Brian
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
JANE
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Unnamed Sister
|
Siblings |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Siblings |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Witnesses who communicated |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Familial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Unnamed witness
|
Fellow witnesses |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Unknown |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Communicated |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Prosecutor and witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Co witnesses |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Cooperating witness informant |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Informational |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Former witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Acquaintance |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
[REDACTED] female student
|
Friend |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Informational |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Government withdrew witness Brian. | Court | View |
| N/A | Witness testimony | Brian is scheduled to testify, but the court decides he will not testify until after lunch. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Flight | Brian had planned to fly home, creating a scheduling issue for his testimony. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Conversation | Brian volunteered information to the government. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Communication | Jane communicated with Brian about a document she was shown on the stand. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Flight | Brian is planning to fly home. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Meeting | Brian met with the government long before the trial began. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Conversation | A recent conversation between Jane and Brian occurred during the trial. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trip | Brian had planned to fly home tomorrow. | From court location to home | View |
| N/A | Trial | An ongoing trial where testimony is being heard and discussed. The case number is 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Testimony | The testimony of a witness named Brian is being discussed, specifically its consistency with prio... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government meeting with witness Brian. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government meeting with witness Brian | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Violation of Sequestration Order: Witness Jane contacted witness Brian to discuss testimony. | Unknown | View |
| 2025-11-21 | Meeting or travel | A potential event is scheduled for "Friday 5:30pm". | oregon | View |
DOJ-OGR-00013024.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022. It captures a conversation between two lawyers, Ms. Menninger and Ms. Moe, and the judge regarding the testimony of a witness named Brian. The discussion focuses on scheduling Brian's testimony around his plan to fly home the next day and the scope of his questioning, specifically concerning information he may have received from another individual named Jane.
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-00013020.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. The judge expresses concern that a witness, Brian, may have been coached during a recent conversation with another person, Jane. A lawyer, Ms. Moe, refutes this by arguing that Brian's testimony is consistent with prior statements he made to the government long before the trial, which are documented in '3500 material'.
DOJ-OGR-00013019.jpg
This document is page 1428 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The text details a discussion between the Judge and prosecutor Ms. Moe regarding whether witnesses were instructed not to confer with one another. Ms. Moe reveals that during a meeting the previous night, a witness named Brian admitted unprompted that he had been in communication with another individual named Jane.
DOJ-OGR-00013017.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between the judge (THE COURT) and an attorney (MS. MOE). The discussion centers on the rules of witness sequestration, specifically concerning communications between two witnesses, Jane and Brian, who are implied to be family members. The judge questions the legality and propriety of sequestered witnesses being provided with trial transcripts, testing the boundaries of the sequestration order.
DOJ-OGR-00013015.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Menninger informs the Court that the government disclosed a violation of the sequestration order, where witness Jane called her brother, witness Brian, to discuss her testimony and a document shown during cross-examination. This occurred just before Brian was anticipated to testify regarding prior consistent statements.
DOJ-OGR-00013280.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a dialogue between the judge, government counsel (Mr. Rohrbach), and defense counsel (Ms. Menninger). The discussion focuses on the defense's intentions regarding witnesses Jane and Brian, specifically whether Brian will be released from his subpoena and if Jane will be recalled. Ms. Menninger states Brian is already under subpoena, prompting the judge to recall her previous statement that she would not subpoena him.
DOJ-OGR-00032972.jpg
This document is a handwritten note, possibly a passenger list for a Boeing 727 aircraft. It contains a list of names, several of which are paired together, and mentions "oregon", a time of "Friday 5:30pm", and the days "Thu + Mon". The note is dated October 5, 2017, and appears to be related to coordinating travel or a meeting for the individuals listed.
DOJ-OGR-00032851.jpg
This Palm Beach Police Department incident report, dated April 20, 2006, continues the documentation of an investigation into Jeffery Epstein. The investigator details interviews with a victim, who expressed fear of retaliation from an individual named Robson, and with the mother of a witness, Jeannie Hernandez. The report outlines investigative steps, including a planned controlled phone call, communication with another law enforcement agency (PBSO), and the rationale for not pursuing immediate physical evidence collection due to a time delay.
DOJ-OGR-00032848.jpg
This Palm Beach Police Department incident report from April 20, 2006, details an investigation into allegations involving minor girls being taken to the home of Jeffrey Epstein. An interview on March 15, 2005, reveals that an employee of Epstein's, named Robson, picked up several girls, instructed one to lie about her age, and drove them to Epstein's Palm Beach residence under the pretense of collecting money. The report connects several individuals, including Haley Robson and Zack Brian, to the events and confirms the location of the school the primary subject attended.
Legal compulsion to testify
Ms. Menninger confirms 'We have him under subpoena.'
Court testimony
A witness who had already testified called Brian, an anticipated witness, to discuss their experience on the witness stand, including a document they were shown. This communication is the basis for a request to bar Brian from testifying.
Report of call from Jane
Brian told the government about his call with Jane.
Unknown
Communications between Brian and Jane discussed in court.
Inconsistent statements
Statements inconsistent with his sister's accounts.
Unknown, but involved Brian volunteering two pieces of in...
Brian volunteered two pieces of information to the government. Ms. Menninger is concerned there was more to this conversation than what was revealed.
Substance of testimony
Brian relayed the substance of his testimony to the government long before the trial began, which was memorialized in '3500 material'.
Substance of testimony
Brian relayed the substance of his testimony to the government long before the trial began, which was memorialized in '3500 material'.
Pre-trial/Trial preparation
Brian unprompted mentioned he heard from Jane.
Unknown
Brian heard from Jane (content cut off at end of page).
Witness Preparation/Interview
Brian mentioned unprompted that he heard from Jane regarding her status as a witness subject to recall.
Trial Status
Jane mentioned she was potentially subject to recall and recross.
Post-testimony warning
Jane told Brian the defense attorney is an expletive and 'that's what this will be like.' She also mentioned being shown an Interlochen application.
Testimony discussion
Jane discussed her court testimony with Brian and disclosed a document shown during cross-examination.
Report of witness communication
Brian reported the phone call he received from another witness to the government, and this information was then relayed to the speaker's party via handwritten notes.
Meeting with Epstein
Defense alleges Jane told Brian she was approached by Epstein and that Epstein knew their father. Jane states she does not recall.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity