| 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 (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a legal argument held without the jury present between defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca and prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding the admissibility of a 'state complaint' (Exhibit C4). The defense argues that the complaint should be admitted to show that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, was not mentioned in it, while the prosecution objects on the grounds that this fact is not inconsistent with the witness's testimony.
This document is page 194 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It details the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn by attorney Mr. Pagliuca, focusing on verifying her signature on page 19 of Exhibit C8. The defense moves to admit Exhibits C8 and C9, to which prosecutor Ms. Comey objects, and the Court defers the ruling until a break.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. Mr. Pagliuca attempts to refresh the witness's memory regarding prior statements made under oath in 2009 and her answers to interrogatories, but the witness expresses confusion. Another attorney, Ms. Comey, repeatedly objects to the line of questioning, and the court sustains her objections.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn. An attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, questions her about her memory of answering written interrogatories for a lawsuit, which she claims not to recall. The attorneys and the judge then discuss showing Carolyn a portion of her deposition transcript to potentially refresh her recollection.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on a complaint Carolyn previously filed against Mr. Epstein and Sarah Kellen. Carolyn states she does not recall certain details of the complaint and denies having reviewed or approved it before her lawyers filed it in federal court.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing attorney Mr. Pagliuca cross-examining a witness named Carolyn. The questioning centers on a paragraph from a 2009 federal complaint against Jeffrey Epstein, which alleges Epstein paid Carolyn $300 after an encounter. The transcript captures a legal objection by another attorney, Ms. Comey, which the judge sustains.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn regarding allegations against Jeffrey Epstein. The testimony, read from a legal filing, describes an incident where Carolyn was paid $300 by Epstein to observe a sexual act performed by her friend on him. It also mentions a subsequent telephone call where Epstein requested Carolyn return to his residence to give him a massage.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on a complaint (Exhibit C5) where Carolyn made a claim against a Mr. Epstein; Carolyn now states that the complaint, which she previously testified under oath was accurate, was in fact not accurate. Mr. Pagliuca also establishes that a specific paragraph of the complaint does not contain the name "Maxwell."
This document is page 184 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca is cross-examining a witness named Carolyn regarding a complaint filed on her behalf by attorney Mr. Willits in 2008 against Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen. The prosecution (Ms. Comey) successfully objects to the admission of defense exhibit C4 on the grounds that it is 'not inconsistent,' leading the defense to request a sidebar.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022. It captures a portion of the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, where they are trying to locate Exhibit C4. The witness states the exhibit is related to her arrest, and another attorney, Ms. Comey, requests to approach the bench.
This document is a page from a court transcript (cross-examination of witness Carolyn) filed on August 10, 2022. The questioning focuses on inconsistencies between the witness's current memory and a statement she gave to the FBI in 2007 regarding who called her about 'Incubus tickets' (Sarah or Epstein). The questioning also establishes that Sarah called the witness to convey that Epstein wanted to take photographs of her.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning attempts to refresh Carolyn's memory about a prior statement she allegedly made to the FBI in 2007 concerning a chef. Carolyn disputes the attorney's characterization of the statement, claiming the document she was shown mentioned her taking off her panties for $400 but did not mention a chef.
This is a page from a court transcript documenting the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn. The questioning focuses on a 2007 statement to the FBI regarding a phone call allegedly returned by Jeffrey Epstein and the details of a subsequent visit to his property where her boyfriend, Sean, drove her.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It details the resumption of proceedings after a lunch break, where the jury returns and the witness, 'Carolyn,' takes the stand to continue cross-examination by defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca. The judge reminds the witness she is under oath and instructs the attorney to adjust his microphone.
This court transcript page from August 10, 2022, captures a discussion about a witness named Carolyn. An attorney expresses concern that the jury may wrongly connect Carolyn's schizophrenia to actions by Epstein, while her children's situation is due to her long-standing problems. In response, attorney Ms. Comey requests that sensitive details about Carolyn's family be discussed under seal, a motion the judge grants, moving the proceedings to the robing room.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing attorney Mr. Pagliuca cross-examining a witness named Carolyn. The questioning focuses on Carolyn's prior deposition testimony from 2009, which was given in connection with a civil lawsuit she had filed against Jeffrey Epstein and Sarah Kellen. Mr. Pagliuca attempts to present specific pages and lines from the old deposition to the witness in court.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. A witness named Carolyn is being cross-examined by Mr. Pagliuca regarding a 2007 statement she gave to the FBI. The attorney reads a portion of a report stating Virginia approached Carolyn at a party to offer her $300; Carolyn corrects the record, stating the FBI got it wrong and the interaction actually occurred at Virginia's house, not a party.
This document is a page from a court transcript (likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial given the case number and attorneys) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn. The witness denies using drugs or alcohol and denies an allegation that Virginia Roberts approached her at a party to offer her $300. The witness confirms she was interviewed by the FBI in 2007 regarding Jeffrey Epstein.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the questioning of a witness named Carolyn by an attorney, Ms. Comey. Carolyn confirms her previous testimony from December 2009, stating she would call Mr. Epstein's residence to arrange to give him a massage for payment. She specifies that she would often speak with household staff, identified as 'Sarah or Maxwell' or possibly a cook, to make these arrangements.
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, likely from the U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Prosecutor Ms. Comey is examining a witness named Carolyn regarding her prior testimony from December 2009. Carolyn confirms that while she cannot recall specific dates of her visits to Epstein's home, she remembers the events clearly, and states that Epstein did not contact her directly, but rather had 'Sarah or Maxwell' call her.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed 08/10/22) detailing a sidebar conference during the direct examination of a witness named Carolyn. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca argues that reading only two lines of a prior statement removes necessary context. The Court rules that the witness can read the 'whole thing,' and prosecutor Ms. Comey agrees, coordinating specific line numbers (136, line 23 through line 6) with the defense.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It details a courtroom exchange where an attorney, Ms. Comey, attempts to introduce evidence, leading to confusion and a formal objection from the opposing counsel, Mr. Pagliuca, who then requests to approach the bench.
This document is a partial transcript from a legal proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the direct examination of a witness named Carolyn. Carolyn discusses her past visits to Jeffrey Epstein's house, stating she went for money to support her son, and stopped going when she 'became too old' at 18. She also admits to using and being addicted to cocaine and pain pills, continuing after her association with Epstein ended.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Carolyn by Ms. Comey. Carolyn testifies about being 15 or 16 years old when she brought three friends (Amanda, Tatum, and Julie, aged 15-17) to Jeffrey Epstein's house at his specific request for girls her age or younger. She describes entering the home through the kitchen and proceeding upstairs to the massage room.
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) documenting the direct examination of a witness named Carolyn by Ms. Comey. The testimony covers the identification of Carolyn's mother (Dorothy) and describes phone calls from Ghislaine Maxwell to schedule appointments, during which Maxwell would mention she and Jeffrey Epstein were 'flying in' from out of town.
Asking if the Court has attempted to call the missing jurors.
Discussing the redaction of phone numbers for Carolyn and third parties.
Stopping the examination because it is 4:59 PM.
Questioning regarding the columns in a logbook exhibit.
Questioning regarding Melissa and Amanda's visits to Epstein's house.
Clarification on how nonsealed exhibits will be shown (on screen).
Ms. Comey requests permission to submit a letter to the court to look into the issue being discussed regarding witnesses.
Ms. Comey questions Mr. Parkinson about a search conducted on October 20, 2005, at 358 El Brillo Way. The questioning clarifies the timeline of events, distinguishing between an incident in 2003 and the 2005 search, and details the rooms Mr. Parkinson observed.
Ms. Comey states she told Ms. Menninger 'the other day' that they were not planning to offer exhibit 332B.
Direct examination regarding the physical layout of Epstein's Palm Beach property.
Questioning regarding a specific female passenger on Epstein's planes who attended Interlochen.
Discussion regarding the playback of a video on Ms. Drescher's laptop and pausing at specific timestamps.
Requesting admission of exhibits 11-16 and 1004, and requesting jurors view sealed binders.
Ms. Comey asks for a moment, Judge grants it, counsel confers.
Questioning regarding a photograph of a work area containing the name Jeffrey E. Epstein.
Questioning regarding witness background, education, and past relationships.
Not necessarily, your Honor. We're not being recorded right now and we're getting a transcript.
The Court sustains a foundation objection regarding witness testimony about a book version, instructing the jury to disregard specific beliefs of the witness.
Ms. Comey requests a ruling on whether the government needs to 'draw the sting' on direct examination regarding a witness's juvenile arrests and old misdemeanors.
Argument describing a photo of Epstein and a girl, arguing its probative value because it was displayed in the house the defendant ran.
Rodgers confirms meeting a person in photos in Sept 2003 and meeting Jane in Nov 1996 based on his logbook.
Discussion regarding the timeline for releasing redacted photographs (by Sunday) and videos (by Tuesday) due to IT staff schedules.
Questioning regarding identification of a photograph (Exhibit 104) depicting the witness at age 14.
Questioning regarding a photo found on a CD (1B75) from the Epstein/Maxwell investigation.
Questioning regarding the identification of a photo found on a CD during the investigation.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity