The Court

Organization
Mentions
2003
Relationships
255
Events
3033
Documents
968

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.
255 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person Ms. Sternheim
Legal representative
19 Very Strong
25
View
person Ms. Moe
Legal representative
19 Very Strong
26
View
person Ms. Comey
Legal representative
18 Very Strong
28
View
person Mr. Everdell
Legal representative
16 Very Strong
35
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Legal representative
13 Very Strong
12
View
person MR. PAGLIUCA
Legal representative
13 Very Strong
20
View
person defendant
Legal representative
12 Very Strong
8
View
person Ms. Williams
Professional
11 Very Strong
7
View
person Juror 50
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
12
View
person Juror No. 50
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
7
View
person Mr. Everdell
Professional
11 Very Strong
196
View
person Ms. Moe
Professional
11 Very Strong
228
View
person the defendant
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
13
View
person MR. WEINGARTEN
Professional
10 Very Strong
6
View
person MS. POMERANTZ
Professional
10 Very Strong
61
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
10
View
person Members of the jury
Professional
10 Very Strong
5
View
person Mr. Weinberg
Professional
10 Very Strong
8
View
person Ms. Sternheim
Professional
10 Very Strong
116
View
person Ms. Comey
Professional
10 Very Strong
155
View
person MR. ROSSMILLER
Professional
10 Very Strong
11
View
person MR. ROHRBACH
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
8
View
person MR. COHEN
Professional
10 Very Strong
9
View
person MR. PAGLIUCA
Professional
10 Very Strong
136
View
organization The government
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
7
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
N/A N/A Court proceeding regarding trial schedule, closing arguments, and jury deliberation timing relati... Courtroom View
N/A N/A Court proceedings/Trial discussions Courtroom (referenced by Tr... View
N/A N/A Ms. Maxwell's Sentencing Proceeding Court View
N/A N/A Jury Deliberations and Court Response to Note Courtroom View
N/A N/A Maxwell's attempt to dismiss Mann Act counts for lack of specificity or to compel Government to s... N/A View
N/A N/A Jury Selection (Voir Dire) Courtroom View
N/A N/A Detention Hearing Decision Court View
N/A N/A Maxwell's attempt to dismiss indictment due to alleged actual prejudice from Government's delay i... N/A View
N/A N/A Maxwell's attempt to dismiss indictment based on fabricated stories and perjurious conspiracy by ... N/A View
N/A N/A Payment of criminal monetary penalties within 30 (or 60) days after release from imprisonment, ba... N/A View
N/A N/A Court hearing discussing attorney misconduct and potential retrial. Courtroom View
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 Discussion regarding Exhibit 3505-005 Courtroom View
N/A N/A Court proceeding sidebar or argument regarding courtroom logistics and COVID protocols. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Meeting between Court and Counsel at 8:45 AM. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Trial sessions planned for Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday before Christmas and New Year's. Courtroom View
N/A N/A 10-minute break (Recess) Courtroom View
N/A N/A 9 a.m. conference regarding the jury charge. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Charging Conference (Trial Tr. at 2758–61) Court 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 Juror No. 50 questioning during trial. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Court hearing regarding admissibility of testimony. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Court hearing regarding sentencing enhancements for Ghislaine Maxwell. Courtroom View

DOJ-OGR-00000981.jpg

This document is page 20 (filed page 25) of a legal motion filed on July 10, 2020, arguing for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. The defense proposes a $5 million bond co-signed by six friends and relatives, secured additionally by $3.75 million in UK property, alongside home detention, GPS monitoring, and private security within NY districts. The text argues that COVID-19 increases her risk in detention and cites *United States v. Boustani* regarding the use of private security guards for wealthy defendants.

Legal filing / court motion (bail application)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000980.jpg

This document is a legal defense filing arguing that Ms. Maxwell is not a flight risk because her potential prison sentence is likely only 10 years, contrary to the government's claims of "decades." It outlines significant legal challenges the defense intends to raise, including a prior non-prosecution agreement involving Epstein, statute of limitations issues, and the difficulty of prosecuting decades-old conduct.

Legal filing / memorandum of law
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000968.jpg

This document is page 12 of a legal filing (Document 18, filed July 10, 2020) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Defense counsel argues for Maxwell's release on bail, citing the inability to effectively communicate with her due to MDC's COVID-19 protocols, which restrict in-person visits and delay phone calls. The text details a specific incident on July 6, 2020, where counsel struggled to connect with Maxwell to comply with a court order, and footnotes cite legal precedents where other defendants were released due to similar pandemic-related restrictions.

Court filing (legal memorandum/bail application)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000967.jpg

This document is a page from a legal filing arguing for the release of Ms. Maxwell, citing increased COVID-19 risks in prisons and the inability to adequately prepare a defense while detained. The text references the 'Stephens' case as a precedent where a defendant was released under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) because prison lockdowns prevented necessary legal preparation.

Legal brief / court filing fragment
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000921.jpg

This document is a page from a legal filing (Procedural History) dated April 1, 2021, detailing the arrest and bail applications regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines her arrest on July 2, 2020, the government's allegations that she groomed minors for Jeffrey Epstein, and the subsequent legal motions leading to her detention order following a Zoom hearing where no accusers testified.

Legal filing / court brief (procedural history)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000892.jpg

This document is a log of court filings from Case 21-770, dated March 24, 2021, detailing events from early December 2020 concerning the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell. The entries consist of letters from Maxwell's legal team and subsequent orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding procedural matters such as briefing schedules, sealing documents, a renewed motion for bail, and Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the Metropolitan Detention Center. A key event is the Court's denial of Maxwell's request to summon the prison warden to testify about her confinement, instead ordering the Government to continue providing written updates.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000872.jpg

This legal document, a page from a court filing, analyzes the legal ambiguity surrounding the timing of nationality assessment for an extradition request under the U.S.-France Extradition Treaty. It presents conflicting interpretations, with the treaty and French law suggesting nationality is assessed at the time of the offense, while the Defendant's expert argues for the time of the request. This uncertainty complicates the Defendant's potential renunciation of French citizenship as a means to prevent extradition.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000866.jpg

This legal document is a court filing from September 22, 2021, detailing the procedural history of a defendant's third motion for release on bail. It outlines the dates of the defendant's motion, the government's opposition, and the defendant's reply. The document then discusses the legal standard regarding the court's jurisdiction to rule on the bail motion while the defendant's bail appeal is pending in a higher court.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000861.jpg

This document is a docket summary from the legal case against Ghislaine Maxwell, detailing court filings and orders from late February to mid-March 2021. Key events include Maxwell's third motion for bond, subsequent responses and replies, and a motion for a time extension which was granted. The document culminates in a detailed order from Judge Alison J. Nathan on March 18, 2021, addressing disputes over the redaction and sealing of pretrial motions and exhibits, setting deadlines for the parties to confer and propose joint redactions.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000813.jpg

This document is page 30 of a court filing from July 18, 2019, denying aspects of Jeffrey Epstein's bail proposal. The Court argues that the defense's home confinement plan would require excessive judicial oversight and that private security is less secure than actual jail. The Court also dismisses Epstein's offer to waive extradition rights as an 'empty gesture' that no foreign country would likely honor if he fled.

Court order / legal filing (bail determination)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000812.jpg

This document is page 29 of a court order filed on July 18, 2019, in the case against Jeffrey Epstein. The Court denies the adequacy of Epstein's proposed bail package, citing a lack of audited financial statements and criticizing the defense for providing only a cursory one-page asset summary totaling over $559 million. The Court characterizes the defense's conditional offer to provide better financials only if bail is granted as 'disingenuous' for a man of Epstein's wealth and financial experience.

Court order/legal filing (bail determination)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000809.jpg

This legal document details the extensive financial assets of a defendant, including hundreds of millions in equities and numerous high-value properties, to argue against a bail package. The government contends that these assets, along with recently discovered cash and diamonds, provide the defendant with the means to flee the jurisdiction. The document also references the defendant's past alleged criminal conduct, including working with associates to exploit minors.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000807.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that the defendant, Mr. Epstein, is an extraordinary flight risk. It cites his vast wealth, including an $8.6 million Paris residence, ownership of private jets used for frequent international travel, and limited family ties to the U.S. The document also reveals that a recent search of his New York City home uncovered an expired Austrian passport with his photo but another name, listing a residence in Saudi Arabia, further heightening concerns about his potential to flee.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000796.jpg

This legal document, filed on July 18, 2019, discusses the legal principles and precedents surrounding the presumption of remand for serious offenses, emphasizing that this presumption is not easily erased and requires deference to Congress's judgment. It highlights that the U.S. Pretrial Services Department, following an interview with Mr. Epstein, issued a report on July 8, 2019, recommending to the Court that Mr. Epstein continue to be remanded, concluding that no conditions could ensure his compliance or public safety.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000793.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues against the pretrial release of Mr. Epstein, asserting he is a danger to the community. It cites testimony from a bail hearing on July 15, 2019, where a victim, Annie Farmer, stated she met Epstein as a minor, was flown to New Mexico, and that he was 'inappropriate' with her. The document uses this testimony to support the government's position that Epstein's release would result in the harassment and abuse of victims.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000789.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing from July 18, 2019, details arguments surrounding Jeffrey Epstein's bail. It outlines the government's allegations that Epstein's employees facilitated the trafficking of minors to his residences in Manhattan and Palm Beach. The document also presents the defense counsel's counterarguments, asserting that Epstein is not a flight risk due to his history of returning to the U.S. after extensive travel and his willingness to provide full financial disclosure to the Court.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000788.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing, details the prosecution's (Government's) argument against granting bail to the defendant, Mr. Epstein. The Government cites Epstein's vast wealth ($559M), a history of witness obstruction, and recent suspicious wire transfers totaling $350,000 to a potential co-conspirator as evidence that his proposed release conditions are 'woefully inadequate' and that he poses a flight risk.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000787.jpg

This legal document outlines fourteen bail conditions proposed by Jeffrey Epstein's defense team. The conditions include home detention in his Manhattan residence (valued at $77 million), electronic monitoring, and a substantial bond secured by his residence, private jet, his brother Mark's home, and his friend David Mitchell's investments. The proposal aims to guarantee Epstein's court appearance and mitigate any perceived danger to the community.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000769.jpg

This legal document argues for the release of grand jury transcripts with narrowly tailored redactions to protect the identities of victims like Ms. Farmer, citing their strong privacy interests as established in previous cases. However, it argues against redacting the names of third parties who have not been charged or alleged to be involved in the crimes of Epstein and Maxwell, suggesting such an effort "smacks of a cover up" and requires independent court scrutiny.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000763.jpg

This document is page 3 of a government filing dated August 4, 2025, addressed to Judges Berman and Engelmayer regarding the Epstein and Maxwell cases. It details specific dates the grand juries met for both cases (2019 for Epstein, 2020-2021 for Maxwell) and discusses the submission of grand jury exhibits and transcripts under seal. The government argues that the 'nolle prosequi' (dismissal due to death) in the Epstein case does not prevent the court from disclosing sealed grand jury minutes.

Legal correspondence / court filing (government letter to judges)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000762.jpg

This legal document is a letter from the U.S. Government to Judges Berman and Engelmayer, filed on August 5, 2025. The Government responds to a court order demanding information about the potential unsealing of grand jury materials from the Epstein and Maxwell cases. The Government acknowledges the public's strong right of access to trial exhibits, noting that exhibits from the Maxwell trial were already made public, but requests an extension until August 8, 2025, to provide its final position on unsealing the grand jury exhibits.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000754.jpg

This legal document is a filing from the Government in response to a Court order in case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. The Government confirms it reviewed the Maxwell grand jury transcripts before moving to unseal them and has notified all but one of the referenced victims. The filing also states that the Government is submitting the complete grand jury materials for both Epstein and Maxwell to the Court under seal to protect victim-identifying information.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000752.jpg

This document is page 7 of a legal filing (Document 66) in Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. It argues factors regarding the unsealing of grand jury materials, noting that Epstein is deceased and Maxwell is incarcerated. It states that victim testimony at Maxwell's trial was consistent with law enforcement testimony given to the grand jury and that the government is unaware of any impermissible leaks of the transcripts.

Court filing (legal memorandum/response)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000747.jpg

This legal memorandum is submitted by the Government in response to court orders regarding motions to unseal grand jury transcripts in the cases of Epstein and Maxwell. The Government outlines the legal framework for such a release, citing a 'Circuit split' on the issue and precedent from the Second Circuit, while emphasizing its duty to protect victims. It also references a prior, unsuccessful attempt to unseal similar transcripts related to Epstein in the Southern District of Florida.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000739.jpg

This court document, filed on July 22, 2025, orders the Government to file a memorandum of law and submit Epstein grand jury transcripts under seal by July 29, 2025. The Court also sets a deadline of August 5, 2025, for a submission from Epstein's representative and notes that it has not yet received input from victims regarding the potential unsealing of materials.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
0
As Recipient
0
Total
0
No communications found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity