Ms. Comey
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
18
Very Strong
|
28 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Opposing counsel |
15
Very Strong
|
17 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Opposing counsel |
13
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Opposing counsel |
13
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Opposing counsel |
12
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Representative |
12
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Mr. Alessi
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Parkinson
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Professional adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Mr. Parkinson
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Professional adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
38 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
person
Shawn
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Meder
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
37 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
155 | |
|
person
Mr. Visoski
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
your Honor
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Rodgers
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
5 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Introduction of Government Exhibit 1004 (Stipulation) | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court Recess pending verdict | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding the admissibility of photographic exhibits and the timing of defense obj... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal sidebar/conference regarding a response to a jury question concerning witness Carolyn and a... | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discussion regarding three missing jurors who are stuck on the security line or unaccounted for o... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Lawrence Visoski | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of witness Kimberly Meder | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross-examination of witness Dawson regarding a residence and inconsistent statements. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Shawn | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of David Rodgers | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony of Kimberly Meder | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony of Carolyn | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Admission of Government's Exhibit 296R | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct Examination of Lawrence Visoski by Ms. Comey | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Redirect examination of witness Carolyn. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Conclusion of Shawn's testimony and calling of Nicole Hesse to the stand. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court recess taken after discussion between counsel and judge. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct Examination of Lawrence Visoski | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct Examination of Carolyn | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of Michael Dawson | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of witness Rodgers regarding Government Exhibit 662 (a logbook). | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Admission of Government Exhibits 252, 253, and 254 under seal. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of Gregory Parkinson | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Introduction of Government Exhibit 2 for identification. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Juan Patricio Alessi | Courtroom | View |
DOJ-OGR-00017205.jpg
This document is page 184 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It captures the final moments of prosecutor Ms. Comey's closing argument, where she asks the jury to find the defendant guilty of participating in the sexual abuse of underage girls. Following this, the Court (Judge Nathan) begins reading the jury instructions, starting with Instruction No. 1 regarding the Role of the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00017203.jpg
This document is a transcript of a legal rebuttal given by Ms. Comey in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. Comey argues that the four witnesses who testified against Maxwell were motivated by a desire for justice, not financial gain. She supports this by stating they had already received 'million-dollar payouts' and would not have risked perjury by lying in a federal trial if money was their only goal.
DOJ-OGR-00017200.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of a rebuttal argument given by Ms. Comey. She argues that the witnesses—Jane, Kate, Carolyn, and Annie—have no financial motive to lie, as their civil cases are settled and the victim compensation fund they were paid from is finished. Ms. Comey refutes the defense's implication of a financial incentive for Jane by clarifying that a conversation between Jane's lawyer and a prosecutor occurred in 2021, long after Jane had already received her financial award.
DOJ-OGR-00017199.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of a rebuttal argument given by Ms. Comey on August 10, 2022. She argues for the credibility of several witnesses, including Juan Alessi and the ex-boyfriends (Matt, Dave, Shawn) of other female witnesses, stating they have no motive to lie. Comey highlights corroborating evidence, such as flight records showing minors Jane and Virginia on Jeffrey Epstein's planes and Alessi's own admission of stealing from and repaying Epstein, to bolster their testimony against the defendant.
DOJ-OGR-00017198.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court rebuttal on August 10, 2022, where an attorney, Ms. Comey, argues against the defense's claim that the FBI manipulated witnesses. She asserts there is no evidence for this accusation, citing testimony from witnesses like Special Agent Young, Jane, Kate, Carolyn, and Annie, who all stated they were only asked to tell the truth. Ms. Comey concludes that for the defense's argument to hold, the jury would have to believe that all these witnesses lied about the defendant's role in their abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00017196.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (rebuttal by Prosecutor Ms. Comey) in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The prosecutor argues against the defense theory that victims fabricated stories for financial gain, pointing out that victims Jane, Carolyn, and Annie disclosed details about Maxwell to the FBI and personal confidants (Dave Mulligan, Matt, Sean) years before any compensation fund existed (specifically citing 2006 and 2007). The text details specific allegations, including Maxwell touching Annie's breasts during a massage and Carolyn identifying Maxwell by her hair and accent.
DOJ-OGR-00017195.jpg
This document is a court transcript of a rebuttal argument delivered by Ms. Comey on August 10, 2022. Comey refutes the defense's theory that witnesses (Kate, Carolyn, Annie, Jane) were manipulated by greedy lawyers to fabricate a story about Maxwell for financial gain from the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund. She argues there is no evidence for this conspiracy and highlights that one witness's lawyer worked pro bono, which contradicts the alleged financial motive.
DOJ-OGR-00017194.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Rebuttal by Ms. Comey) filed on August 10, 2022, in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecutor argues against the defense's attempt to discredit witness 'Carolyn' over peripheral details, emphasizing that Carolyn consistently identified Maxwell as the person who scheduled massages with Jeffrey Epstein, even in a 2009 deposition. The text details abuse Carolyn suffered from Epstein and notes she confided in a person named Sean about meeting Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00017192.jpg
This document is a legal rebuttal arguing for the credibility of a witness named Jane, asserting that her memory of meeting Maxwell and Epstein and the onset of abuse at age 14 is accurate. It counters defense attempts to discredit her timeline by referencing Interlochen and flight records from 1994 and 1996, which place Jane, Maxwell, Epstein, and the defendant together at key times and locations, including flights to New York. The speaker emphasizes that Jane's memory of the abuse is more significant than minor discrepancies in dating events by public figures' birthdays.
DOJ-OGR-00017189.jpg
This document is a court transcript of a rebuttal by Ms. Comey in a criminal case. She argues against the defense's claim that four women (Jane, Kate, Carolyn, and Annie) are misremembering their experiences, asserting that their core memories of trauma involving the defendant (Maxwell) and Epstein are solid and reliable. The prosecutor highlights specific, vivid memories of the victims to counter the defense's theory of a 'massive false memory event'.
DOJ-OGR-00017185.jpg
This document is a page from a prosecutor's (Ms. Comey) rebuttal in a criminal trial, filed on August 10, 2022. Ms. Comey argues that the defendant was knowingly complicit in a sexual abuse scheme, citing the environment at a Palm Beach house, a list of masseuses used as a 'ruse for sex', and a $30 million payment as evidence of this complicity. She dismisses the defense's arguments about missing evidence as a distraction from the powerful testimony of victims Jane, Kate, Carolyn, and Annie.
DOJ-OGR-00017183.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the beginning of the government's rebuttal argument in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The prosecutor, Ms. Comey, argues that the case is about Maxwell's crimes against children she targeted for abuse, specifically naming victims Jane, Carolyn, and Annie. She dismisses the defense's arguments as attempts to distract the jury and asserts the government's right to respond to them.
DOJ-OGR-00017096.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a legal argument made outside the presence of the jury. Attorney Ms. Sternheim objects to a statement made by opposing counsel, Ms. Moe, during closing arguments. The core of the dispute is whether a massage table's origin in California is sufficient to prove an effect on interstate commerce, a key element of the charges, with Ms. Sternheim arguing that this interpretation is incorrect.
DOJ-OGR-00017021.jpg
This document is the final page of a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on August 10, 2022. The Court, along with counsel Ms. Comey, Mr. Everdell, and Mr. Rohrbach, finalizes a minor textual edit and discusses redactions. The judge thanks the court staff and all parties for their willingness to work on a Saturday before adjourning the proceedings until 8:30 a.m. on Monday, December 20, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00017018.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It records a discussion between the Judge, defense attorney Ms. Sternheim, and prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding procedural matters before the jury returns on a Monday at 8:30 AM. They discuss creating an agreed-upon list of admitted exhibits and redacting transcripts for potential jury review to avoid readbacks.
DOJ-OGR-00017015.jpg
This document is a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between a judge and two attorneys, Ms. Sternheim and Ms. Comey. The parties agree to conduct closing arguments on the upcoming Monday and discuss the appropriate length, with the judge suggesting two hours. Ms. Comey notes the preparation is still cumbersome due to exhibits that were intentionally reserved for the closing arguments.
DOJ-OGR-00016925.jpg
This document is an index of examinations from a legal transcript for Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on August 10, 2022. It lists four witnesses—Jason Richards, Amanda Young, Eva Adnersson Dubin, and Michelle Healy—and details which attorneys conducted their direct, cross, and redirect examinations, along with the corresponding page numbers in the full transcript.
DOJ-OGR-00016916.jpg
This document is a partial court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing discussions and stipulations regarding the admission of various exhibits (A-1, A-2, DH1, DH2, DH3, J2, DH4) during a legal proceeding. Attorneys MS. COMEY and MR. EVERDELL, along with THE COURT, discuss the admissibility of Palm Beach County school records pertaining to individuals named Virginia Robertson and Jane, and the potential testimony of witness Dominique Hyppolite. The government also requested that Exhibit J2 be accepted under seal.
DOJ-OGR-00016913.jpg
This is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell and Prosecutor Ms. Comey agree to stipulations regarding the admission of redacted Government Exhibits 52-K, 52-J, and 52-L under seal. Additionally, the parties stipulate that the FBI seized Annie Farmer's boots on June 29, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00016912.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between a judge and several attorneys (Ms. Sternheim, Ms. Comey, and Mr. Everdell) about the day's trial schedule. The judge discusses the need to potentially keep the jury until 5:30 or 6:00 PM and shows consideration for jurors' potential childcare responsibilities. After the scheduling is discussed, the jury is brought in, and the judge allows Mr. Everdell to proceed.
DOJ-OGR-00016911.jpg
This document is a partial court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between attorneys (Ms. Sternheim, Ms. Comey) and the Court regarding scheduling for an ongoing legal proceeding. The parties discuss the timing for bringing in the jury, potential extended hours on Monday to complete proceedings, and the estimated duration of closing arguments, including a summation argument for Ms. Moe and a rebuttal. The conversation focuses on logistical aspects of the trial's conclusion.
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-00016908.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 the prosecution (Ms. Comey, Mr. Rohrbach), the defense (Ms. Menninger), and the Court regarding the finalization of stipulations and the withdrawal of a request to issue an arrest warrant for a witness named Kelly Bovino who failed to appear for a subpoena. The parties also discuss resolving issues to avoid calling a witness from London on the following Monday.
DOJ-OGR-00016839.jpg
This is a court transcript from a case dated August 10, 2022, detailing a procedural discussion between two attorneys, Mr. Pagliuca and Ms. Comey, and the judge. They are arranging the submission of a new, less-redacted version of flight logs (Exhibit 662-R), agreeing to mark it as '662-RR' for clarity, which will replace a previously offered version.
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.
Government Exhibit 296
Ms. Comey questions Gregory Parkinson about the contents of Government Exhibit 296, a CD. Parkinson identifies it and describes its contents as video of a search warrant execution.
Request to seal discussion of witness's family details
Ms. Comey requests that if Mr. Pagliuca is going to discuss the details of Carolyn's family, the discussion should be held at side bar and under seal.
Description of Government Exhibits 202, 206, and 209
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Mr. Parkinson, asking him to describe what is depicted in a series of government exhibits showing various parts of a property.
Government's rebuttal argument in the trial of Ghislaine ...
Ms. Comey begins the government's rebuttal by focusing the jury's attention on the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell, and her alleged crimes of abusing children, specifically mentioning Jane, Carolyn, and Annie. She characterizes the defense's arguments as distractions and reaffirms that while the government has the burden of proof, it is appropriate to respond to the defense's theories.
Identification of individuals in photographs from the Eps...
Ms. Comey questions a witness who identifies Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell in two photographs (Exhibits 307 and 320), which are subsequently admitted into evidence by the court. The witness states the photos came from a CD reviewed during the investigation.
Direct examination of witness's background
Ms. Comey questions witness Juan Patricio Alessi about his personal background, including his name, age, birthplace, upbringing, education, and work history after moving to the United States.
Introduction of prior consistent statements
Ms. Comey informs the court of her intention to question a witness about 'Jane's' prior consistent statements.
Direct examination regarding Government Exhibits 238, 239...
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Mr. Parkinson, about the contents of three government exhibits, which he identifies as showing the first floor and north side of a building. She also confirms with the court that the exhibits have been admitted into evidence.
Admission of evidence
Ms. Comey states she has no objection to Exhibit B and then moves to enter numerous redacted government exhibits into evidence.
Carolyn's age and introduction to Jeffrey Epstein
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Carolyn, about her initial interactions with someone named Shawn. Carolyn states she told Shawn she was 17 but he learned she was turning 14 by attending her birthday party. Carolyn also testifies that Shawn led her to meet Jeffrey Epstein via his friends, Virginia Roberts and Tony Figueroa.
Massagers in Mr. Epstein's room
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Alessi, about the types, appearance, frequency of discovery, and location of massagers found in Mr. Epstein's room.
Female passenger on Mr. Epstein's plane
Ms. Comey questions witness Mr. Rodgers about a female passenger on Mr. Epstein's plane who he understood attended Interlochen. She directs him to identify the passenger's name using Government Exhibit 12 without saying it aloud.
Direction to review Government Exhibit 14
Ms. Comey asks the Court to direct the jury to turn to Government Exhibit 14, specifically to a child's name and birth date entry.
Cleaning procedures after Mr. Epstein's massages.
Ms. Comey questions Mr. Alessi about what he cleaned up after Mr. Epstein's massages. Mr. Pagliuca objects to the time frame. Mr. Alessi explains that whether he cleaned up towels depended on if the massage therapist was a repeat visitor or a new person.
Cleaning procedures after Mr. Epstein's massages.
Ms. Comey questions Mr. Alessi about what he cleaned up after Mr. Epstein's massages. Mr. Pagliuca objects to the time frame. Mr. Alessi explains that whether he cleaned up towels depended on if the massage therapist was a repeat visitor or a new person.
Relevance of a photograph as evidence
Ms. Comey argues that a disturbing photograph displayed outside Mr. Epstein's bedroom contradicts the defense's argument that the defendant was unaware of Epstein's attraction to underage females due to a 'halo effect'.
Witness's relationship with Virginia Roberts and her conn...
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Shawn, about their acquaintance with Virginia Roberts. The testimony establishes they were schoolmates, met in 2001, and socialized with Roberts and her boyfriend, Tony Figueroa. It is also stated that an unnamed female met Jeffrey Epstein through Virginia Roberts.
Objection to document C4
Ms. Comey objects to the inclusion of document C4, arguing it was crafted by lawyers, not the witness, and would confuse the issues for the jury.
Identification of Government Exhibits 932 and 704
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Mr. Visoski, to identify two exhibits as photos of Mr. Epstein's New York residence and offers them into evidence.
Stipulation regarding authenticity of Government Exhibits...
Ms. Comey stipulates on the record that Government Exhibits 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 are true and correct copies of birth certificates from various state and county agencies.
Request for briefing schedule regarding cross-examination...
Ms. Comey informed the court that the government and defense counsel disagree on the propriety of certain cross-examination topics for government witnesses. She requested to submit a written briefing to avoid discussing sensitive information, such as past criminal convictions or identifying details of anonymized witnesses, on the public record.
Identification of Government Exhibit 332 and Virginia Rob...
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Meder, about a photograph (Government Exhibit 332) from a CD (logged as 1B26) that was reviewed as part of the Epstein and Maxwell investigation. She also asks if the witness is familiar with the appearance of Virginia Roberts.
Jury video screens
Ms. Comey noted that the jurors' screens in the jury box had been turned for a video presentation and thanked the courthouse staff for their help.
Proposed limiting instructions
At the court's request, Ms. Comey reads the proposed (but now withdrawn) limiting instructions for a video and a photo (Government Exhibit 250) into the record.
Direct examination regarding Government Exhibits 238, 239...
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Mr. Parkinson, about the contents of three government exhibits, which he identifies as showing the first floor and north side of a building. She also confirms with the court that the exhibits have been admitted into evidence.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity