SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
LocationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00020359.jpg
This document is an affirmation by Assistant U.S. Attorney Maurene Comey, filed on May 27, 2021, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The filing formally opposes the renewed motion for pretrial release by defendant-appellant Ghislaine Maxwell. It references a previous court order from April 27, 2021, which had already denied Maxwell's request for bail and upheld the District Court's decision.
DOJ-OGR-00020354.jpg
This is page 2 of a court filing by the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The document addresses the Court's inquiries regarding the defendant's housing conditions at the MDC. It explains that she is housed alone due to safety concerns ('high-profile case', 'nature of charges') and her own expressed fears of the general population. It also states that the MDC cannot provide her with an eye mask because they are considered contraband, though she may use other non-contraband items to cover her eyes.
DOJ-OGR-00017602.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. Prosecutors are arguing to admit the testimony of a witness named 'Matt,' who was in a relationship with a victim named 'Jane' starting in 2007. Matt is expected to testify that Jane told him her family struggled financially during her childhood and mentioned an 'uncle' who paid for things, implying a cover story for abuse or grooming.
DOJ-OGR-00017600.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It records a discussion between the prosecution (Ms. Moe), the defense (Ms. Menninger), and the Court regarding the need to protect the privacy of a crime victim during upcoming cross-examination. The Court instructs the parties to 'meet and confer' to resolve issues regarding anonymizing names and identifying topics.
DOJ-OGR-00017596.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 Ms. Menninger (Defense) and Ms. Comey (Prosecution) regarding Federal Rule 16 and the disclosure of impeachment evidence. The Defense argues that documents used for impeachment (bias, motive, memory) do not need to be produced to the government beforehand, while the Prosecution contests this interpretation.
DOJ-OGR-00017583.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named 'Jane'. Jane testifies about her relationship history, specifically a boyfriend named 'Matt' (pseudonym) she dated from 2007 to 2013, and confirms she told him she had been sexually abused by Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. She explains this disclosure was prompted by seeing news of Epstein's arrest, which caused her emotional distress that her boyfriend noticed.
DOJ-OGR-00017566.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It details a legal argument between attorneys Ms. Moe and Ms. Menninger regarding the admissibility of testimony from a witness named 'Jane' about her mother. Specifically, Ms. Moe argues to admit statements where Jane's mother reacted negatively to Jane speaking with a guidance counselor, instructing Jane never to talk about what happens in their house; the Court agrees to admit this with a limiting instruction that it is offered for the effect on the listener, not for the truth of the mother's statements.
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-00017461.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski. The defense attorney, Mr. Everdell, questions the witness about two photographs (Exhibits LV3A and LV3B) depicting a woman who shares a first name with 'Jane's true first name.' The exhibits are admitted into evidence under seal to protect the privacy of the individual, consistent with a prior court ruling regarding pseudonyms.
DOJ-OGR-00014486.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), specifically the summation by defense attorney Ms. Menninger. She argues that the government failed to record interviews with accusers, questions the credibility of witnesses who added Maxwell to their stories only after hiring personal injury lawyers, and points out discrepancies between testimony and flight logs regarding travel.
DOJ-OGR-00011720.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) where attorney Mr. Pagliuca discusses the admissibility of evidence regarding communications between witnesses' lawyers and the government. Specifically, Pagliuca mentions an email from attorney Mr. Scarola to the government suggesting ten topics for an interview with a woman named Carolyn. The discussion centers on whether these communications (proffers and emails) are privileged and how they will be introduced without calling the lawyers as witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00011716.jpg
This document is a transcript page from the opening statement of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim argues that the accusers' memories are unreliable due to media influence and monetary incentives (False Memory Syndrome defense strategy). An objection by prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding Sternheim's characterization of investigators is sustained by the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00011709.jpg
This document is page 44 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the opening statement by defense attorney Ms. Sternheim, who argues that Ghislaine Maxwell is being used as a 'scapegoat,' 'target,' and 'stand-in' for the deceased Jeffrey Epstein to satisfy the anger of his victims. Prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz objects repeatedly during the statement.
DOJ-OGR-00011693.jpg
This document is a page from the opening statement by Ms. Pomerantz in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The text outlines how Maxwell and a 'middle-aged man' (implied Epstein) targeted victims like 'Jane' between 1994 and 2004. It details Maxwell's role in grooming victims through shopping trips and normalizing sexual topics to facilitate their abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00011684.jpg
This document is page 19 of a court transcript (Document 741) filed on August 10, 2022, from the case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). It contains standard jury instructions delivered by the judge, explaining that lawyer statements and objections are not evidence, and instructing jurors to use their common sense when evaluating testimony. The page bears the Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00011684.
DOJ-OGR-00011677.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022, involving the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. It records a procedural discussion between Defense Attorney Ms. Sternheim, Prosecutor Ms. Comey, and the Judge regarding the order of 'alternating strikes' during jury selection. The Judge agrees to allow the defense to start the process because they have ten strikes available.
DOJ-OGR-00011666.jpg
This document is the cover page for the court transcript of the jury trial in the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell, held on November 29, 2021. The trial took place in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan. The document lists the appearances of the legal counsel for both the prosecution and the defense, as well as other individuals present.
DOJ-OGR-00011665.jpg
This is a Notice of Filing of Official Transcript filed on August 10, 2022, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330) in the Southern District of New York. The document notifies parties that a transcript for a conference held on November 23, 2021, has been filed by court reporter 'speer'. It outlines the standard legal procedures and deadlines for requesting redactions of personal identifiers before the transcript becomes publicly available.
DOJ-OGR-00011664.jpg
This is the final page (43) of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The proceedings conclude with the Judge instructing Ms. Comey (Government) and Ms. Sternheim (Defense) to confer regarding rebuttal witnesses and submit a letter by Saturday if there is a disagreement. The court adjourns for the Thanksgiving holiday.
DOJ-OGR-00011645.jpg
A page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between the prosecution (Mr. Rohrbach), the defense (Ms. Menninger), and the Judge regarding expert witness Mr. Flatley. The discussion focuses on the scope of Mr. Flatley's expertise, specifically regarding forensic principles, digital document storage, and metadata, and whether proper notice was given to the defense regarding his opinions. The Judge instructs that any differing expert opinions on these technical matters must be noticed.
DOJ-OGR-00011641.jpg
This document is page 20 of a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). The text documents a legal argument between attorneys (Mr. Everdell and Ms. Menninger) and the Judge regarding a witness named Kelso. The debate centers on whether Kelso will testify as a fact witness or an expert witness regarding computer forensics and metadata, and whether sufficient disclosure has been made under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16.
DOJ-OGR-00011634.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It details a discussion between the Judge and attorney Mr. Pagliuca regarding the logistics of maintaining witness anonymity in the courtroom. Specifically, they discuss preventing the public from seeing identifying information on counsel's screens while ensuring the government and jurors have access to necessary documents.
DOJ-OGR-00011633.jpg
A page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed 08/10/22) detailing a procedural argument between attorney Mr. Pagliuca and the Judge. The discussion centers on how to present documents designated for 'refreshing recollection' without exposing identifying information to the public via courtroom screens. The Judge suggests using paper to ensure anonymity, while Mr. Pagliuca argues this is impractical due to the 'thousands of pages' involved.
DOJ-OGR-00011628.jpg
This document is page 7 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The text details a legal argument where the defense (Mr. Pagliuca) is barred by the Court from calling an attorney as a witness without prior briefing due to privilege concerns regarding 'Minor Victim 4'. The prosecution (Ms. Comey) then requests clarification on whether the jury will be instructed during preliminary instructions that witnesses will use pseudonyms, to which the Court agrees to address before opening statements.
DOJ-OGR-00011622.jpg
This document is the cover page for a court hearing transcript from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated November 23, 2021. The case is United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell, with Hon. Alison J. Nathan presiding as the District Judge. The page lists the appearances of the legal counsel for both the prosecution, led by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams, and the defense, including attorneys from the firm Haddon Morgan and Foreman.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity