| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Flatley
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Loftus
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
15 | |
|
person
Rocchio
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
15 | |
|
person
Dr. Rocchio
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Brune
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Rodgers
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Maguire
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Aznaran
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Parkinson
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Rocchio
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Rodgers
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Kane
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Brown
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Mr. Flatley
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Farmer
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
A. Farmer
|
Professional adversarial |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Loftus
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Alessi
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Dr. Rocchio
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Loftus
|
Professional adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Brune
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Court testimony | Direct examination of Brune regarding his professional relationship and actions as the lawyer for... | Court | View |
| N/A | Cross-examination | Witness Berke is questioned about their knowledge regarding a juror's background and potential co... | Courtroom (unspecified) | View |
| N/A | Court testimony (direct examination) | Ms. Brune is questioned about her ethical standards and actions as a former Assistant U.S. Attorn... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Cross-examination | Cross-examination of witness Parkinson regarding the evidentiary limitations of videos and photog... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Testimony | A witness named Edelstein is being questioned about a conversation with Ms. Trzaskoma regarding t... | Southern District (implied) | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Direct examination of Ms. Brune regarding her ethical obligations as an officer of the court. | court | View |
| N/A | Legal testimony | Direct examination of a witness named Brune regarding his firm's jury selection process. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Testimony | Direct examination of a witness named Brune regarding their understanding of the voir dire (jury ... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Testimony | A witness named Kate testifies about her experience at Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach house. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Testimony/deposition | Ms. Edelstein is being questioned about the potential connection between Juror No. 1 and a suspen... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Direct examination | Direct examination of Ms. Brune regarding her knowledge of potential juror misconduct. | Court | View |
| N/A | Testimony / deposition | A colloquy where an unnamed defendant was questioned about Jeffrey Epstein's activities. The defe... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Cross-examination | A witness named Berke is cross-examined in a legal proceeding about his professional obligations ... | courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Legal testimony | Direct examination of Ms. Brune regarding her handling of a 'significant piece of information' an... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Cross-examination | Mr. Berke is questioned under oath about an attorney's ethical obligations regarding juror miscon... | Court | View |
| N/A | Cross-examination | A witness named Berke is being cross-examined about their knowledge of a juror's background. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Testimony | Direct examination of a witness named Espinosa. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Cross-examination | A witness named Visoski is being questioned about their observations during flights. | court proceeding | View |
| N/A | Legal testimony/deposition | Edelstein is being questioned about a decision made with Susan Brune regarding the content of a l... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Testimony | A witness named Alessi gives testimony under direct examination, describing the layout of Mr. Eps... | Courtroom (inferred) | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Brune regarding the decision not to research potential juror Cather... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Legal testimony | Direct examination of witness Brune regarding the submission of a letter and brief to the court. | The Court | View |
| N/A | Cross-examination | A witness named Berke is being cross-examined about their duties as an attorney and officer of th... | Courtroom or deposition set... | View |
| N/A | Testimony | Direct examination of Ms. Brune regarding her ethical obligations and knowledge of potential juro... | Court | View |
| N/A | Testimony | Direct examination of a witness named Carolyn. | Court | View |
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. The questioning attorney establishes the witness's expertise in neuropsychology, confirms they are not a toxicologist, and begins to probe the relationship between memory and delayed disclosure.
This document is a partial transcript of a direct examination of Dr. Rocchio, filed on August 10, 2022, as part of a legal case. Dr. Rocchio, an expert, testifies that childhood sexual abuse is typically committed through grooming and coercion by individuals known to the child, rather than physical force by strangers. The testimony defines 'grooming' as deceptive tactics used by perpetrators to engage a child in sexual abuse and discusses its recognition within the psychological community.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated January 15, 2025, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Rocchio. The questioning focuses on the methodology of a study or article, specifically the demographic characteristics of the "experts" and professionals involved, and challenges the response rate of the data collection, which the questioner labels a "dropout rate."
This document is a page from a court transcript dated January 15, 2025, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Rocchio. The testimony focuses on establishing Rocchio's expertise, specifically their extensive experience as a peer reviewer for academic publications. Rocchio states they are on the editorial board for the journal of the Division of Trauma Psychology and also serve as a guest reviewer for other journals related to psychological injury and law.
This document is a transcript of a voir dire or deposition from February 28, 2023, where an attorney questions a potential juror about an inaccurate answer on their questionnaire. The juror admits to mistakenly checking 'no' when asked if a family member had ever been accused of a crime, explaining that their stepbrother had been. The juror attributes the error to being distracted, unfocused due to a recent breakup, and skimming the form too quickly, calling it an 'inadvertent mistake' and 'one of the biggest mistakes' of their life.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) recording the direct examination of a witness named Rodgers. The testimony confirms that Jeffrey Epstein and Virginia Roberts were passengers together on two flights on April 9, 2001, traveling from Palm Beach to Atlantic City, and then to Teterboro. It also documents a subsequent flight on April 11, 2001, from Teterboro to St. Thomas.
This document is a segment of a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing testimony under cross-examination regarding the execution of warrants. The testimony confirms that first and second warrants were executed on July 6th and July 7th, 2019, respectively, with specific times provided for the initial search on July 6th and the conclusion of the search on July 7th, also mentioning a later visit on July 11th to collect CDs.
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Kate. The questioning focuses on establishing a timeline, suggesting that Kate's contact with an unnamed male ended around 2012 or earlier. This cessation of contact coincided with her becoming a mother and her employment at a facility she ran for women recovering from substance use and trauma.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures the cross-examination of a witness named Kate, focusing on her ambition and statements she made in a 2004 interview about her intense focus on her modeling career.
This document is a page from a legal transcript dated July 26, 2017, detailing an interview about an individual's travels with an unnamed male. The interviewee states she visited his private Caribbean island and London home as a vacationing guest, not as an employee. She also recounts attending a peculiar symposium in Santa Fe, New Mexico, about cleaning homes, which she describes as "stupid."
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It details the cross-examination of a witness named Rodgers regarding the residences of an unnamed male individual in New York City. The testimony establishes that the individual lived on 69th Street around 1991, when he hired the witness, and later moved to a townhouse at 9 East 71st Street in 1996.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Loftus. The questioning centers on a 1995 research paper by Loftus, which involved an experiment to implant a false memory into participants. The experiment presented subjects with three true childhood stories, obtained from their parents or siblings, and one fabricated story about being lost in a shopping mall.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Loftus. Loftus, who holds a doctorate in psychology, explains how memory retrieval can be influenced by suggestive pressures, citing examples from law enforcement interviews and psychotherapy. She also clarifies for the jury that she is not a practicing therapist and does not conduct therapy, although she does study patients.
This court transcript details a direct examination of a witness from the travel agency Shoppers Travel. The witness confirms that Jeffrey Epstein's office was a customer for whom they booked flights and other travel. The testimony also reveals that in 2016, the witness was asked to generate a report from their QuickBooks system related to Epstein's office records.
This document is a page from a deposition transcript dated August 10, 2022, where a witness, A. Farmer, is being cross-examined. The questioning focuses on the witness's knowledge of a potential trip by Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein to a ranch in New Mexico in April 1996. The witness denies knowledge of a flight log and has limited memory of staff present at the ranch, such as a chef, and is being shown a 2006 document to refresh their memory.
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Rodgers. Rodgers testifies about various aircraft owned by an unnamed male individual, confirming the purchase of a Boeing 727 in January 2001. The testimony also details the use of a smaller Cessna for flights between a ranch, Palm Beach, Florida, and St. Thomas.
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on March 11, 2022. It captures the questioning of a witness about their answers on a jury selection questionnaire. The examiner probes whether the witness, who has a history of sexual abuse, intentionally provided inaccurate answers to get selected for the jury, which the witness denies. The witness also recounts the timeline of being summoned for jury duty and filling out the questionnaire on November 4th.
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on March 11, 2022. It details the questioning of a potential juror regarding their answers on a juror questionnaire. The individual clarifies that their experience with sexual abuse was not what they considered when answering about being a victim of a crime, stating they no longer identify as a victim and can serve as a fair and impartial juror.
This document is a transcript of a redirect examination in a legal proceeding, filed on February 24, 2022. A witness named Brune is questioned about why they did not investigate an individual further, despite a Westlaw report indicating she was a suspended attorney. The witness explains their belief that the report had conflated two different people with the same name, and they were convinced the person in question was a 'Bronxville stay-at-home wife' and not the lawyer.
This document is a court transcript from a direct examination of a witness named Brune, filed on February 24, 2022. Brune explains the reasoning behind filing a legal brief, noting that other lawyers on the case were surprised by their findings. The questioning focuses on a July 22nd phone call and Brune's anticipation that the government would raise a "waiver issue," for which Brune planned to answer truthfully.
This document is a page from a 2017 deposition transcript where an unnamed witness is questioned about her past. The witness denies being involuntarily sent to a juvenile facility but admits to lying to her father about visiting 'Epstein's house,' claiming she was going shopping instead. She confirms that she had previously admitted this lie to the police.
This document is a page from a legal transcript dated July 26, 2017. In it, an unnamed witness is questioned about their contact with Steven Lavelle, stating they no longer speak. The witness denies knowing two redacted female individuals by name but suggests they could identify them from photos, and also denies any knowledge of another girl who allegedly made allegations against Epstein and refused to testify before a Grand Jury.
This document is a transcript from a legal proceeding dated July 26, 2017. An unnamed witness is being questioned about their past interactions with detectives from Palm Beach, including a Detective Recarey, in relation to a Grand Jury testimony that occurred when the witness was 14 or 15. The witness clarifies that their dad, not Detective Recarey, drove them to the testimony, and an attorney named Mr. Leopold objects to a repetitive question.
This document is page 5 of a deposition transcript from July 26, 2017. In this section, the deponent affirms they are fit to testify, states they are living with their aunt and uncle but cannot recall the address, and is questioned about a contempt motion filed by their mother. The transcript was prepared by Censor & Associates.
This document is a transcript page from a Q&A session featuring Steve Bannon. Bannon discusses the 2008 financial crisis, the lack of accountability for bank executives, and how this fueled the Tea Party movement. A questioner named Mario Fantini asks Bannon about how to counteract the rise of the 'Identitarians' (a neo-nativist movement) in Europe. The page concludes with a pull quote noting that despite Congressional recommendations, no bank executives were indicted following the crisis.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines witness Rodgers about the timeline and use of several aircraft, including a Hawker, Gulfstream, Boeing 727, and Cessna, owned by an unnamed individual.
A questioner cross-examines Rodgers, who confirms that an unnamed woman had extensive responsibilities including managing properties, hiring staff, overseeing renovations, and making purchases for residences and planes.
An unnamed questioner is examining a witness named Alessi about the origin of a piece of evidence labeled "Exhibit 52" and the Post-It notes contained within it. The witness denies having any knowledge of where the exhibit was created or came from, after being prompted with possible locations like New York, Palm Beach, and California.
An unnamed questioner is asking a witness named Carolyn about the sequence of events after she entered a room with a person named Virginia. The testimony covers setting up a massage table, disrobing, and the arrival of Mr. Epstein.
An unidentified questioner asks Dr. Rocchio to define 'delayed disclosure' and explain how the relationship between a victim and perpetrator affects the reporting of abuse.
An unnamed questioner asks the witness, Loftus, to describe their professional affiliations. Loftus details their membership and leadership roles in several psychological organizations.
This document is a transcript of a direct examination of Carolyn. She is asked about conversations she had with Maxwell regarding her family, past sexual abuse, and travel. Carolyn states she told Maxwell about her mother's alcoholism, being molested, and being raped by her grandfather. She also recounts an invitation from Mr. Epstein and Maxwell to an island.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines witness Rodgers about whether a person named Jane was on a flight. Rodgers expresses uncertainty, admitting they might have been given a name for a manifest without meeting the person.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines the witness, Loftus, about the details and methodology of memory experiments she has conducted, specifically one involving a simulated accident with a stop/yield sign and another at a science museum.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines witness Rodgers about flights from Columbus to TBC and a round trip from Traverse City to Cahokia, Illinois. The questioning covers the passengers on the first flight and the purpose of the second, which was for aircraft maintenance.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines witness Rodgers about flights taken by an unnamed male to Interlochen, Michigan, to see performances. The questioning establishes the location, purpose of the trips, and the witness's prior statement about taking the subject on seven flights between 1991 and 1997.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines witness Alessi about the various types of workers (pest control, landscapers, HVAC, cleaners) who came to Mr. Epstein's residence. The testimony establishes that these workers came regularly, often when Mr. Epstein was not present, and that Alessi supervised them.
A witness named Aznaran is questioned about their work for U.S. Customs and Border Protection. Aznaran describes the agency's role, its history as a combination of the INS and U.S. Customs Service, and states they have worked there since July 2008.
A questioner conducts a direct examination of the witness, Kane, regarding a school's ability to verify information about students, referrals, and payments.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines Loftus about her research, focusing on the 'lost in the mall' study, its results, and other studies concerning resistance to blatantly false suggestions.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines witness Visoski about the location of restrooms and galleys on Gulf Stream and Boeing aircraft. The witness is asked if they ever observed sexual activity on the plane, which they deny.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines a witness named Rodgers about procedures on a plane. The questioning covers whether the cockpit door was open, visibility into the passenger section, and whether Mr. Epstein would introduce passengers to the witness in the cockpit.
An unnamed questioner elicits testimony from Carolyn about a massage she and Virginia gave to Mr. Epstein. Carolyn states that after 45 minutes, Mr. Epstein turned over, Virginia got on top of him, and they had sex while Carolyn watched from a couch. Afterwards, Carolyn and Virginia were paid $300.
A questioner asks the witness, Loftus, about situations where information exchange can be suggestive. Loftus provides examples from law enforcement interviews and psychotherapy. The questioner then clarifies that Loftus has a doctorate in psychology but is not a practicing therapist.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines witness Visoski about whether he ever saw females under the age of 20 traveling alone on Epstein's planes between 1991/1994 and 2005. Visoski states he only saw young girls traveling with their families.
A questioner cross-examines witness Rodgers about Ghislaine's relationship with Epstein. The testimony suggests their personal relationship ended in the 1990s, after which she continued to work for him and be his friend, but her role lessened in the 2000s as Epstein brought in others to run his business.
A questioner cross-examines witness Rodgers about Ghislaine's relationship with Epstein. The testimony suggests their personal relationship ended in the 1990s, after which she continued to work for him and be his friend, but her role lessened in the 2000s as Epstein brought in others to run his business.
An unidentified questioner interviews Rodgers about the circumstances of his hiring by Jeffrey Epstein in 1991, his role as a pilot, and his previous employment.
An unnamed questioner cross-examines Mr. Alessi about being called John/Juan, his conversations with Ms. Maxwell, and his prior testimony about taking $6,300 from Jeffrey Epstein's house after quitting his job in 2002 due to financial hardship.
An unnamed questioner (Q.) is cross-examining a witness (A. Farmer) about statements made on an application to a victims compensation fund. The questioning focuses on whether incidents described as "hand-holding" and "caressing my hands" in movie theaters in New York and New Mexico constitute sexual abuse as claimed on the application.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity