SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
LocationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00011619.jpg
This document is page 100 of a court transcript filed on July 22, 2022, from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The Judge advises the defendant of their right to appeal the conviction and sentence within 14 days. The Court also discusses administrative matters, specifically setting the 'end of the conspiracy date' to July 2004 for the purpose of the judgment, to which neither the prosecution (Ms. Moe) nor the defense (Ms. Sternheim) objects at that moment.
DOJ-OGR-00011611.jpg
This document is a page from the sentencing transcript of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The judge outlines the rationale for a substantial sentence, citing the gravity of the offense, the harm to victims, and the need for general deterrence against sexual abuse and trafficking of minors. The judge emphasizes that Maxwell's wealth and status do not place her above the law.
DOJ-OGR-00011609.jpg
This document is page 90 of a sentencing transcript filed on July 22, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The text details the judge or prosecutor's argument regarding the severity of Maxwell's punishment, citing her 'heinous and predatory' conduct described by the Probation Department. Specific details are provided regarding the abuse of a victim named 'Jane' (age 14), including grooming tactics, instruction on how to sexually please Epstein, and direct sexual abuse by both Epstein and Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00011582.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on July 22, 2022. It features a victim impact statement from a woman, now a psychologist, who describes her silence for two decades due to shame and fear of professional ruin. She addresses Judge Nathan directly, urging her to consider the ongoing suffering of victims and the systemic effects of the crimes when sentencing Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00011577.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on July 22, 2022, concerning United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text, likely spoken by a prosecutor during sentencing arguments, characterizes Maxwell as Jeffrey Epstein's 'right hand' and a 'partner in crime' who preyed on children and viewed people as either 'disposable' or 'mattered.' It highlights that she received millions of dollars from Epstein to fund a luxurious lifestyle and emphasizes the lasting trauma inflicted on the victims.
DOJ-OGR-00011573.jpg
This page from a court transcript (case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) details sentencing proceedings for Ms. Maxwell. The Judge rejects the claim that Maxwell is indigent, citing $22 million in assets reported in 2020 and a lack of documentation regarding her marriage/divorce, and states an intention to impose a fine. The Judge also notes the government is not seeking restitution, finds no grounds for downward departures from sentencing guidelines, and calls for a lunch break.
DOJ-OGR-00011555.jpg
This document is a transcript page from the sentencing hearing of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on July 22, 2022. The Judge is issuing a ruling regarding objections to the Pre-Sentence Report (PSR), specifically noting the defense's argument to use 2003 sentencing guidelines versus 2004 guidelines. The text explicitly mentions that the government's sole objection to the guideline calculation is that Virginia Roberts and Melissa should be formally considered victims.
DOJ-OGR-00011523.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated July 22, 2022, involving Ms. Sternheim (defense) and Ms. Moe (government). The proceedings cover administrative confirmations of filings on ECF and a substantive discussion regarding the government's compliance with the 'Justice For All Act.' Specifically, Ms. Moe confirms that the government has notified six victims, proven at trial to be impacted, about the upcoming sentencing and their right to be heard.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031778.jpg
This document appears to be a news article or legal summary, bearing a House Oversight footer, detailing the legal troubles of attorney Michael Avenatti. It covers his arrest, his fallout with former client Stormy Daniels, a $10 million judgment against him regarding his former law firm, and his allegations that Nike made illicit payments to the families of basketball players DeAndre Ayton and Bol Bol. The text identifies the specific legal case as U.S. v. Avenatti (19-mj-2927) in the Southern District of New York.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_022072.jpg
This document is an excerpt from the book 'Filthy Rich' (pages 102-103) contained within a House Oversight evidence file. It details Jeffrey Epstein's early career transition after leaving Bear Stearns, specifically focusing on his involvement in recovering funds from the collapse of Drysdale Government Securities. The text highlights his relationship with Ana Obregón, who introduced him to high-society connections and gave him power of attorney, allowing him to work with Assistant US Attorney Andrew Levander on the fraud investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_026605.jpg
This document is an email chain from October 24, 2014, in which former White House Counsel Kathy Ruemmler forwards an Associated Press article to Jeffrey Epstein (via jeevacation@gmail.com). The article, written by Nedra Pickler, details Ruemmler's decision to withdraw her name from consideration as U.S. Attorney General to replace Eric Holder, citing concerns over a difficult confirmation process. Ruemmler marks the email to Epstein as 'High' importance.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017959.jpg
This page is from a legal complaint filed on April 16, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. It outlines allegations of libel against Alan Dershowitz, claiming he intentionally and maliciously made false statements about the plaintiff, Roberts (likely Virginia Roberts Giuffre), to destroy her credibility as a sex trafficking victim. The document asserts that Dershowitz acted on behalf of himself and Jeffrey Epstein, knowing the statements were false, and that these statements damaged Roberts's professional reputation as the president of a non-profit.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017946.jpg
This document is page 12 of a legal filing (Case 1:19-cv-03377) filed on April 16, 2019. It details the formation of the non-profit 'Victims Refuse Silence' by Roberts (Virginia Giuffre) in 2014 to help trafficking survivors. It alleges that Alan Dershowitz, acting as both attorney and co-conspirator for Jeffrey Epstein, made false and defamatory statements to maliciously discredit Roberts and silence her allegations of sexual abuse.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017942.jpg
This document is page 8 of a civil complaint filed on April 16, 2019, involving Plaintiff Roberts (Giuffre) and Defendant Alan Dershowitz. It outlines factual allegations regarding Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking enterprise, stating that Roberts was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell and Epstein while under 18 and abused between 2000 and 2002 at various locations including New York, Florida, New Mexico, and the Virgin Islands. The document also lists residential addresses for both Dershowitz and Epstein in New York City.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017878.jpg
This document is page 813 of a court opinion (349 F.Supp.2d 765) regarding 'In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001.' The text details the court's decision to grant motions to dismiss claims against Saudi Princes Sultan and Turki due to a lack of personal jurisdiction and insufficient factual evidence linking their charitable donations to the purposeful support of al Qaeda or terrorism in the United States. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' footer, indicating it was part of a document production to the House Oversight Committee.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017822.jpg
This document is a court exhibit containing a Miami Herald article detailing allegations against Alan Dershowitz by Sarah Ransome and Virginia Roberts regarding Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking ring. It discusses a defamation settlement where Dershowitz paid $900,000 to Roberts' lawyers, despite his claims of vindication and an exonerating investigation by Louis Freeh. The text also references sealed emails and court motions to make these documents public.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017821.jpg
This document is a court filing (Page 4 of 6) from April 16, 2019, discussing various allegations related to Jeffrey Epstein. It details claims by 'Ransome' about being recruited as a masseuse, held against her will, and forced into sex by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, leading to a civil lawsuit. The document also describes Epstein's plea deal, which quashed an FBI investigation, and includes a photograph of Virginia Roberts with Prince Andrew, with Ghislaine Maxwell in the background, where Roberts claims she was a sex slave and had sex with the prince.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023373.jpg
This document is a page from a 2012 legal opinion (printed via Westlaw in 2019) regarding the consolidated multi-district litigation (MDL 1570) surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. It outlines the plaintiffs' claims under the Anti-Terrorism Act against banks, charities, and states accused of funding al-Qaeda, and details the procedural history including the transfer of cases to the Southern District of New York and the succession of judges presiding over the matter. The document bears a House Oversight Committee Bates stamp but does not explicitly name Jeffrey Epstein on this specific page.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023371.jpg
This document is a preliminary statement from a legal appeal (cited 2012) concerning the 'In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' litigation. The Plaintiffs-Appellants (victims' families) are appealing a district court's dismissal of claims against five defendants, including Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi American Bank, and Saleh Abdullah Kamel, whom they allege knowingly provided material support to al-Qaeda. The text argues that the lower court applied improper pleading standards and misinterpreted statutes such as the Alien Tort Statute and the Anti-Terrorism Act. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production to the U.S. House Oversight Committee.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023361.jpg
This document is a 2012 Appellate Brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the 'In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' litigation. It lists numerous attorneys representing the Plaintiffs-Appellants and includes a Corporate Disclosure Statement detailing the corporate structures and name changes of various entities involved, primarily related to Cantor Fitzgerald and BGC Partners. The document bears a House Oversight Committee stamp (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023361), suggesting it was part of a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_024483.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a corporate risk disclosure report (stamped House Oversight) detailing risks associated with 'The Company' and KLC (Knowledge Learning Corporation). It outlines restrictions on business activities due to Michael Milken's past SEC judgments and criminal plea, preventing the company from acting as a broker or dealer. Additionally, it details risks related to KLC's child care operations, specifically the potential for lawsuits regarding child abuse, the impact of negative publicity on reputation, and the adequacy of insurance coverage for such claims.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015539.jpg
This page is from a legal complaint (Case 1:15-cv-07433) filed on September 21, 2015. It outlines allegations of libel against Ghislaine Maxwell, stating she and her agent Gow made false statements with 'actual and deliberate malice' to discredit the plaintiff, Giuffre. The document asserts that these statements damaged Giuffre's professional reputation as the president of a sex trafficking non-profit and falsely accused her of lying about being recruited by Maxwell and abused by Epstein.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015538.jpg
This document is page 8 of a civil complaint filed on September 21, 2015, in the case of Giuffre v. Maxwell. It specifically outlines 'Count I: Defamation,' alleging that Ghislaine Maxwell and her authorized agent, Ross Gow, maliciously released false statements to the press starting in January 2015. The plaintiff claims these statements were intended to destroy Giuffre's reputation, discredit her efforts to help sex trafficking victims, and protect Maxwell's 'powerful friends.'
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015536.jpg
This document appears to be page 6 of a civil complaint (Case 1:15-cv-07433) filed on September 21, 2015. It details allegations that Ghislaine Maxwell procured underage girls for Jeffrey Epstein and subsequently launched a defamation campaign in January 2015 through her agent, Ross Gow, to discredit victim Virginia Giuffre. The text outlines specific statements made by Maxwell on January 3, 2015, calling Giuffre's claims 'obvious lies' and 'untrue' in an effort to silence exposure of sex crimes.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015532.jpg
This document is page 2 of a civil complaint filed on September 21, 2015, by Virginia Giuffre against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:15-cv-07433). The text outlines the nature of the action, alleging that Maxwell facilitated the sexual trafficking and abuse of Giuffre when she was a minor and subsequently defamed her by calling her a liar. It establishes jurisdiction in the Southern District of New York based on diversity of citizenship and Maxwell's residence in New York City.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity