Counsel Ms. Menninger, and Prosecutor Ms. Comey. The discussion centers on how to handle a witness who intends to invoke the Fifth Amendment and another witness who refused to communicate with the defense. The Judge expresses frustration with potential delays, stating the issue needs to be resolved immediately ('happen yesterday').
DOJ-OGR-00016728.jpg
This is a single page (245 of 246) from a court transcript in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. The text captures the very end of a session involving the direct examination of a witness named Hyppolite. The presiding judge adjourns the court to December 17, 2021, at 8:45 a.m., noting that the 'charge' (jury instructions) will be given 'tomorrow.'
DOJ-OGR-00016699.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Direct Examination of witness Aznaran) filed on August 10, 2022, in the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The testimony explains technical details regarding how passenger entry data is recorded, distinguishing between static data provided by airline manifests (names, DOB, carrier codes) and dynamic processing times updated in the TECS system when a passenger is physically processed by a CBP officer at an immigration kiosk.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity