the government

Person
Mentions
286
Relationships
1
Events
2
Documents
143
Also known as:
Ghislaine Maxwell (Defendant), The Government Ghislaine Maxwell (Defendant), The Government, Warden Heriberto Tellez

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.
1 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person Jeffrey Epstein
Adversarial
6
1
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
N/A N/A An alleged promise was made by the government to victims ('the girls') that they would receive mo... N/A View
N/A N/A Negotiation of Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement Southern District of Florida View

DOJ-OGR-00018349.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. The judge is ruling to exclude photographic evidence of a stuffed tiger and dog found in Epstein's New York apartment in 2019, deeming them irrelevant and prejudicial because they do not match the specific 'artwork of animals' described by the witness 'Jane' from years prior. However, the judge notes anticipation that 'schoolgirl outfits' found in the same apartment in 2019 will likely be introduced.

Court transcript / legal ruling
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00018339.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The Judge is addressing a government request regarding the testimony of a witness using the pseudonym 'Kate.' The Judge notes that while Kate alleges sexual conduct with Jeffrey Epstein, she was over the age of consent at the time and is not a victim of the specific crimes charged in this indictment. However, her testimony is deemed relevant to Mann Act counts and 404(b) evidence. The Judge rules that her testimony regarding sexual details will be limited to avoid prejudice and that the jury will be instructed that the Court prohibited asking for those specific details.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00018311.jpg

This document is a transcript page from the cross-examination of Mr. Parkinson by attorney Mr. Everdell in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The questioning focuses on a specific photograph of an unidentified woman found during a search of Jeffrey Epstein's house conducted by Parkinson. Everdell establishes that Parkinson did not recall finding, nor did the government present, any other photographs or video evidence of this specific woman from the search.

Court transcript (cross-examination)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00017679.jpg

This document is a page from the cross-examination of a witness named 'Jane' in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The defense attorney questions Jane about prior statements she made to the government, confirming that she previously stated Maxwell was not present or did not witness specific sexual acts (oral sex, intercourse) between Jane and Jeffrey Epstein. The witness confirms several of these prior statements while stating she does not recall others.

Court transcript (cross-examination)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00015111.jpg

This document is page 3 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330) addressed to Judge Paul Engelmayer, dated August 6, 2025. It argues for strict protocols and heightened caution regarding the unsealing of grand jury materials to protect the privacy and safety of Epstein and Maxwell's victims, citing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and Rule 6(e). A significant footnote highlights that several victims have already died by suicide or overdose and argues that a potential pardon would cause irreparable harm.

Legal filing / court motion (page 3 of a letter or brief)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008656.jpg

This document is a page from the jury instructions (Instruction No. 28) filed on December 18, 2021, in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. It details the 'Third Element' of Count Six: Sex Trafficking of an Individual Under the Age of 18. The instruction clarifies that the Government must prove Maxwell knew the victim, identified as 'Carolyn,' would be caused to engage in commercial sex acts, and explicitly states that the victim's consent is not a defense if she was under 18.

Legal filing / jury instruction
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008588.jpg

This document is page 50 (internal paging 49) of a court filing (Document 563) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, filed on December 18, 2021. It contains jury instructions explaining the legal standards for establishing 'guilty knowledge' and participation in a conspiracy. The text clarifies that Maxwell does not need to know every detail or member of the conspiracy to be found guilty, and that a single act can establish membership, making her liable for the conspiracy's activities.

Court filing (jury instructions)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008568.jpg

This document contains Jury Instruction No. 20 from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on December 18, 2021. It defines the first element of Count Four: Transportation of an Individual Under the Age of 17 to Engage in Illegal Sexual Activity. The text outlines that the Government must prove Maxwell knowingly transported 'Jane' in interstate commerce, noting that personal transportation is not required if she made arrangements (like purchasing tickets), and that the victim's consent is irrelevant to the charge.

Legal filing (jury instructions)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008567.jpg

This document is a page from the jury instructions (Instruction No. 19) filed on December 18, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It outlines the three legal elements required to prove 'Count Four: Transportation of an Individual Under the Age of 17 to Engage in Illegal Sexual Activity,' specifically relating to a victim identified as 'Jane' between 1994 and 1997. The text includes markup showing specific legal language adjustments, such as defining the age requirement and limiting the scope to interstate commerce.

Court filing - jury instructions
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008558.jpg

This document is page 20 of 167 from a court filing (Document 563) dated December 18, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains Jury Instruction No. 11 regarding 'Multiple Counts,' instructing the jury to consider each of the six counts separately. The text shows specific edits replacing the generic term 'Defendant' with 'Ms. Maxwell' and outlines the burden of proof required by the Government.

Legal court filing (jury instructions)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008524.jpg

This document is page 68 of 82 from a court filing (Document 562) dated December 17, 2021, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains Jury Instruction No. 49, which explicitly instructs the jury that Ms. Maxwell exercised her Constitutional right not to testify, that the burden of proof rests solely with the Government, and that no adverse inference can be drawn against her for not taking the witness stand.

Court document (jury instructions)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008514.jpg

This document is page 58 of 82 from a court filing (Document 562) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 17, 2021. It contains 'Instruction No. 41: Time of Offense,' which instructs the jury that the Government is not required to prove the exact dates of the alleged conduct, provided it occurred 'on or about' the alleged times.

Court filing (jury instructions)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008487.jpg

This document is page 31 of 82 from a court filing (Document 562) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 17, 2021. It contains Jury Instruction No. 23 regarding Counts Two and Four, clarifying that for the charges of enticement and transportation, the Government need only prove the Defendant had the requisite intent, and it is immaterial whether the intended sexual activity actually occurred.

Court filing (jury instructions)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008361.jpg

A letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The Government informs the court that, after conferring with the defense, they will not agree to a stipulation regarding the testimony of Robert Glassman. The Government argues that a specific statement in an email is inadmissible and requires context to be understood by the jury.

Legal correspondence / court filing
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008341.jpg

This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) filed on December 10, 2021. The Judge ('The Court') is discussing jury instructions regarding a specific witness involved in sexual conduct in New Mexico. The Judge notes that while the witness was above the age of consent in New Mexico, the government is using the evidence to prove enticement for illegal acts in New York, and the jury instructions must accurately reflect this legal distinction without favoring the government's arguments.

Court transcript (trial proceedings)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001895.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (filed Dec 10, 2020) detailing the government's efforts to notify victims regarding the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines specific dates in July 2020 when notifications were sent regarding her arrest, presentment, and bail hearing. It explicitly mentions notifications sent to individuals identifying as victims of both Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein, even those not named in the indictment.

Court transcript / legal filing
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001813.jpg

This document is Page 2 of a Government filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on October 30, 2020. It addresses delays in electronic discovery production due to vendor volume and refutes defense accusations regarding the definition of the 'Prosecution Team' and the withholding of exculpatory material. A significant footnote (Footnote 2) argues that the 'genesis' of Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement with the Southern District of Florida is irrelevant because the current defendant (Maxwell) was not a party to it, was not named in it, and the agreement covered a different time period.

Legal filing (court document)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001788.jpg

This document is Page 2 of a court filing (likely from United States v. Maxwell based on the case number) dated October 7, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The Government updates the court on discovery progress, committing to a November 9, 2020 deadline for electronic discovery and outlining schedules for producing witness statements (Brady/Giglio materials) 4 to 8 weeks before trial. The document also argues the legal scope of the prosecution's obligations, citing case law (Avellino, Quinn) to assert that the prosecution is not responsible for knowledge held by other government agencies (like the FBI) not directly involved in the investigation.

Court filing (letter to judge regarding discovery)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001744.jpg

This document is page 2 of a court order filed on August 25, 2020, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Court addresses the Defendant's request regarding pretrial disclosure schedules (denied without prejudice) and conditions of confinement. Specifically, the Court denies Maxwell's request for a court order mandating her release to the general population and specific discovery access, noting that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has already modified conditions to allow her 13 hours of access to discovery materials daily.

Court order / legal filing
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001666.jpg

This is page 3 of a government filing dated July 28, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The government argues against the defense's request to publicly name victims/witnesses, calling the defense's argument 'absurd' and 'offensive' particularly regarding the suggestion that victims derive a 'benefit' from public identification. The document outlines the proposed protective order which would allow defense counsel to discuss identities privately but prohibits public dissemination to prevent harassment and intimidation.

Court filing / legal correspondence (government submission)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001658.jpg

This document is page 12 of 13 from a filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on July 27, 2020. It outlines legal stipulations regarding the handling of confidential information, specifically setting timelines relative to appeals and dismissals (referencing 28 U.S.C. § 2255). Paragraphs 19 and 20 detail that the provisions remain in effect until mutual written agreement or court order, and mandate that the Government and Defense Counsel meet to discuss evidence presentation prior to hearings or trial.

Court document / legal filing (protective order)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001587.jpg

This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) arguing for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. The defense argues that she is not a danger to the community, cites the health risks of COVID-19 in prison, and claims she is not a flight risk due to her strong ties to the U.S. (citizenship, 30-year residency, family in NY) and her history of cooperation through counsel since Epstein's arrest.

Legal filing (court document 18 - bail argument)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001541.jpg

This document is page 2 of a court order filed on July 7, 2020, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It outlines strict COVID-19 entry protocols for the courthouse, instructions for defense counsel regarding the 'Waiver of Right to be Present' form, and mandates that the Government ensure crime victims are notified of proceedings and their rights under 18 U.S.C. § 3771.

Court filing / order (page 2)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001384.jpg

This document is page 12 of a legal filing (Case 21-770) dated April 19, 2021, in which Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team argues against the Government's narrative regarding her confinement. The defense claims that unsanitary conditions are caused by others, accuses the Government of a double standard and HIPAA violations for releasing Maxwell's vaccination status while keeping accusers anonymous, and asserts that her vaccination does not resolve issues regarding her ability to prepare for trial using 'ancient' technology.

Legal filing / court document (appeal or motion reply)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00001375.jpg

This document is page 3 of a legal reply brief filed on April 19, 2021, in Case 21-770 (associated with Ghislaine Maxwell). The defense argues that the lower court did not conduct a 'lengthy bail hearing' and that the Government presented no actual evidence, relying solely on the text of the Indictment to argue the strength of the case and flight risk. The filing contends the court erred by accepting the Indictment itself as proof of the strength of evidence.

Legal filing (reply brief - appeal)
2025-11-20
Total Received
$0.00
1 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
1 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
2 total transactions
Date Type From To Amount Description Actions
N/A Paid the government Kate $0.00 Public assistance/benefits sought by the witnes... View
2022-07-22 Received Ms. Maxwell the government $0.00 Judge intends to impose a fine; amount not spec... View
As Sender
321
As Recipient
183
Total
504

Compliance of Noel and Thomas

From: United States Pretrial...
To: the government

Informed the Government that Noel and Thomas complied with the terms of the agreement.

Internal report
2021-12-13

Witness order

From: the government
To: ["The Defense"]

The Government conferred with the defense on Saturday (December 11, 2021, 'yesterday' from the filing date) about the witness order and was told more information would be forthcoming.

Conference
2021-12-11

Unknown (referenced in text)

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Government seeking to relitigate an issue regarding photo evidence.

Letter
2021-12-04

Request for admission of photographs

From: the government
To: Court

The government filed a letter with the Court on December 4th, 2021, requesting the admission of a subset of photographs of Jeffrey Epstein's apartment.

Letter
2021-12-04

Reply to Defendant's response re GX 52

From: THE COURT
To: the government

Order to file a reply addressing argument that Employee-1 cannot authenticate GX 52 due to actions of a former employee.

Legal filing order
2021-11-21

Opposition to the defense motion to exclude evidence of M...

From: the government
To: THE COURT

The Government submitted a supplemental letter regarding its opposition to a defense motion, which was temporarily sealed.

Supplemental letter
2021-11-08

Mann Act conspiracies

From: the government
To: THE COURT

With respect to the Mann Act conspiracies, the particular criminal sexual activity relates to a particular statute in New York.

Court transcript
2021-11-01

Production of Testimony List

From: the government
To: Defense counsel

List of Dr. Rocchio's previous testimony bearing Bates number 3502-002.

Document production
2021-10-29

Request for Reciprocal Discovery

From: the government
To: the defendant

Request for notice regarding any expert witness the defendant intends to rely upon.

Legal request
2021-10-29

Motion to Resolve Litigation Related to Prior Consistent ...

From: the government
To: THE COURT

This document is a filing by the Government arguing for the admission of prior consistent statements of its witnesses under certain conditions at trial.

Court filing
2021-10-29

Production of CV

From: the government
To: Defense counsel

Production of Dr. Rocchio's curriculum vitae bearing Bates number 3502-006.

Document production
2021-10-29

Disclosure Order

From: THE COURT
To: the government

The Court issued a disclosure order which the government sought to reconsider.

Order
2021-10-29

Jury selection procedures

From: the government
To: THE COURT

The Government argues against providing juror identities weeks in advance of selection, citing legal precedent that the purpose of voir dire is to find disqualifications, not to allow for in-depth analysis. It requests that peremptory challenges be exercised at the conclusion of voir dire and asks the Court to clarify when juror names will be provided.

Court filing
2021-10-26

Jury selection procedures

From: the government
To: THE COURT

The Government argues against providing juror identities weeks in advance of selection, citing legal precedent that the purpose of voir dire is to find disqualifications, not to allow for in-depth analysis. It requests that peremptory challenges be exercised at the conclusion of voir dire and asks the Court to clarify when juror names will be provided.

Court filing
2021-10-26

Proposed Jury Charge

From: the government
To: the defense

Government provided the defense with its proposed jury charge.

Document delivery
2021-10-20

Proposed Jury Charge

From: the government
To: the defense

Government provided the defense with its proposed jury charge.

Document exchange
2021-10-20

Response Deadline

From: ALISON J. NATHAN
To: the government

Order to respond to Defendant's letter by 5:00 p.m. on Oct 15, 2021.

Order
2021-10-15

Response to Dkt. No. 345

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Ordered response due by 5:00 p.m.

Legal filing response
2021-10-15

Response to defendant's letter on legal mail delivery

From: The Court (Judge Aliso...
To: the government

The Court issued an order (Dkt. No. 348) directing the Government to respond to a letter from the defendant regarding the delivery of her legal mail.

Court order
2021-10-15

Dkt. No. 347

From: THE COURT
To: the government

Ordering the Government to respond to the defendant's letter.

Court order
2021-10-14

Institutional Emergency

From: Legal counsel at the MDC
To: the government

Informed Govt of emergency impacting safety/security preventing mail delivery.

Internal communication
2021-10-13

Institutional emergency at the MDC

From: Legal counsel at the MDC
To: the government

Legal counsel at the MDC informed the Government about an institutional emergency on October 13, 2021, which delayed mail delivery.

Verbal communication
2021-10-12

Identification of exhibits

From: the government
To: Defense/Court

Letter identifying exhibits necessary to identify parties to emails.

Letter
2021-10-11

Maxwell Rule 404(b) letter

From: the government
To: Defense counsel

Notice of evidence regarding Rule 404(b) and potential witnesses.

Letter
2021-10-11

Evidence Admissibility

From: the government
To: Defense/Court

Evidence contained in this letter is being argued as admissible under Rule 404(b) or as direct evidence.

Letter
2021-10-11

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity