The Court
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Legal representative |
19
Very Strong
|
25 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Legal representative |
19
Very Strong
|
26 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Legal representative |
18
Very Strong
|
28 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Legal representative |
16
Very Strong
|
35 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
20 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Ms. Williams
|
Professional |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Juror 50
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Professional |
11
Very Strong
|
196 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Professional |
11
Very Strong
|
228 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
person
MR. WEINGARTEN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
61 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Members of the jury
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Mr. Weinberg
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
116 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
155 | |
|
person
MR. ROSSMILLER
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
MR. COHEN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
136 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
7 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Trial | An ongoing trial where testimony is being heard and discussed. The case number is 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Ms. Maxwell challenged the strength of the government's case in pretrial motions pending before t... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | An initial bail hearing where an explanation was given for why Ms. Maxwell's phone was wrapped in... | Court | View |
| N/A | Pretrial conference | A pretrial conference was held where counsel for the government and defendant made their appearan... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Juror 50 was questioned by the Court regarding his answers on a questionnaire (Questions 48 and 4... | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing proceedings | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Voir dire (jury selection process). | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding the 'business record exception' and admissibility of phone logs/notes. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Jury selection (voir dire) | The process of screening prospective jurors for Ms. Maxwell's trial, during which Juror No. 50 al... | Court | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Direct examination of a witness named Brune regarding her understanding of 'significant informati... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | Recross-examination of witness Brune regarding a fraud alert, Social Security numbers, and the di... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A pretrial conference where the Court informed the parties of its decision to release Mr. Robertson. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Juror misconduct | Juror No. 50 and a second deliberating juror were untruthful on their jury selection questionnair... | The Court | View |
| N/A | Legal filing | A discussion about filing a brief on the 900 series for the witness Maguire. The court mandates i... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | The defendant's criminal trial, during which the Government observed her to be perfectly healthy ... | Court | View |
| N/A | Sentencing | The upcoming sentencing hearing where the Government is making recommendations for incarceration ... | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Initial bail hearing where the identity and connection of the Defendant's spouse was withheld fro... | Court | View |
| N/A | Trial | A legal trial where Juror 50 served. The document references events 'before or during trial' and ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | An initial bail hearing where the defense raised numerous arguments. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | A cross-examination of witness Ms. Brune by attorney Mr. Shechtman regarding the jury selection p... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | The Government objected to Maxwell's proposed questions; The Court ruled to ask a single question... | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal hearing | An initial hearing where the government made arguments about Ms. Maxwell's arrest. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | The Court ordered the defendant to be detained pending trial. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Ms. Maxwell is presenting a bail application for the Court's consideration. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | The trial of the defendant, Maxwell, where Juror 50 served on the jury. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00016777.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, details a legal argument between prosecution (Ms. Comey) and defense (Ms. Menninger) counsel. The core issue is whether the defense can introduce evidence related to broader investigative steps, such as a 2019 search, that were not part of the evidence presented to the jury. The prosecution argues this would be confusing and violate a court order, while the defense attempts to justify its relevance.
DOJ-OGR-00016771.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, details a legal argument by Mr. Rohrbach to the court. He refutes a point made by opposing counsel, Mr. Everdell, regarding the defense's ability to challenge an investigation's thoroughness. Mr. Rohrbach argues that while the defense can cross-examine witnesses like 'Jane' about events, they are prohibited from calling a case agent during their direct case simply to highlight investigative steps that were not taken, referencing the Watson and Brady cases as precedent.
DOJ-OGR-00016739.jpg
This court transcript excerpt from August 10, 2022, discusses an upcoming witness from the U.K. and a declaration provided by an unnamed witness. This witness, who owns the Nags Head Pub, has direct knowledge of Ghislaine Maxwell's ownership and residency at a Kinnerton Street property, having observed her presence there daily and noting her occupancy timeline. The document also includes a brief comment from MS. COMEY regarding the defense's preparation time.
DOJ-OGR-00016735.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a discussion between a judge and several lawyers regarding procedural issues. The topics include a defense subpoena, ongoing negotiations with the government over redactions for exhibits, and a decision by the defense not to pursue testimony from a Mr. Hamilton in England due to technical complications.
DOJ-OGR-00016659.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a legal proceeding filed on August 10, 2022, detailing a segment of a cross-examination. Ms. Pomerantz argues for the relevance of a witness's experiments on memory, distinguishing them from other evidence related to Dr. Rocchio, while Mr. Pagliuca briefly interjects. The Court ultimately rules 'Overruled' on an unspecified objection or motion.
DOJ-OGR-00016586.jpg
This document is a partial court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a segment of a legal proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It records the beginning of the direct examination of Elizabeth Loftus, a professor and scientist, who was called as a witness by the defense. The transcript includes exchanges between Ms. Sternheim (defense counsel), Mr. Everdell, and the presiding Judge, as Professor Loftus starts to explain her role to the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00016579.jpg
This court transcript details a direct examination of a witness from the travel agency Shoppers Travel. The witness confirms that Jeffrey Epstein's office was a customer for whom they booked flights and other travel. The testimony also reveals that in 2016, the witness was asked to generate a report from their QuickBooks system related to Epstein's office records.
DOJ-OGR-00016468.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a discussion between the judge, defense attorney Mr. Everdell, and government attorney Ms. Moe regarding the scheduling of witness list disclosures and related legal submissions. The parties agree on a timeline for actions on the following Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday, with Mr. Everdell highlighting the witnesses' need for a prompt resolution.
DOJ-OGR-00016463.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca explains that the defense is still finalizing its witness list because the government rested its case earlier than expected. Government attorney Ms. Moe counters that the defense was warned and is obligated by a prior court order to produce materials, specifically those governed by Rule 26 related to experts and witnesses, immediately.
DOJ-OGR-00016383.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, A. Farmer. The questioning focuses on discrepancies between her current testimony and prior statements made to a victims' compensation fund and the government regarding massages she received from Mr. Epstein. The questions highlight details such as Epstein staring and groaning during a foot massage, and another massage in New Mexico where her chest and breast were touched.
DOJ-OGR-00013194.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn. The questioning revisits her prior deposition, confirming her trust in her attorneys. It is also established that a complaint she previously filed in federal court was not against a Ms. Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00013191.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn. The questioning attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, confronts Carolyn with her 2007 statement to the FBI, in which she allegedly claimed a person named Sarah called her to relay messages from Epstein regarding concert tickets and a request to take photographs. The witness appears to challenge the relevance of the questions to the document she is being shown.
DOJ-OGR-00013166.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from the case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The transcript captures the end of a discussion regarding a question with privacy implications during the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn. Two attorneys, Ms. Moe and Ms. Menninger, acknowledge the judge, who then calls for a 30-minute recess.
DOJ-OGR-00013154.jpg
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 centers on a statement Carolyn allegedly made to the FBI in August 2007, claiming that a person named Virginia told her she could earn $300 by massaging a man in Palm Beach. Carolyn denies making that statement to the FBI at that time, asserting she was told about the massage opportunity later, at Mr. Epstein's house.
DOJ-OGR-00013136.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Carolyn. Carolyn testifies that she visited Jeffrey Epstein's house multiple times after giving birth to her son because she needed money, and that she stopped visiting when she turned 18 because she was "too old." She also admits to developing an addiction to cocaine and pain pills after her association with Epstein ended.
DOJ-OGR-00013043.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a hearing on August 10, 2022, related to case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. During the direct examination of a witness named Meder, a photograph showing Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein is identified and admitted into evidence as Exhibit GX-342. The photo originated from a CD logged as '1B63' from the 'Epstein and Maxwell investigation'.
DOJ-OGR-00013041.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Meder. A government attorney, Ms. Comey, questions the witness about a photograph of Ghislaine Maxwell, which the witness confirms was sourced from a CD (logged as 1B63) reviewed during the 'Epstein and Maxwell investigation'. The photograph is successfully entered into evidence as Government's Exhibit 340 by the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00013038.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Meder by an attorney, Ms. Comey. The witness identifies a photograph, admitted as Government Exhibit 324, as originating from a CD related to the 'Epstein and Maxwell investigation.' The witness confirms the photograph depicts Jeffrey Epstein on the left and Ghislaine Maxwell on the right.
DOJ-OGR-00013033.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It details the direct examination of a witness named Meder by prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding Government Exhibits 304 and 306. The witness identifies Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell in a photograph (Exhibit 304) and identifies Maxwell in another photo (Exhibit 306) retrieved from an investigation CD labeled '1B26'.
DOJ-OGR-00013018.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, details a discussion between attorney Ms. Moe and the judge regarding a conversation between two siblings, one of whom was a witness named Jane. Ms. Moe explains that one sibling described her court testimony as an 'unpleasant experience' to the other. The judge inquires about whether the government had instructed witnesses not to discuss testimony, and Ms. Moe recounts her own conversation with Jane's attorney on the matter.
DOJ-OGR-00010557.jpg
This legal document is a filing arguing against a defendant's request for the Court to discredit a victim's testimony at sentencing. It cites the trial testimony of the victim, Carolyn, who stated she stopped visiting Jeffrey Epstein's house at age 18, and presents documentary evidence from a seized message book with entries from November 2004 and March 2005 to corroborate her timeline. The filing asserts that the defendant's speculation about the evidence's authenticity is baseless and that the jury's conviction based on Carolyn's testimony should be respected.
DOJ-OGR-00010542.jpg
This document is a court filing summarizing the proof presented at Ghislaine Maxwell's trial, detailing her conviction on multiple counts related to the sexual abuse of minors between 1994 and 2004. It describes her close relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, noting she acted as his girlfriend and partner, facilitating the grooming of girls as young as 14 at various international properties. The document also notes the government's intent to dismiss severed perjury charges to spare victims further trauma.
DOJ-OGR-00010537.jpg
This document is a Table of Contents for a legal filing (Document 670, filed 06/22/22) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It outlines sections pertaining to a criminal case, including background, charges, summary of proof at trial concerning the sexual abuse of multiple individuals (Jane, Kate, Annie Farmer, Virginia Roberts, Carolyn, Melissa), pre-sentence report and sentencing guidelines, discussion on the defendant's conduct warranting imprisonment, and financial penalties. The document details various sentencing enhancements and arguments related to the defendant's sentence.
DOJ-OGR-00010533.jpg
This is a court order from United States Circuit Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated June 21, 2022, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The order establishes several deadlines for the Government and other parties regarding the handling of victim impact statements and the confirmation of victim notification under the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA).
DOJ-OGR-00010508.jpg
This document is a letter of support for Ghislaine, written by Catherine Vaughan-Edwards and filed with the court on June 15, 2022. Despite acknowledging the court's verdict, Vaughan-Edwards defends Ghislaine's character based on their 34-year friendship, describing her as a kind, supportive, and generous friend and mentor, in contrast to her negative portrayal in the media.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity