| 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 |
A page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, featuring arguments by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorney. The attorney argues that the government's citations of 'dangerousness cases' are irrelevant to Maxwell's situation and emphasizes the impossibility of preparing for trial while Maxwell is detained during the COVID-19 crisis, citing lack of in-person access to the client due to BOP restrictions. The Judge attempts to interject at the bottom of the page.
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021. A defense attorney is arguing for the release of their client (inferred to be Ghislaine Maxwell) on the grounds that reviewing voluminous electronic discovery for 'conduct that's alleged to be 25 years old' is impossible while the client is in custody during the pandemic. The attorney notes the client is in 'administrative seg.' (segregation) because authorities are 'afraid of what happened with Mr. Epstein' (referencing his death in custody).
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues for bail, claiming the government's indictment of conduct from 1994-1997 is tactical and lacks physical evidence like tapes or video. He asserts that the client has been kept in custody 'by design' and references the 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA).
This document is a page from a court transcript (filed 04/01/2021) appearing to be from the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 21-770). Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues during a bail proceeding that the government's indictment relies on 25-year-old conduct specifically to circumvent the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). He cites the 'Annabi case' regarding the scope of plea agreements and claims the prosecution's strategy is tactical.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, capturing an attorney's argument during a bail hearing. The attorney contends that stringent bail conditions can mitigate flight risk without a prolonged hearing on the defendant's assets, citing an observation by Judge Raggi in a previous case. The attorney also informs the presiding judge of forthcoming significant motions that could challenge the indictment itself, urging the court to consider this when weighing the evidence for the bail determination.
This page is a transcript from a court hearing dated April 1, 2021 (Case 21-770), likely related to Ghislaine Maxwell's appeal regarding detention. The defense attorney argues that the defendant is not a flight risk ('opposite of hiding') and contends that the perjury charge—stemming from a denial of guilt during a deposition—should not heavily weigh the 3142 analysis against release. The attorney notes the government has been investigating the case for ten years.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021) where a defense attorney argues against the government's claim that the defendant is a flight risk for changing her contact information. The attorney explains that the defendant changed her email and phone number because she was hacked and received 'strange e-mails' after the Second Circuit unsealed civil case documents—revealing her personal data—around the time of Jeffrey Epstein's arrest in August 2019. The attorney asserts she kept the hacked phone to preserve evidence for ongoing civil litigation.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. A defense attorney, Mr. Cohen, argues that his client has remained in the U.S. and that counsel has been in frequent contact with the government, suggesting a voluntary surrender could have been arranged. The judge interrupts to seek explicit clarification on whether the defense actually offered to arrange a surrender in the event of an indictment.
This document is page 115 of a court transcript from April 1, 2021, involving a defense attorney arguing before a judge regarding bail conditions for a female client (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell). The attorney rebuts the government's claim that the client is a flight risk or 'hiding out,' arguing instead that she has been actively litigating civil cases since 2015 and denying impropriety regarding Mr. Epstein. The attorney also notes that a plaintiff seeking millions of dollars had spoken earlier in the proceeding.
This document is a transcript from a court hearing on April 1, 2021, where a defense attorney argues for their client's pretrial release. The attorney contends that the government has the unwavering burden to prove the client is a flight risk and has failed to do so, citing precedent from the Supreme Court and a Second Circuit case written by Judge Raggi. The attorney also informs the court that they have proactively prepared a bail package for consideration, subject to verification by Pretrial Services.
This document is a page from a court transcript where an attorney is addressing a judge. The attorney argues that their client, people close to the client, and even the law firm (Haddon Morgan) have received serious physical and death threats, which they present as a significant factor for the court's consideration. The attorney contrasts the reality of these threats with the government's alleged attempts to downplay them.
A transcript from an April 2021 court hearing where defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues for the release of his client (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) on bail. Cohen cites the Bail Reform Act, the difficulty of preparing a defense during the COVID crisis while in custody, and explicitly argues that his client is 'not Jeffrey Epstein' and is being unfairly portrayed by the government and media as a 'sinister person.'
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021. It features a dialogue between the Court and prosecutor Ms. Moe regarding the details of the defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) arrest. The discussion focuses on the defendant's refusal to open the door for law enforcement and the specific allegation that she attempted to block location monitoring by wrapping a mobile phone in foil.
This document is a transcript page from a court hearing dated April 1, 2021, involving prosecutor Ms. Moe and the Judge. Ms. Moe argues that the defendant (contextually Ghislaine Maxwell) poses a flight risk because she successfully purchased real estate under a fake name and lived undetected for a year. The Judge questions why this specific information was not presented until the government's reply brief.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) involving a detention hearing. Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues that the female defendant (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) should be denied bail because she poses an extreme flight risk, has significant undisclosed financial means, strong international ties, and is charged with the sexual abuse of minors. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen is present, and the judge indicates that alleged victims will also be heard.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. The Judge sets a firm trial date for July 12, 2021, and rules to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act to allow for discovery and defense preparation. The proceedings then transition to arguments regarding the government's motion for detention (bail hearing), involving attorneys Mr. Cohen (Defense) and Ms. Moe (Government).
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding where the judge, defense counsel (Mr. Cohen), and government counsel (Ms. Moe) discuss scheduling. The court sets a trial date for July 12, 2021. The government, through Ms. Moe, requests that the time between the hearing and the trial be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act to allow for discovery and motions.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021, documenting a scheduling hearing. The Judge sets the trial commencement date for July 12, 2021, and establishes a timeline for discovery disclosures and pretrial motions running from August 2020 through January 2021. Ms. Moe, representing the government, estimates the prosecution's case will take two weeks, but suggests blocking out three weeks total for the trial.
This document is a transcript page from a court proceeding dated April 1, 2021 (likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell bail hearing). The text details the government's protocol for notifying victims via an opt-in process and outlines how three specific victims will participate in the bail hearing: one via memorandum, one via a statement read by the government, and one speaking directly. Attorneys Ms. Moe and Mr. Cohen confirm they have conferred and agreed upon a schedule with the Court.
This document is a court transcript from April 1, 2021, detailing a discussion between the judge, defense counsel (Mr. Cohen), and government counsel (Ms. Moe) about establishing a schedule for motions and discovery. Mr. Cohen clarifies the schedule by adding a previously omitted August 21 deadline for search warrant applications, which Ms. Moe confirms was included in a prior email to the judge's chambers. The parties are working to finalize deadlines for various legal filings in the case.
This document is a transcript from a court hearing dated April 1, 2021. The Judge is pressing Ms. Moe (likely a government attorney) on the thoroughness of discovery and timely disclosures. Ms. Moe confirms her team met personally with the FBI in Florida to ensure they obtained a 'comprehensive set of materials.' The Judge emphasizes that they must actively retrieve files rather than just accepting initial representations. The discussion then moves to setting a schedule previously discussed with Mr. Cohen.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, covering the arraignment of Ghislaine Maxwell on a superseding (S1) indictment. The prosecution (Ms. Moe) explains that the new indictment includes a 'ministerial correction' regarding civil docket numbers in the perjury counts (Five and Six). The Judge questions both Maxwell and her attorney, Mr. Cohen, to ensure they have reviewed and discussed the changes.
This is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, where the judge justifies holding the proceeding with COVID-19 safety measures, referencing a national emergency and ensuring public trial rights are upheld. The judge then transitions to the arraignment, confirming with counsel Ms. Moe that it is for an S1 superseding indictment and asking for an explanation of the changes from the original indictment.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, concerning Case 21-770. It details a discussion between the Judge, Ms. Moe (Government), and Mr. Cohen regarding the necessity of conducting the arraignment and bail hearing remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court affirms that the proceeding cannot be delayed as the detained defendant is seeking bail and notes the significant public interest in the case.
This document is a page from a court transcript (filed April 1, 2021) documenting a videoconference hearing involving Ghislaine Maxwell and her attorney, Mr. Cohen. Ms. Maxwell is participating from the MDC in Brooklyn. The court confirms technical connectivity, establishes protocols for private attorney-client conversations via breakout rooms, and acknowledges receipt of a 'waiver of physical presence' form signed by Maxwell on July 10, 2020.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity