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-00013170.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The Judge and attorneys (Menninger and Rohrbach) are discussing the admissibility of testimony and potential violations of witness sequestration (witnesses speaking to each other). The Judge indicates he is unlikely to exclude testimony unless there was a 'knowing and full violation,' preferring to let the issue be handled during cross-examination.
DOJ-OGR-00013146.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the direct examination of a witness named Carolyn by prosecutor Ms. Comey. The testimony reviews Carolyn's prior statements from December 2009 regarding her visits to Jeffrey Epstein's home. Specifically, Carolyn confirms that Epstein did not contact her personally; rather, he would have 'Sarah or Maxwell' call her to arrange the visits.
DOJ-OGR-00013096.jpg
This document is page 83 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It details the conclusion of the recross-examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley, who is subsequently excused by the judge while the jury is not present. The court then communicates with Ms. Pomerantz (representing the government) before declaring a recess.
DOJ-OGR-00013089.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Flatley. The testimony clarifies that the 'author' metadata in a Microsoft Word document is derived from the user profile that set up the software, not necessarily the individual creating a specific file. An example is cited where the computer account name was 'Ghislaine' and the corresponding author name in Word was 'gmax'.
DOJ-OGR-00013075.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. It details the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley by prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz regarding the authentication of Government Exhibits 420, 421, and 422, which are identified as Word documents printed from Government Exhibit 54. The defense attorney, Ms. Menninger, offers no objection, and the exhibits are admitted into evidence by the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00013074.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a portion of the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Flatley, by an attorney, Ms. Pomerantz. Flatley testifies that he reviewed evidence using forensic software, and Ms. Pomerantz successfully enters Government Exhibit 418B into evidence without objection from opposing counsel, Ms. Menninger. Ms. Pomerantz then prepares to present additional exhibits (420, 421, and 422) for the witness's review.
DOJ-OGR-00013073.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a portion of the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Flatley, by counsel Ms. Pomerantz. During the testimony, Government Exhibits 418 and 418R are admitted into evidence, with the court noting that 418 is sealed due to third-party phone numbers, and Mr. Flatley identifies another exhibit (418B) as showing the properties of exhibit 418.
DOJ-OGR-00013072.jpg
This page is a transcript from a court proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz questions witness Mr. Flatley to authenticate Government Exhibits 418 (unredacted) and 418R (redacted), establishing they were printed from 'Government 54' (a master evidence source). The government moves to offer Exhibit 418 under seal and 418R publicly.
DOJ-OGR-00013071.jpg
This document is page 58 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. Witness Mr. Flatley is being questioned by Ms. Pomerantz regarding an email sent by 'gmax' (gmax1@mindspring.com) to 'MarkhamCPM@earthlink.net'. The email discusses the creation of a 'household manual,' specifically detailing where to buy cleaning supplies (Publix and Sam's Club in Palm Beach Gardens) and specific brands of laundry products to use.
DOJ-OGR-00013067.jpg
This document is a court transcript page from a case filed on August 10, 2022, showing the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Flatley. The questioning focuses on Government Exhibit 54, through which it is established that Microsoft Windows 2000 was installed on February 22, 2001, and that the registered organization and owner for this installation was listed as 'Gmax'.
DOJ-OGR-00013053.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Meder. The testimony focuses on the chain of custody and location of evidence, specifically CDs identified by '1B numbers,' which were found in various locations within a 'house,' including a potential third-floor closet. Meder confirms working for the government to verify these items but states they cannot recall the exact locations where specific CDs were found.
DOJ-OGR-00013048.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Comey questions a witness named Meder regarding Government Exhibits 317 and 318, which are photographs derived from a CD logged as evidence '1B75'. The witness identifies Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein in both photographs.
DOJ-OGR-00013047.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 the admission of photographic evidence (Government Exhibits 314 and 317). The witness identifies Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein in photos retrieved from a CD logged as evidence item '1B75' during the Epstein and Maxwell investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00013045.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details the direct examination of a witness named Meder by Ms. Comey, focused on the identification and admission of Government Exhibit 347. The exhibit is described as a photograph from a CD (logged as 1B19) showing Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell together.
DOJ-OGR-00013037.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Comey examines a witness named Meder, who identifies Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell in a photograph marked as Government Exhibit 322. The photo originated from a CD logged as evidence number 1B78 during the investigation, and the exhibit is formally admitted into evidence by the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00013028.jpg
This document is page 15 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The text details a legal argument between prosecutor Mr. Rohrbach and defense attorney Ms. Menninger regarding the scope of a witness's testimony concerning the technical properties of burning CDs and file dates (created vs. modified). The defense argues that certain technical details were not disclosed in a 'November 26 letter,' while the prosecution argues these details are common knowledge not requiring specialized expertise.
DOJ-OGR-00013027.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a legal argument between prosecutor Mr. Rohrbach and defense attorney Ms. Menninger regarding the upcoming testimony of a witness named Mr. Flatley. The dispute centers on whether Flatley's testimony regarding file dates on CDs constitutes expert opinion or purely factual testimony based on '3500 material'.
DOJ-OGR-00013026.jpg
This page contains a transcript from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. A defense attorney is arguing before the judge to limit the testimony of a witness named Mr. Flatley. The argument focuses on distinguishing between factual testimony regarding metadata (which the defense accepts) and expert opinion, as well as precluding testimony regarding CDs (Compact Discs) because Flatley was only disclosed to review 'devices.'
DOJ-OGR-00013023.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecution (Ms. Moe) and defense (Ms. Menninger) are discussing a potential violation regarding witness communication. Specifically, a witness named 'Jane' called an individual named 'Brian' after her testimony to warn him that the defense attorney was an 'expletive' and mentioned being shown an 'Interlochen application' during cross-examination.
DOJ-OGR-00013021.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. Attorneys Ms. Moe (Prosecution) and Ms. Menninger (Defense) argue before the Court regarding the admissibility of testimony from a witness named Brian, specifically concerning his communications with a 'Jane' and the late timing (3 AM) of the government's disclosure of notes to the defense. The Judge questions whether the late disclosure warrants the exclusion of testimony or simply provides grounds for cross-examination.
DOJ-OGR-00013001.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument over the admissibility of photographs in a trial. The prosecution, represented by Ms. Moe, argues that the photos are relevant to prove the long-term, close relationship between Ms. Maxwell and Mr. Epstein, countering the defense's claim that she was merely a personal assistant. After a brief exchange where the defense (Ms. Menninger) questions the evidence, the judge overrules the objection, allowing the photographs to be admitted.
DOJ-OGR-00009273.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case of USA v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It details the cross-examination and dismissal of a witness, Ms. Conrad, who admits to perjury and misrepresentation regarding her service as a juror. Defense counsel (Mr. Gair) characterizes her as a 'pathological liar.' The proceedings also involve discussions about calling a U.S. Marshal and a law student named Mr. Benhamou as witnesses, though the latter is dismissed to return to class. The document appears to be an exhibit filed in a later case (likely Giuffre v. Maxwell based on the 2022 filing stamp).
DOJ-OGR-00009272.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 15, 2012, in the case of U.S. v. Paul M. Daugerdas. It captures the cross-examination of a witness, Ms. Conrad, who is questioned about receiving use immunity and the possibility of facing perjury charges. The transcript culminates with the judge directly questioning Ms. Conrad about why she admittedly lied and perjured herself during the jury selection (voir dire) process, to which she responds it was for the 'interesting trial experience'.
DOJ-OGR-00009270.jpg
This document is a transcript from the case 'United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas' dated February 15, 2012, filed as an exhibit in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It features the redirect examination of a witness, Ms. Conrad (a former juror), who is being aggressively questioned about her failure to follow Judge Pauley's instructions and her admission of perjury during voir dire. The document is likely included in the Maxwell case files as a legal precedent regarding juror misconduct and the impact of untruthful answers during jury selection.
DOJ-OGR-00009268.jpg
This document is a transcript from February 15, 2012, of the cross-examination of Ms. Conrad (a juror/attorney) in the case United States v. Paul M. Daugerdas. The header indicates this document was filed in 2022 as part of the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330), likely as a defense exhibit regarding juror misconduct precedents. The text details Conrad's affirmation that she followed Judge Pauley's instructions, her legal background from Brooklyn Law School, and her deliberations regarding witnesses Dr. DeRosa and Paul Shanbrom, and defendants Brubaker and Parse.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity