Jane
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Abuser victim |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Abuser victim |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Perpetrator victim |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Association |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Acquaintance |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Alleged perpetrator victim |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Jane's mother
|
Friend |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Business associate |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Matt
|
Friend |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. Glassman
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Perpetrator victim |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Abuser victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Friend |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jane's father
|
Friend |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Unnamed Questioner
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Michelle
|
Acquaintance |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Association |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Trip | Jane's trip to New Mexico | New Mexico | View |
| N/A | Testimony | Jane testified in court. | Court | View |
| N/A | Crime | Maxwell transported Jane to New York for sexual abuse and conspired to do the same. | New York | View |
| N/A | Trial | The trial of the defendant, Maxwell, where Juror 50 served on the jury. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Crime | Jane was sexually exploited by Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein when she was in middle school. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Testimony | The speaker describes the upcoming testimony of four women, Jane, Annie, Kate, and Carolyn, again... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Trip | Women visiting Jeffrey Epstein at his office. | Epstein's office | View |
| N/A | Trial | An opening statement is being given in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A trial involving a defendant named Maxwell, where a jury was charged with Count Four concerning ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Accommodation booking | Cim Espinosa specifically booked Jane and her mother into one of Epstein's apartments. | Epstein's apartments | View |
| N/A | Trip | A trip to New York when Jane was 14, where she allegedly met Epstein to take headshots and was ab... | New York | View |
| N/A | Alleged crime | Group sexualized massages in which Ms. Maxwell was allegedly involved, according to testimony fro... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trip | Jane's first trip to New York. | New York | View |
| N/A | Trip | Jane traveled to New Mexico, allegedly for the purpose of engaging in sexual activity. | New Mexico | View |
| N/A | Trip | Jane took a return trip from New Mexico, during which Mr. Epstein was not present. | New Mexico | View |
| N/A | Communication | Jane communicated with Brian about a document she was shown on the stand. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Group sexualized massages | Recurring events described as 'group sexualized massages' that would happen 'almost every visit..... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trip | Witness Jane began traveling with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Incident | Incidents occurred while the witness, Jane, was 14, during which Maxwell was present in the room. | a room | View |
| N/A | Incident | Incidents occurred while the witness, Jane, was 16, during which Maxwell was present in the room. | a room | View |
| N/A | Sexual assault | A witness, Jane, describes being taken to a pool house by a man (contextually Epstein), who then ... | pool house | View |
| N/A | Meeting | Jane met with the government/FBI to discuss her case, after having already disclosed details to h... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Interrogation | Lawyers and the FBI repeatedly questioned Jane, suggesting alternative details to her story invol... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Criminal activity | Maxwell and Epstein allegedly selected and targeted vulnerable girls, including Jane, Kate, Annie... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trip | Jane's travel to New York, which the prosecution argues was the result of enticement by the defen... | New York | View |
DOJ-OGR-00017094.jpg
This document is a transcript of a legal summation by Ms. Moe in the case against Maxwell. Ms. Moe refutes the defense's claims regarding Maxwell's London residence by citing Maxwell's own 2019 deposition and argues for the credibility of four female witnesses (Jane, Kate, Carolyn, and Annie). She asserts that the witnesses are not motivated by money in the current trial, as their civil lawsuits are over and they have already received millions of dollars from the Jeffrey Epstein Victim Compensation Program.
DOJ-OGR-00017093.jpg
This document is a transcript of a legal summation by Ms. Moe, likely a prosecutor, to a jury. She argues that the defense has deliberately misled the jury by taking a witness's (Jane's) statements and a legal document out of context. Ms. Moe highlights a specific portion of that document which states the defendant, Maxwell, facilitated and was present for the sexual abuse of Jane, a part she claims the defense intentionally omitted.
DOJ-OGR-00017077.jpg
This document is a court transcript of a prosecutor's (Ms. Moe) summation in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecutor argues that Maxwell was an essential accomplice to Jeffrey Epstein, specifically detailing how she induced a victim named 'Jane' to travel across state lines to New York for sexual abuse. The testimony of a witness, Juan Alessi, is cited as evidence confirming Maxwell's role in arranging and participating in Jane's travel.
DOJ-OGR-00017074.jpg
This document is a legal summation from a court case, outlining Ghislaine Maxwell's role in Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking operation from 1995 to 2004. It details how Maxwell recruited, groomed, and abused multiple young women, including Jane, Annie Farmer, Virginia Roberts, and Carolyn, across various locations like New Mexico and Palm Beach. The text also highlights significant financial payments from Epstein to Maxwell, totaling over $23 million, and describes the evolution of the abuse into a 'pyramid scheme' where victims were incentivized to recruit others.
DOJ-OGR-00017073.jpg
This document is a transcript of a legal summation by 'Ms. Moe', likely a prosecutor, arguing for the guilt of Maxwell. The speaker details over $30 million in payments from Jeffrey Epstein to Maxwell between 1999 and 2007, positing that this money was payment for Maxwell's role as a coconspirator in Epstein's sexual abuse of underage girls. The argument connects these payments to a timeline of abuse starting in 1994 with victims identified as 'Jane' and 'Kate'.
DOJ-OGR-00017058.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of a summation given by Ms. Moe, likely a prosecutor. She argues that the defendant, Maxwell, engaged in 'classic grooming behavior' by teaching young girls, including Annie and Kate, to give foot massages to Epstein. This act is presented as a deliberate method to break down boundaries and facilitate abuse, not as an innocent mentoring activity.
DOJ-OGR-00017054.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a summation given by Ms. Moe on August 10, 2022. Ms. Moe argues to the jury that the defense's attempt to discredit a witness named Jane by calling other women named Michelle and Ava to testify is a meaningless distraction. She emphasizes that Jane never identified the specific individuals Michelle Healey or Eva Dubin, and points out that Epstein and Maxwell's contact book contained multiple people with those common first names.
DOJ-OGR-00017052.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of a legal summation given by Ms. Moe. She argues for the credibility of a witness, Jane, by citing the expert testimony of Dr. Rocchio, who explains that delayed disclosure is typical for victims of sexual trauma. Ms. Moe further supports Jane's testimony by highlighting that it is corroborated by the strikingly similar experiences of three other witnesses: Annie, Carolyn, and Kate.
DOJ-OGR-00017050.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court summation by Ms. Moe, likely a prosecutor. She argues that testimony from a witness named Matt corroborates the account of a victim named Jane. Matt, who dated Jane in the mid-2000s, testified that Jane told him years ago about being abused by her "godfather," Jeffrey Epstein, and another woman, whom Jane later confirmed was Maxwell after her arrest.
DOJ-OGR-00017045.jpg
This document is a transcript of a court summation, likely from a prosecutor named Ms. Moe, detailing the sexual abuse of a 14-year-old victim named Jane by Maxwell and Epstein. The summary recounts Jane's testimony about various forms of abuse, including forced touching and group encounters, and highlights trips the trio took from Florida to Epstein's house in New York via commercial and private flights. The speaker argues to the jury that these actions were predatory and not normal.
DOJ-OGR-00017041.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court summation, likely by a prosecutor named Ms. Moe, in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The speaker argues that Maxwell is guilty because she deliberately cultivated relationships with young girls to facilitate sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein. The case of 'Jane', who met Maxwell and Epstein at a summer camp in 1994 at age 14, is presented as a key example of this 'playbook'.
DOJ-OGR-00017037.jpg
This document is a page from a court summation, likely delivered by 'Ms. Moe', in a criminal case. The speaker outlines the stages of 'grooming' as explained by a Dr. Rocchio and alleges that the defendants, Maxwell and Epstein, used this exact 'playbook' to carefully select and target vulnerable girls from struggling, single-mother households, specifically naming Jane, Kate, Annie, and Carolyn.
DOJ-OGR-00016986.jpg
This court transcript captures an argument from a defense attorney, Mr. Everdell, objecting to a 'conscious avoidance' jury instruction for his client, Ms. Maxwell. He argues that the instruction is inappropriate because testimony from witnesses Jane, Annie, and Carolyn establishes Ms. Maxwell as an active participant in the alleged sexual crimes, not someone who deliberately ignored them. The attorney cites specific acts like participating in massages and groping to prove direct involvement, thereby negating the basis for a conscious avoidance theory.
DOJ-OGR-00016967.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. It captures a discussion between the judge (THE COURT), Mr. Everdell, and Mr. Rohrbach about finalizing the wording for jury instructions. The parties agree on language concerning the defendant's knowledge of a person named Jane being under 17 and the context of 'interstate commerce'.
DOJ-OGR-00016965.jpg
This court transcript page, filed on August 10, 2022, documents a discussion between an attorney, Mr. Rohrbach, and the judge. The conversation centers on the testimony of a witness named Jane regarding a single incident of sexual abuse in New Mexico and whether a specific limiting instruction should be added to the jury charge. The judge ultimately denies the request, stating that the defense failed to ask for it at the appropriate time and that the charge is based on a violation of New York law.
DOJ-OGR-00016935.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding filed on August 10, 2022. An attorney argues that a specific conspiracy charge is narrowly focused on a violation of New York law, with Jane as the sole victim. The attorney distinguishes this from separate conduct in Florida involving a person named Carolyn and clarifies that while witnesses Kate and Annie provided testimony, they are not victims under this particular charge.
DOJ-OGR-00016916.jpg
This document is a partial court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing discussions and stipulations regarding the admission of various exhibits (A-1, A-2, DH1, DH2, DH3, J2, DH4) during a legal proceeding. Attorneys MS. COMEY and MR. EVERDELL, along with THE COURT, discuss the admissibility of Palm Beach County school records pertaining to individuals named Virginia Robertson and Jane, and the potential testimony of witness Dominique Hyppolite. The government also requested that Exhibit J2 be accepted under seal.
DOJ-OGR-00016852.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of Dr. Dubin. An attorney questions Dr. Dubin about his knowledge of a woman named Eva who was reportedly dating or close to Mr. Epstein between 1994 and 2004, which Dr. Dubin cannot recall. The questioning concludes with Dr. Dubin explicitly denying ever having been in a group sexual encounter or a sexualized massage with an individual referred to as 'Jane'.
DOJ-OGR-00016805.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Young. An unnamed questioner reads passages from another document for Young to confirm, describing a person named Jane's first trip to New York, her meeting with Epstein, and her former residence in a gated community in Florida called Bear Lakes. An attorney, Ms. Menninger, then interjects to bring up a matter related to an 'Annie Farmer issue'.
DOJ-OGR-00016803.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a direct examination of a witness named Young, filed on August 10, 2022. The witness confirms their involvement in two interviews from December 2019 and February 2020 and is asked to read excerpts from a report. The quoted sections describe an incident where an individual named Maxwell removed the clothes of a 14-year-old girl referred to as 'Jane'.
DOJ-OGR-00016799.jpg
This document is a transcript of a direct examination of a witness named Young, filed on August 10, 2022. The witness confirms their involvement in creating an FBI 302 report based on handwritten notes from September 19th, with the final report being typed in December 2019. The witness reads a line from the report into the record: "GM walked by with dog. JE came up to meet her."
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-00016770.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript where an attorney argues to a judge that the government failed to properly investigate information provided by witnesses, which is probative of the defendant's innocence. The attorney cites the 'Watson case' as precedent where law enforcement prematurely concluded guilt and then begins to question a witness about conversations with a person named 'Jane' regarding 'group sexualized massages'.
DOJ-OGR-00016769.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, in which an attorney argues that the government's investigation was not thorough. The attorney uses the example of a witness, Jane, who testified about her involvement in 'sexualized massages' and named other participants, including a 'Michelle'. The attorney claims that despite this information, the government failed to follow up and interview Michelle and others, arguing this lack of diligence is significant to the case.
DOJ-OGR-00016759.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between a judge and several attorneys (Ms. Menninger, Ms. Comey, Mr. Everdell). The conversation centers on the prior testimony of a witness named Jane, specifically her memory of a trip to New York around 1997 and whether that memory was influenced by her attorney, Mr. Rossmiller. The defense attorney, Mr. Everdell, also informs the court of their intent to call Special Agent Amanda Young as a witness.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | Jane | $200.00 | Payment for her time visiting his mansion while... | View |
| N/A | Received | Unknown | Jane | $0.00 | Settlement award discussed in the context of cr... | View |
| N/A | Received | defendants | Jane | $0.00 | Discussion of a plan to 'get more money from th... | View |
Benefit of testifying
Communication that testifying would benefit her in the criminal case.
Request to take extra classes
The questioner refers to a letter the witness (Jane) had submitted asking to take extra classes the next summer.
Potential abuse in New Mexico
The document describes how the government repeatedly questioned Jane about abuse in New Mexico, despite her initial statements of having no memory of such events.
No Subject
A photograph was sent to Epstein with a note saying 'Thanks for rocking my world'.
Trip to New Mexico and sexual abuse
Jane previously told the FBI about a trip to New Mexico but denied being sexually abused there.
Names of participants in group massages
The witness confirms that she previously told the government the names of other women who participated in the group massages.
A document shown to Jane on the witness stand.
Jane communicated with Brian about a document she had been shown while on the witness stand. Ms. Menninger wants to know the full extent of this communication.
Question regarding testimony
The government communicated a question to Jane through her attorney.
Timeline of 'The Lion King'
The government communicated to Jane through her attorney that 'The Lion King' Broadway show did not come out until 1997.
Information for the government
Jane communicated information to Mr. Glassman with the knowledge that he intended to share it with the government.
Photographs from soap opera
Jane, a soap opera star, sent photographs of herself and other cast members in an envelope to her fan, Ms. Espinosa.
Unknown content
The content of this communication is the subject of the legal debate; Menninger wants to exclude the specific content while allowing the witness to state how she felt.
Legal Strategy
Communications regarding the impact of criminal testimony on the civil case.
Receiving financial help from Jeffrey Epstein
Jane told the witness that she had received financial help from Jeffrey Epstein. The exact timing and details of the conversation are not fully specified in this excerpt.
Confirming Maxwell's identity
After Matt learned that Maxwell had been arrested, he called Jane to ask if she was the woman Jane had told him about years ago. Jane confirmed that she was.
Harassment
People calling and harassing Jane.
Jane's family living in her house
The witness is questioned about telling Matt that her family was living in her house.
A woman making her feel comfortable
Jane told her boyfriend from a decade ago, Matt, about the woman who would make her feel comfortable in the room.
Advice about boyfriends
Maxwell advised Jane that once she has a sexual relationship with a boyfriend, she can always have one again because they are 'grandfathered in'.
Abuse suffered in New Mexico
Maxwell received notes from Jane's interview, which recorded the abuse she suffered in New Mexico, over three weeks before her trial.
Making arrangements
The questioner alleges that the witness, Jane, previously told the government she recalled Emmy calling her home phone in Florida between the ages of 14 and 16 to make arrangements. The witness denies ever making this statement.
Involvement in sexualized massages
Jane testified to the government that she was involved in sexualized massages with multiple people and provided their first names.
The case
The speaker states, 'You heard that Jane and Annie gave some interviews themselves...'
Post-event discussions
Jane spoke with her family and ex-boyfriend Matt, which the speaker claims contaminated her memory of events.
Her experience with Epstein
Jane told the government that she was in the same house for three years when she met Epstein until she moved to New York.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity