Southern District
LocationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
Eastern District
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
Main Justice
|
Co negotiators |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Investigation | A criminal investigation into Epstein's co-conspirators by the Southern District. | Southern District | View |
| N/A | N/A | Negotiations with Main Justice and Southern District | Unknown | View |
DOJ-OGR-00016210.jpg
This document is page 100 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It records the end of the day's proceedings where the judge dismisses witness Mr. Visoski for the evening while the jury is not present. The page contains significant whitespace as the testimony concluded early on the page.
DOJ-OGR-00016184.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022. In the excerpt, the judge confirms with Ms. Comey and Mr. Everdell that there are no preliminary issues to address before the jury enters. The court then prepares to bring in the jury for Ms. Comey's witness.
DOJ-OGR-00016182.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, for case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. It captures a procedural discussion between the judge (THE COURT) and attorneys (Ms. Comey, Mr. Everdell, Ms. Sternheim) while the jury is not present. The main topic is the logistical handling of binders containing sealed exhibits for the jury, with the parties agreeing to place them under the jurors' chairs before testimony begins.
DOJ-OGR-00016181.jpg
This document is a court transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a portion of the defense's argument, delivered by Ms. Sternheim, who emphasizes the government's burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and reminds the jury of the presumption of innocence. After Ms. Sternheim concludes by contrasting Maxwell's presence with Jeffrey Epstein's absence, the judge calls for a 10-minute break before the government presents its first witness.
DOJ-OGR-00016167.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022. It features a discussion between the Court and attorney Mr. Pagliuca regarding opening statements. The Judge overrules an objection but questions the defense's basis for suggesting attorneys told witnesses what to say. Mr. Pagliuca argues that in 2008, a witness named Carolyn provided detailed interrogatories, depositions, and a complaint that did not include Ms. Maxwell, implying her later inclusion may have been influenced.
DOJ-OGR-00016161.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a trial dated August 10, 2022. An attorney, Ms. Sternheim, delivers part of an opening statement, arguing that the testimony of four upcoming female witnesses is unreliable because their memories could have been created by suggestive activities, media influence, and the incentive of monetary gain. Opposing counsel, Ms. Comey, successfully objects to one of Ms. Sternheim's claims, and the court instructs the jury to disregard the comment.
DOJ-OGR-00016147.jpg
This document is page 37 of a court transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (referenced as 'the defendant'), dated August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz outlines the prosecution's opening argument, describing a 'pyramid scheme of abuse' where the defendant recruited and groomed minors for Jeffrey Epstein under the guise of massage appointments. The text details specific charges, including transporting minors under age 17 across state lines and sex trafficking of minors.
DOJ-OGR-00016131.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022, in which a judge is instructing the jury on their conduct. The judge strictly prohibits jurors from discussing the case with anyone, including each other, until deliberations, and forbids the use of any electronic devices or social media for communication or research related to the case. The instructions emphasize the need to keep an open mind and base their verdict solely on the evidence presented in court.
DOJ-OGR-00016130.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) filed on August 10, 2022. The text contains instructions from the judge to the jury regarding how to evaluate witness testimony and the importance of keeping an open mind until all evidence is presented. Notably, the judge addresses the significant media attention surrounding the case and establishes that witnesses may use pseudonyms or first names only to protect their privacy.
DOJ-OGR-00016122.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a procedural discussion between the judge, Ms. Sternheim, and Ms. Comey. The parties are establishing the order for alternating peremptory strikes during jury selection. The judge decides that the defense will start and outlines the sequence of strikes, a method agreed upon by both the defense and the government.
DOJ-OGR-00016120.jpg
This document is page 10 of a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, for Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The text details a discussion between attorneys (Ms. Moe and Ms. Sternheim) and the Judge regarding the logistics of projecting evidence on screens for a witness. The primary concerns raised are ensuring the government can follow the proceedings and preventing the public gallery from viewing the screens to maintain privacy.
DOJ-OGR-00016119.jpg
This page is a transcript from the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues against the defense's use of screens to highlight documents because the government cannot see the witness's screen without it being mirrored to the public gallery, which poses security/privacy risks. The Court rules that highlighting text on a screen for a witness is permissible provided the action is fully described for the record, similar to reading from paper.
DOJ-OGR-00016117.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a procedural discussion regarding the handling of physical evidence binders and paper copies of exhibits. Prosecutor Ms. Moe requests that the government be allowed to review binders prepared by defense attorney Mr. Everdell before they are presented to the jury or witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00001953.jpg
This document is page 76 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (the Ghislaine Maxwell case) filed on December 10, 2020. The Court questions Ms. Moe (Government) about whether statements made by alleged victims should be considered in the '3142 analysis' (bail determination). Ms. Moe clarifies that while victims have a right to speak under the Crime Victims Rights Act, the government is not using their testimony to support its specific motion, leading the Court to conclude it should not consider the substance of those statements for the bail analysis.
DOJ-OGR-00001952.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated December 10, 2020, detailing a discussion about a defendant's pretrial detention. The judge questions the prosecutor, Ms. Moe, about legal arguments raised by the defense attorney, Mr. Cohen, concerning the burden of proof for flight risk. Ms. Moe argues that the defendant has the burden to rebut the presumption of detention and has failed to do so, justifying the government's request to keep her detained.
DOJ-OGR-00001947.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated December 10, 2020, from case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. An attorney, Mr. Cohen, concludes his argument for his client's bail, asserting the government has failed to prove the client is a flight risk. He asks the judge to grant bail or to keep the proceeding open for a week to allow for the submission of more information.
DOJ-OGR-00001946.jpg
This is page 69 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on December 10, 2020. Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorney is arguing before the judge regarding her continued detention, stating that the government's cited case law regarding COVID-19 risks involves dangerous felons and is not relevant to Maxwell's situation. The attorney emphasizes the impossibility of preparing for trial with only four months of discovery while unable to meet the client in person due to BOP restrictions.
DOJ-OGR-00001941.jpg
This document is page 64 of a court transcript from a bail proceeding filed on December 10, 2020 (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues that the government is using tactics to circumvent the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) by indicting conduct that is 25 years old. He cites the 'Annabi case' regarding the reach of plea agreements binding U.S. Attorney offices.
DOJ-OGR-00001940.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated December 10, 2020. An unidentified attorney argues before a judge during a bail hearing, contending that a lengthy examination of their client's assets is unnecessary and intended only for detention, citing a precedent from a Judge Raggi. The attorney also signals their intent to file significant legal motions that could challenge the indictment's validity, which they argue the court should consider when weighing the evidence for bail purposes.
DOJ-OGR-00001909.jpg
This document is page 32 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 10, 2020. Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues that the defendant is a flight risk because she successfully lived in hiding for a year and purchased real estate using a fake name without detection. The Judge (The Court) interrupts to question why this specific information regarding the evasion was not presented until the government's reply brief.
DOJ-OGR-00001892.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court hearing on December 10, 2020, in which the judge questions an attorney, Ms. Moe, about the completeness of discovery materials provided by the F.B.I. in Florida. The judge emphasizes the need for proactive and critical efforts to ensure full disclosure, rather than simply accepting initial representations. The judge then directs Ms. Moe to present a proposed discovery schedule that she has already discussed with another party, Mr. Cohen.
DOJ-OGR-00022013.jpg
This document is page 10 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT, filed on February 10, 2020. The Court sets a trial date for June 8 to allow for pretrial dispositions and discovery review. Defense counsel Mr. Foy expresses concern about a potential conflict with family travel planned for the end of June, to which the Judge responds that professional obligations must take priority.
DOJ-OGR-00022012.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a court hearing filed on February 10, 2020. Attorney Mr. Figgins requests permission to file a formal motion regarding the 'Investigator General's report' and asks for a schedule extension due to an elderly relative visiting. The Court grants the extension, setting a motion deadline for March 20, with the prosecution (Ms. Lonergan) to oppose by April 10.
DOJ-OGR-00022010.jpg
A transcript page from Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT (United States v. Noel et al.) filed on February 10, 2020. Government prosecutor Ms. Lonergan argues against a six-month adjournment, stating the trial focuses on a specific '14-hour period' at the MCC and is not complex. She notes that witness statements (3500 material) were provided unusually early to the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00021982.jpg
A transcript page from a court hearing filed on December 19, 2019 (Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT). Defense attorney Mr. Foy argues that 'outside circumstances' are driving the prosecution and expresses concern about receiving discovery and potential Brady material in time for an April 20 trial date. The Judge is unpersuaded and sets the trial for April 20, with Ms. Donaleski estimating the government's case will take approximately one week.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity