Trove
Sign In Sign Up

the Judge

Person
Mentions
138
Relationships
15
Events
40
Documents
67
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.

Event Timeline

Interactive Timeline: Hover over events to see details. Events are arranged chronologically and alternate between top and bottom for better visibility.
15 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person Ms. Moe
Professional
10 Very Strong
6
View
person Mr. Everdell
Professional
9 Strong
5
View
person The jury
Professional
7
3
View
person MS. MENNINGER
Professional
7
3
View
person MR. PAGLIUCA
Professional
6
2
View
person The jury
Professional judicial
6
1
View
person Ms. Comey
Professional
6
2
View
person Unnamed speaker
Professional
6
2
View
person MS. POMERANTZ
Professional
6
1
View
person the defendant
Judicial
5
1
View
person Ms. Maxwell
Legal representative
5
1
View
person lawyers for the parties
Professional
5
1
View
person Ms. Sternheim
Professional
5
1
View
person The jury
Instructional
5
1
View
person Mr. Cohen
Professional
5
1
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
N/A N/A Sentencing hearing where the judge overrules a defense objection regarding sentencing guidelines ... Courtroom View
N/A Trial The legal proceeding for which the juror is being considered. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Denial of second bail application Court View
N/A Jury selection The process of selecting jurors for the trial, which the respondent is currently undergoing. courtroom View
N/A Hearing A hypothetical hearing is discussed, with opinions on whether it should be held and whether victi... N/A View
N/A Court proceeding A court hearing to discuss the schedule for jury deliberations. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Sentencing Hearing / Legal Ruling Courtroom (Southern District) View
N/A Trial A legal proceeding where testimony is given, evidence is admitted, and rulings are made. N/A View
N/A Side bar conferences Discussions between the judge and counsel that the jury is instructed not to concern themselves w... N/A View
N/A Legal proceeding A court case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) in which this jury instruction was filed. N/A View
N/A N/A Sentencing hearing ruling where the judge determines Virginia Roberts and Melissa are victims for... Courtroom View
N/A Trial The legal proceeding for which the juror is being selected. The juror is instructed not to discus... courtroom View
N/A Jury selection The process of selecting a juror for a trial, which this questionnaire is a part of. N/A View
2025-11-07 Phone call A telephone call where a judge was trying to identify people involved in a process. N/A View
2023-06-29 N/A Court ruling on objections to Pre-Sentence Report (PSR). Courtroom View
2023-06-29 Court hearing A discussion took place regarding sentencing guidelines in Case 22-1426. The court confirmed an i... Courtroom (implied) View
2023-06-29 Sentencing A judge sentences Ms. Maxwell to 240 months (20 years) of imprisonment and five years of supervis... The Court View
2022-08-22 N/A Court proceedings regarding sentencing calculations, specifically discussing enhancements for 'le... Southern District of New Yo... View
2022-08-22 Court hearing A discussion during a court proceeding regarding sentencing guidelines, specifically whether the ... Courtroom (implied) View
2022-08-22 N/A Court ruling on objections to the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. Southern District of New Yo... View
2022-08-10 Court hearing A court proceeding to discuss and set deadlines for the disclosure of a witness list and subseque... Courtroom in the Southern D... View
2022-08-10 Court proceeding A judge confirms with two parties, Ms. Comey and Mr. Everdell, that there are no preliminary matt... Courtroom in the Southern D... View
2022-08-10 Legal proceeding Summation by Ms. Menninger in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. Courtroom (implied) View
2022-08-10 Court proceeding A summation (closing argument) was delivered by Ms. Menninger to a jury regarding the government'... Courtroom (implied) View
2022-08-10 Court hearing A court proceeding where attorneys argue about the scope of a witness's upcoming testimony. Court View

DOJ-OGR-00014719.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument about jury instructions. An attorney argues that the existing instructions are sufficient and that sending new, confusing ones would be a mistake. The judge ('THE COURT') then critiques the defense's newly proposed instruction, stating it addresses a count the jury didn't ask about and contains a legally incorrect paragraph concerning sexual activity involving a person named 'Jane' in states other than New York.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

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.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00014649.jpg

This document is a page from the court transcript of the jury charge in the trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The judge instructs the jury on the requirement for a unanimous verdict, the protocol for filling out the verdict form via the foreperson, and general conduct regarding courtesy during deliberations. The transcript concludes with the judge calling for a sidebar with counsel and the court reporter before submitting the case to the jury.

Court transcript (jury charge)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00014587.jpg

This document is page 187 of a court transcript (Document 767) filed on August 10, 2022, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains the judge's charge to the jury, specifically instructing them not to research the case externally or communicate about it outside the jury room. It also details Instruction No. 4, explaining that statements made by attorneys are arguments, not evidence, and that the jury's own recollection of the evidence must control their decision.

Court transcript / jury instructions
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00014552.jpg

This document is a transcript from a court proceeding, specifically a summation by an attorney, Ms. Menninger, likely for the defense. She is instructing the jury that the burden of proof lies entirely with the government to prove every element of the charges against her client, Ms. Maxwell, beyond a reasonable doubt. Ms. Menninger emphasizes that if the government fails to meet this high standard on any part of any charge, the jury must acquit.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00014551.jpg

This document is page 151 of a court transcript containing the defense summation by Ms. Menninger in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. Menninger argues that Maxwell was not involved with the accuser 'Kate' in New York and that regarding 'Carolyn' and the Palm Beach property, mere presence or management duties do not constitute conspiracy or sex trafficking. The defense emphasizes the lack of physical evidence (message pads, phone records) linking Maxwell to orchestrating massages and notes that Sarah Kellen was present at the property.

Court transcript (summation)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00019959.jpg

This document is a transcript from a court hearing on April 1, 2021, concerning a defendant's bail. A government representative, Ms. Moe, argues that the defendant is a significant flight risk due to possessing multiple passports, large sums of money, and international connections, and should therefore be detained pending trial. The judge clarifies with Ms. Moe that the government's sole basis for requesting detention is the risk of flight, not any danger the defendant poses to the community.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00005287.jpg

This document is page 11 of 40 from a jury questionnaire filed on October 22, 2021, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The page contains questions 15, 16, and 17 (renumbered from 14, 15, and 16) asking prospective jurors about their biases regarding law enforcement searches/evidence, their experience with expert witnesses, and their ability to adhere to strict media blackout instructions during the trial. The document includes handwritten edits renumbering the questions.

Court filing - jury questionnaire (page 11 of 40)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00008784.jpg

This legal document, filed on December 19, 2021, is a specific instruction (No. 58) from a judge to a jury in a criminal case. The judge explicitly directs the jurors not to consider any potential punishment for the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, during their deliberations. The document clarifies that the jury's only role is to determine guilt or innocence based solely on the evidence presented by the Government, while the duty of sentencing belongs exclusively to the judge.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00008715.jpg

This document is a jury instruction, designated as Instruction No. 4, from a legal case filed on December 19, 2021. The judge directs the jury to base their verdict solely on their own recollection of the evidence, not on the arguments of the lawyers for the Government or the Defendant. It clarifies that statements from counsel, the judge's comments, legal objections, and side-bar conferences are not evidence and should not influence their determination of the facts.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00014523.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript where a lawyer, Ms. Menninger, is delivering a summation. She attempts to discredit a witness named Kate by highlighting inconsistencies in her background and motives, such as her immediate application to the Epstein Victims' Compensation Fund. Menninger also reminds the jury of the judge's instruction not to convict Ms. Maxwell based on Kate's testimony about non-illegal sexual conduct with Mr. Epstein.

Legal document (court transcript summation)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011682.jpg

This document is page 21 (transcript page 17) of a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The text contains preliminary instructions from the judge to the jury regarding the presumption of innocence, the burden of proof resting solely on the government, and the defendant's right not to present evidence (specifically using female pronouns 'she' and 'her'). The judge also outlines their own role in deciding rules of law compared to the jury's role as fact-finders.

Court transcript (jury instructions)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011608.jpg

This document is page 89 of a sentencing transcript filed on July 22, 2022, involving Ghislaine Maxwell. The presiding judge explains that Maxwell is being sentenced specifically for her own role in enticing, transporting, and trafficking underage girls (some as young as 14) for sexual abuse by and with Jeffrey Epstein, emphasizing that she is not being punished merely as a proxy for Epstein but for her own direct participation in the abuse.

Court transcript (sentencing hearing)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011568.jpg

This document is a transcript from a legal proceeding where a judge determines a defendant's sentence based on the 2003 Guidelines. The judge calculates a total offense level of 37, leading to a guideline imprisonment range of 210-262 months and a fine range of $20,000 to $200,000 per count. An attorney, Ms. Moe, then interjects to correct the judge's calculation, stating that 5 units should add 4 levels, not 5.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011559.jpg

This document is page 40 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on July 22, 2022, related to the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell (the defendant). The judge overrules a defense objection regarding sentencing enhancements, affirming that the defendant engaged in a pattern of prohibited sexual conduct with a minor and rejecting the argument that a finding of 'continuing danger to the public' is required by the Guidelines. The judge cites legal precedents (United States v. Sash, NLRB v. SW General) to prioritize the clear text of the Guidelines over background commentary or legislative history.

Court transcript / sentencing ruling
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011535.jpg

This document is page 16 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on July 22, 2022. The judge is ruling on defense objections to the Presentence Investigation Report. The court overrules objections regarding findings that records from the 2005 Palm Beach search prove Epstein received sexualized massages from minors (2001-2004) and affirms the defendant's responsibility for victimizing additional minors. It also addresses the inclusion of a victim impact statement from a survivor named 'Kate'.

Court transcript (sentencing/hearing)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017345.jpg

This document recounts a legal case involving a young violinist accused of rape by a female college student, a charge deemed implausible by Itzhak Perlman and the narrator due to the physical disparities between the accuser and the accused. Despite a conviction by a judge in a bench trial, the conviction was later reversed on appeal due to the defense being denied access to the complainant's psychiatric records, leading the prosecution to drop the case.

Legal case narrative / book excerpt
2025-11-19
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
5
As Recipient
5
Total
10

Character references

From: Family members and fri...
To: the Judge

Described Maxwell as attentive, loving, loyal, and generous.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Character reference

From: unnamed inmate
To: the Judge

Describes Maxwell tutoring other inmates while incarcerated.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Victim Impact Statement

From: Victim's Mother
To: the Judge

Decried emotional trauma and manipulation by McDaniel.

Statement
N/A
Communication Source

Sentencing arguments

From: the Judge
To: ["MR. EVERDELL"]

The judge invites Mr. Everdell to make additional arguments beyond his written submissions regarding sentencing.

Court dialogue
2022-08-22
Communication Source

Objection/clarification on sentencing calculation

From: Ms. Moe
To: the Judge

Ms. Moe responds to the judge by pointing out that under guideline 3D1.4, 5 units should add 4 levels to the offense score, not 5 as the judge had stated.

Courtroom dialogue
2022-07-22
Communication Source

Sentencing guideline calculation and call for new objections

From: the Judge
To: Courtroom participants

The judge explains the calculation of the defendant's total offense level to be 37 and the corresponding sentencing ranges for imprisonment, fines, and supervised release, then asks for any new objections.

Courtroom dialogue
2022-07-22
Communication Source

Verdict deadline

From: the Judge
To: the jurors

The judge sent a note on Wednesday 29 December informing the jurors that if they had not reached a verdict, she would recall them the following day.

Note
2021-12-29
Communication Source

Consensus reached

From: the jurors
To: the Judge

The jurors were about to send a note to the judge saying they had reached consensus on all counts just as they received her note.

Note
2021-12-29
Communication Source

Instruction No. 58: Punishment Not to be Considered by th...

From: the Judge
To: ["The Jury"]

The judge instructs the jury that they must not consider potential punishment for the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, during their deliberations. Their sole function is to weigh the evidence to determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Jury instruction
2021-12-19
Communication Source

Jury consultants and voir dire process

From: the Judge
To: Counsel/Participants

Judge asked questions related to the jury consultants in the case.

Call
0022-07-01
Communication Source

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search