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 | N/A | Limited Hearing | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of Counts Seven and Eight against Ghislaine Maxwell. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Closing Arguments and Jury Charge | Courtroom | 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 | Hearing where Juror 50 may be a witness | The Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding sentencing or appeal arguments (Case 22-1426). | Courtroom (likely SDNY) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Denial of motion to compel immediate disclosure of Minor Victim-4's prior statements. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Epstein's State Plea Hearing where the non-prosecution agreement was discussed. | Southern District of Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Redirect examination of a witness regarding juror Catherine M. Conrad's background check. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Scheduled oral argument in both cases. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding upcoming sentencing and review of the presentence report. | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Redirect examination of witness Brune regarding Juror No. 1. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Conclusion of the evidence portion of the trial. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Last bail hearing where the Court expressed concern about lack of ties. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony of witness Brune regarding the vetting of Juror No. 1. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Selection (Voir Dire) for Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Rule 29 Argument | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Voir Dire / Juror Questioning | Open Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Prosecution announces intent to rest case | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | SORA Hearing (Sex Offender Registration Act Hearing) | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross-examination testimony of witness Flatley. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding jury instructions and a question asked by the jury. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing Hearing / Pre-sentencing argument | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| N/A | N/A | The Government rests its case. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government Exhibit 10 is admitted into evidence. | Courtroom | View |
DOJ-OGR-00004739.jpg
This document is page 3 of a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated June 4, 2021, denying Ghislaine Maxwell's request to access the entirety of a diary written by Minor Victim-2. The court notes that the diary entries stopped shortly after the victim met Jeffrey Epstein and do not reference Maxwell or later trips with Epstein. The court rejects Maxwell's arguments based on Federal Rules of Evidence 106 and 612, stating that the journal's relevance is currently limited to potential impeachment.
DOJ-OGR-00025485.jpg
This document is an email thread from August 11, 2019, in which the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) asks Hugh Hurwitz (likely from the Bureau of Prisons) to verify a timeline of events concerning inmate Jeffrey Epstein's recent incarceration. The timeline details Epstein's placement on and removal from suicide watch in late July, his return to the Special Housing Unit, and the removal of his cellmate on August 9th. Hurwitz responds with caution, stating that while he has no personal concerns, the information is subject to an ongoing OIG/FBI investigation and should not be released without their clearance.
DOJ-OGR-00014727.jpg
This document is a court transcript page from a case filed on August 10, 2022. A judge explains the decision to modify the jury deliberation schedule due to a significant spike in COVID-19 (omicron variant) cases in New York City, aiming to prevent a mistrial. An attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, objects to the change, arguing that the court should honor its initial commitment to the jury regarding time off for the weekend and New Year's.
DOJ-OGR-00014721.jpg
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. A judge explains the decision to extend daily jury deliberations by one hour due to a significant spike in COVID-19 cases from the omicron variant in New York City. The judge's concern is that jurors or trial participants might need to quarantine, which would risk the completion of the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00014711.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a debate between legal counsel and the judge over the jury's deliberation schedule. Ms. Menninger objects to extending the jury's hours, suggesting it could be perceived as pressure to rush, while Ms. Moe argues it is merely procedural scheduling. The judge resolves the issue by deciding to instruct the jury to be available to deliberate until 6 p.m. daily, starting the next day, if they have not yet reached a verdict.
DOJ-OGR-00014697.jpg
This document is a court transcript page from a case dated August 10, 2022. It captures a discussion between Mr. Everdell and the Court regarding a note from the jury. The jury is asking if a defendant can be found guilty solely for aiding and abetting a return flight from New Mexico, considered separately from the initial flight to New Mexico. Mr. Everdell argues that the answer should be 'no' based on the court's instructions that the travel must have a 'significant or motivating purpose'.
DOJ-OGR-00014667.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. The transcript captures a discussion between the judge and several other individuals (likely attorneys) about scheduling jury deliberations. The judge outlines a plan for the jury to deliberate from 9:00 AM to 4:30 PM the following day and considers offering them the option to continue on Thursday, even though it is close to Christmas Eve.
DOJ-OGR-00014661.jpg
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a dialogue between attorneys Ms. Comey, Mr. Pagliuca, and the judge regarding a document used for impeachment that is not formally in evidence. They discuss how to properly handle this situation, with the judge proposing a clarifying instruction for the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00014541.jpg
This document is a partial court transcript from August 10, 2022, featuring a summation by Ms. Menninger in a case related to Jeffrey Epstein. Ms. Menninger argues that Ghislaine was Epstein's "right-hand woman" and culpable for his actions, presenting evidence from flight logs and witness testimonies that Epstein frequently traveled with other women, such as Frances Jardine, Celina Midelfart, and Sherry Lewis, to locations like Palm Beach, often without Ghislaine. The document emphasizes Ghislaine's alleged knowledge and involvement in Epstein's activities despite claims of being kept in the dark.
DOJ-OGR-00011752.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Visoski, by an attorney, Ms. Comey. Mr. Visoski identifies a photograph, marked as Government Exhibit 202, as the garage of Jeffrey Epstein's house in Palm Beach. Following his testimony and no objection from opposing counsel Mr. Everdell, the court admits the exhibit into evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00005860.jpg
This legal document is a court filing arguing against several defense motions. The prosecution contends that evidence of the defendant's lifestyle and close partnership with Jeffrey Epstein is relevant to the conspiracy charge and not prejudicial. The filing also argues that trial participants should not be precluded from using the terms "Victims" or "rape" when referring to the Minor Victims and acts committed by Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00005800.jpg
This document is page 17 of a legal filing (Document 397) from October 29, 2021, in the case US v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The Government is arguing against the defendant's motion to exclude the testimony of expert witness Dr. Rocchio, a clinical psychologist. The text asserts that Dr. Rocchio's qualitative methodology is reliable based on her clinical experience, rather than statistical error rates, which the Government argues are inapplicable to this type of social science testimony under Daubert standards.
DOJ-OGR-00002840.jpg
This document is page 19 of a court filing (Case 1:17-cr-00548-PAC) filed on March 24, 2021, regarding the case of United States v. Schulte. The text details the Court's rejection of Schulte's arguments concerning violations of the Jury Selection and Service Act (JSSA), specifically regarding the exclusion of inactive voters and the proration of jurors from Westchester, Putnam, and Rockland counties. The Court cites precedent from *United States v. Allen* and Judge Roman to validate the Government's decision to indict in White Plains.
DOJ-OGR-00002728.jpg
This legal document, filed by the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, details the security and search procedures for a specific defendant at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). It outlines daily pat-down and cell searches, weekly body scans, and frequent nightly wellness checks, justifying them as necessary for the safety of the institution and the defendant. The document also notes a recent change to reduce searches by relocating the defendant's video conferences with her counsel to within her unit.
DOJ-OGR-00002708.jpg
This document is page 15 of a court filing in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It outlines Maxwell's requests for documents related to her motions to dismiss the indictment (based on Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement) and to suppress evidence obtained via a subpoena to a redacted party. The document asserts Maxwell was unaware of this subpoena and seeks its production to determine grounds for challenge, while also initiating a motion for the immediate disclosure of exculpatory (Brady) and impeachment (Giglio) material.
DOJ-OGR-00020140.jpg
This document is page 13 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020 (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), denying release/bail for the Defendant (contextually Ghislaine Maxwell). The Court argues that the Defendant poses a significant flight risk due to her French citizenship, the difficulty of extradition (specifically mentioning Israel), her extraordinary financial resources, and her proven ability to avoid detection. The Court explicitly rejects the Defendant's argument that waiving extradition rights indicates an intent not to flee.
DOJ-OGR-00020112.jpg
This legal document, filed on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, argues against the government's assertions in a bail proceeding. It claims that a pre-arrest discussion of divorce with her spouse was a protective measure, not an indication of a weak relationship, and that their bond is a strong tie to the country. The document also defends Ms. Maxwell's financial disclosures, stating the government has not contested the accuracy of her detailed financial report and is instead baselessly arguing she deceived the Court and Pretrial Services.
DOJ-OGR-00020111.jpg
This document is a page from a defense filing arguing for the release of Ms. Maxwell on bail. It asserts that the government has failed to justify continued detention, pointing to new evidence of Maxwell's strong ties to the U.S., specifically through her spouse and friends who have offered support, contradicting earlier government claims.
DOJ-OGR-00020095.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, is the Government's argument against a defendant's release from the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The Government contends that the MDC has adequately addressed the defendant's complaints regarding diet and security searches, and that its COVID-19 precautions were effective, as the defendant was quarantined and tested negative after a potential exposure. The filing concludes that since the defendant has no underlying health conditions, the pandemic does not warrant her release.
DOJ-OGR-00020090.jpg
This document is page 27 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on December 18, 2020. The text argues against the defense's motion for reconsideration of bail, stating the Court has already rejected comparisons to other high-profile cases (Esposito, Dreier, Madoff). The prosecution highlights the defendant's 'significant foreign connections' and 'sophistication in hiding those resources and herself' as reasons for continued detention.
DOJ-OGR-00020085.jpg
This legal document argues for the defendant's detention by highlighting her evasive behavior and lack of trustworthiness. It cites an instance where she fled from FBI agents and suggests her actions, like wrapping a phone in tin foil, were meant to evade law enforcement. Furthermore, it claims the defendant was deceptive about her wealth, reporting only $3.8 million to Pretrial Services when evidence suggests she has access to far more, indicating a willingness to deceive the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00020084.jpg
This document is page 24 of a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) arguing against a renewed bail application for the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell). It details her evasion of law enforcement, noting that despite communications between her counsel and the government from July 2019 to March 2020, her location was never disclosed. It further highlights that upon arrest, she ignored FBI directives and fled from agents who were clearly identified, countering defense claims that she was simply following security protocols.
DOJ-OGR-00020076.jpg
This legal document is a court filing arguing against granting bail to a defendant. The prosecution asserts the defendant is a flight risk due to significant foreign ties, including citizenship in three countries, multiple passports, and foreign assets. The document argues her ties to the United States are weak, citing her lack of employment and dependents, and points to inconsistent statements she made about her marriage to undermine her claims of stability.
DOJ-OGR-00020069.jpg
This page from a legal document details a court's decision to detain a defendant before trial, finding that electronic monitoring would be insufficient and dismissing concerns about COVID-19 risks. The document then outlines the applicable legal standard under the Bail Reform Act, explaining the government's burden to prove the defendant is a flight risk and the factors a court must consider.
DOJ-OGR-00020059.jpg
This document is the final signature page (page 39) of a legal motion filed on December 4, 2020, in the case regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. The text explicitly requests the Court to order Maxwell's release on bail based on proposed conditions. It lists the contact information and signatures for her defense team, consisting of attorneys from Cohen & Gresser LLP, Haddon, Morgan & Foreman P.C., and the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity