our client
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Speaker (implied lawyer)
|
Client |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Court hearing/litigation | A lawyer is presenting arguments to a judge regarding a client's case, discussing past conduct (1... | Court (implied by 'THE COUR... | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001072.jpg
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).
DOJ-OGR-00001942.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a legal proceeding, dated December 10, 2020, where a lawyer is arguing before a judge ('your Honor') regarding a client who has been in custody. The arguments involve the application of legal factors (3142 factors), guidance from the Second Circuit and Supreme Court, and the historical context of the alleged conduct. The judge ('THE COURT') interrupts Mr. Cohen to ask for clarification on a point.
DOJ-OGR-00001938.jpg
This legal document discusses the government's claims regarding a client's financial activities, including 15 bank accounts and transfers of funds, one for $500,000 and another for several hundred thousand in June and July 2019. The speaker refutes some claims and explains the context, noting that the client's not-for-profit was shut down due to media attention and that a bank dropped the client after Mr. Epstein's arrest.
DOJ-OGR-00001920.jpg
This document is page 43 of a court transcript from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330), dated December 10, 2020. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues that the government has unfairly introduced new facts late in the proceeding, preventing a written response. He attempts to distance his client from Jeffrey Epstein, stating she is 'not the monster' portrayed by the media and emphasizes her strong family and professional ties, noting that supporters are present on the call anonymously for safety reasons.
DOJ-OGR-00017587.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (sidebar conference) filed on August 10, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Defense attorney Ms. Menninger and the Judge discuss whether the witness ('Jane') understands how the jury's verdict might impact payouts from the Victim Compensation Fund. Menninger argues that the witness has already received money from the fund based on her story, and discusses the relevance of the fund to the witness's motivation.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity