| 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 |
This document is a page from a court transcript showing the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. Alessi testifies about his role working for Mr. Epstein, stating he was a driver and was not allowed in the room when Epstein conversed with guests. He confirms driving Ms. Maxwell to massage places and being at The Breakers to find a professional masseuse for Mr. Epstein.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. Alessi, by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. Alessi admits to having a list of massage therapists for Mr. Epstein but denies ever personally calling one to come to the house. The transcript also records procedural interactions between the attorneys (Pagliuca and Ms. Comey) and the judge.
This page contains the cross-examination of Juan Alessi during the trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Defense attorney Pagliuca asks Alessi if he ever called The Breakers, Mar-a-Lago, or Boca Raton resort to find massage therapists for Jeffrey Epstein, to which Alessi replies 'Never.' The rest of the page involves procedural discussions regarding the admissibility of prior deposition testimony for impeachment purposes.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The discussion involves procedural arguments with the judge and another attorney, Ms. Comey, about referencing prior testimony. The page ends with Mr. Pagliuca asking Mr. Alessi if he would call resorts like The Breakers or Mar-a-Lago to find someone to deliver a message to Jeffrey Epstein.
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of witness Alessi (Juan Alessi). The testimony focuses on Alessi driving a woman (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) to exclusive spas and country clubs in Palm Beach, including The Breakers, allegedly for the purpose of 'recruiting.' Alessi admits to keeping a Rolodex containing the names of 'repeat woman' and 'massage therapists' who visited the house.
This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of John Alessi, filed on August 10, 2022. The testimony focuses on Alessi's role in driving an English woman (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) to various spas and massage schools between Jupiter and Boca Raton, Florida, for the purpose of recruiting young women. Alessi confirms he made lists of locations and drove, but states he waited in the car while she did the recruiting and denies personal involvement in recruiting or seeing 'him' (implied Epstein) doing it.
This document is a page from the cross-examination of Juan Alessi in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Attorney Pagliuca questions Alessi about previous deposition testimony regarding whether a specific woman was considered a massage therapist and whether Jeffrey Epstein instructed Alessi to hire licensed therapists from clubs and spas—an allegation Alessi denies. Prosecutor Ms. Comey intervenes to ensure the full context of the deposition questions is read into the record.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, showing a lawyer, Mr. Pagliuca, cross-examining a witness named Alessi. Mr. Pagliuca reads from a prior deposition where the witness was questioned by Mr. Edwards, Virginia Roberts' lawyer, about a trip to Mar-a-Lago. The testimony reveals the witness gave conflicting dates (2000 and summer 2002) for when they went to pick up Virginia Roberts from the location.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. An attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, questions Alessi about a meeting with a Ms. Roberts at Mar-a-Lago in 2001 or 2002. Another attorney, Ms. Comey, objects to the questioning method, leading to a procedural discussion before the court.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi by attorney Mr. Pagliuca. The testimony focuses on Alessi confirming observing Ms. Maxwell engaging in conversation with Virginia Roberts after Maxwell received a 'treatment.' There is a brief legal dispute where Ms. Comey objects to Mr. Pagliuca misreading a line from a prior deposition, which Pagliuca then corrects.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. The judge confirms with counsel, Ms. Comey for the government and Mr. Pagliuca, that there are no preliminary matters to discuss. The judge then instructs court staff, Ms. Williams, to bring the witness back to the stand and to bring in the jury to resume the proceedings.
Page 75 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed 08/10/22) documenting the cross-examination of Mr. Alessi. Attorney Ms. Comey requests a full Q&A be read for the record, but cross-examining attorney Mr. Pagliuca realizes he is on the wrong page and requests a break, which the Court grants.
In this transcript from the trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330), witness Mr. Alessi is cross-examined by defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca. Alessi admits he did not follow the specific household manual or use its checkmarks, though he asserts he did his work. Pagliuca attempts to establish that a 'countess' was hired to write this manual, which Alessi claims not to know.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on the witness's relationship and communication protocols with Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell, particularly concerning who was in charge at a Palm Beach property. The transcript also records a procedural exchange where another attorney, Ms. Comey, makes an objection that is overruled by the judge.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on an occasion when Mr. Epstein picked up a "Ms. Jane" from her home in West Palm Beach, Florida, and drove her to his house. The topic then shifts to renovations at a Palm Beach house, with the attorney introducing Government Exhibit 297, dated April 4, 1994, as evidence.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It features the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. Alessi, regarding a 2020 declaration where he stated he was instructed by Jeffrey Epstein to pick up a woman referred to as 'Ms. Jane' in West Palm Beach and drive her to Epstein's home. Alessi expresses confusion about the 'declaration' terminology but confirms that the signature on the document dated July 9 is definitely his.
This document is page 61 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a legal argument during the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. Ms. Comey objects to the defense using a prior declaration, arguing it isn't inconsistent, but the Court overrules the objection, allowing Mr. Pagliuca to question the witness about the discrepancy between 'multiple occasions' (testimony) and 'one' (declaration).
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument between attorneys Ms. Comey and Mr. Pagliuca regarding the consistency of a witness's (Alessi) testimony. The discussion focuses on impeaching the witness over the specific years (between 1993-1996) and the number of occasions he observed events involving Mr. Epstein, Ms. Maxwell, and a person named Jane in West Palm Beach. The attorneys quote prior statements to challenge the witness's current testimony during cross-examination.
This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of witness Juan Alessi (likely in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca questions Alessi about his signature on a document labeled 'JA-1' dated July 9, 2020. Prosecutor Ms. Comey objects to the reading of the document, claiming it is not inconsistent testimony, while Pagliuca moves to introduce the entire exhibit.
This document is page 55 of a court transcript from the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. It depicts a procedural discussion during the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi (likely Juan Alessi). Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca and the Judge discuss referencing specific lines from 'yesterday's testimony' and a deposition to establish context for the witness.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. Alessi, by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on prior deposition testimony from exhibit 3504-22. Another attorney, Ms. Comey, objects, arguing that the testimony is not inconsistent with what has already been presented, leading to a procedural discussion with the judge.
This document is a transcript page from a court sidebar conference in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca apologizes for an unintentional error during the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. Prosecutor Ms. Comey criticizes his preparation and suggests a protocol for reading prior inconsistent statements, while the Judge accepts the apology as an accident but warns that a different approach will be needed if the error repeats.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on Alessi's purchase of a $590,000 property with his wife in West Palm Beach in September 2002, which is linked chronologically to a break-in at Mr. Epstein's house. Another attorney, Ms. Comey, objects to the line of questioning, and the court sustains the objection.
This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of Mr. Alessi, filed on August 10, 2022. The testimony references a previous deposition from September 8, 2009, where Alessi admitted to stealing a total of $6,300 on two separate occasions at night. The questioning attorney attributes the theft to Alessi's 'financial problems,' which Alessi appears to confirm.
This document is page 33 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The text captures a moment where Ms. Comey addresses the court regarding display screens, followed by the Judge instructing Ms. Williams to bring in the jury. A witness, Mr. Alessi (likely Juan Alessi, Epstein's former house manager), is then greeted and told to take his seat.
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.
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Mr. Visoski, asking him to identify the person depicted in Government Exhibits 115 and 111.
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Mr. Visoski, about the layout and buildings on a ranch property owned by Mr. Epstein in New Mexico.
Ms. Comey argues that the four witnesses against Ghislaine Maxwell testified for justice, not for financial gain. She states they had already received 'million-dollar payouts' and would not have subjected themselves to a grueling and humiliating trial and cross-examination if their testimony were false.
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Mr. Visoski, about the contents of a photograph. Mr. Visoski identifies the people, aircraft, and location in the photo.
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.
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.
Q&A regarding the identification of an aerial photo of the island and descriptions of buildings on it.
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'.
Questioning regarding the frequency and behavior of female guests at the pool over a 12-year period.
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.
Argument for guilty verdict based on evidence and Judge's instructions.
Questioning regarding the identification of people in Government Exhibit 347.
Request to admit Government Exhibits 252, 253, and 254 into evidence under seal.
Requesting permission for jurors to view Government Exhibits 223, 224, and 225.
Q&A regarding Mr. Alessi's role and the details of flight 979 on May 9, 1997.
Ms. Comey questions the witness, Carolyn, about the ages of her friends (Amanda, Tatum, Julie) when she brought them to Jeffrey Epstein's house. Carolyn states Epstein asked her to bring friends, and describes entering the house and going to a massage room.
Ms. Comey argues that the case is about Ghislaine Maxwell's specific crimes and participation in abuse, refuting the defense's attempts to distract the jury.
Questions regarding the procedure following the search on October 20, 2005.
Questioning regarding interactions at Epstein's Palm Beach house.
Ms. Comey objects that the defense is violating a pretrial ruling by arguing the government is targeting the defendant. The Court clarifies that the defense can argue witnesses are using the defendant as a scapegoat, but cannot attack the prosecution's motives.
Informing the court that stipulations have been reached and the case may conclude that afternoon.
Asking if the Court has attempted to call the missing jurors.
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.
Ms. Comey argues that the four witnesses against Ghislaine Maxwell testified for justice, not for financial gain. She posits that since they had already received large financial payouts, they had no monetary incentive to risk perjuring themselves in a federal trial.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity