Minor Victim-1
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Perpetrator victim |
11
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Abuser victim |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Perpetrator victim |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Alleged perpetrator victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Perpetrator victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Perpetrator victim |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Abuser victim |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Michael Casey
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Alleged perpetrator victim |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Groomer victim |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Abuser victim |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Facilitator victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Witness-1
|
Witness victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Witness-2
|
Witness victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Alleged interaction |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Investigator witness |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Groomer abuser and victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Abuser and victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Alleged abuser victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Michael Casey
|
Agent |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Witness for prosecution |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
|
Non existent |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Alleged perpetrator and victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Alleged abuser and victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Financial |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Trip | Epstein and MAXWELL encouraged Minor Victim-1 to travel to Epstein's residences. | New York and Florida | View |
| N/A | Meeting/interaction | Request to identify dates and locations of alleged meeting/interaction between Ms. Maxwell and Mi... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Recruitment and sexual abuse | JEFFREY EPSTEIN enticed and recruited multiple minor victims (Minor Victim-1, Minor Victim-2, Min... | Manhattan, New York; Palm B... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The government's case against Ms. Maxwell, which is alleged to be based entirely on the testimony... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Abuse | Minor Victim-1 was sexually abused by Epstein. | New York and Florida | View |
| N/A | Crime | Multiple group sexual encounters involving Minor Victim-1, who was under the age of 18. | New York and Florida | View |
| N/A | Meeting | Ghislaine Maxwell met Minor Victim-1 when Minor Victim-1 was approximately 14 years old. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Recruitment | EPSTEIN encouraged and enticed Minor Victim-1 to recruit other girls to engage in paid sex acts, ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Abuse | Minor Victim-1 was sexually abused by Epstein in both New York and Florida. | New York and Florida | View |
| N/A | Crime | Epstein abusing Minor Victim-1 and Minor Victim-2. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Alleged crime | Alleged instances of sexual abuse took place over a three-year period beginning approximately 27 ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Crime | Minor Victim-1 was enticed to travel from Florida to New York for purposes of sexually abusing her. | From Florida to New York | View |
| N/A | Trial | A trial where the Government is requesting special measures for how minor victims and witnesses a... | court | View |
| N/A | Interaction | MAXWELL subsequently interacted with Minor Victim-1 on multiple occasions at Epstein’s residences. | Epstein’s residences | View |
| N/A | Trip | Ghislaine Maxwell arranged for Minor Victim-1 to be transported from Florida to New York on multi... | From Florida to New York, N... | View |
| N/A | Trip | Transportation of Minor Victim-1 from Florida to New York on multiple occasions for the purpose o... | Between Florida and New York | View |
| N/A | Grooming | Ghislaine Maxwell groomed Minor Victim-1 to engage in sexual acts with Epstein. This included bef... | Epstein's residences | View |
| N/A | Trip | Transportation of Minor Victim-1 from Florida to New York for the purpose of engaging in sex acts... | Florida to New York, New York | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding / testimony | Victims are expected to testify about sexual abuse. The Government has requested that Minor Victi... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Recruitment and sexual abuse | Minor Victim-1 was recruited to engage in sex acts with EPSTEIN and was repeatedly sexually abuse... | New York Residence | View |
| N/A | Crime | Allegation that individuals under 18, including Minor Victim-1, were caused to engage in a commer... | Manhattan, New York | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The government's case against Ms. Maxwell, which the document argues is based entirely on the tes... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Abuse | MAXWELL involved Minor Victim-1 in group sexualized massages of Epstein. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trip | Epstein and MAXWELL encouraged Minor Victim-1 to travel to Epstein's residences in New York and F... | New York and Florida | View |
| N/A | Grooming | Request to identify dates and locations where Ms. Maxwell allegedly groomed Minor Victim-1 to eng... | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00019185.jpg
This document is page 12 of a legal indictment filed on July 2, 2020, detailing specific allegations against an individual named MAXWELL. The charges describe her involvement with Epstein in the sexual abuse and exploitation of three minors between 1994 and 1997. The alleged criminal acts, including group sexual encounters and enticement to travel for sex acts, occurred in New York, Florida, and London, England.
DOJ-OGR-00019182.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, alleges that an individual named MAXWELL participated in the sexual abuse of minors with Epstein. It details MAXWELL's alleged involvement with two victims: encouraging 'Minor Victim-1' to travel to Epstein's residences in New York and Florida for sexual encounters, and grooming 'Minor Victim-2' in New Mexico around 1996 for abuse by Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00010541.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) outlining the procedural history of charges against the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell). It details the timeline of indictments from June 2020 through March 2021, listing eight specific counts including conspiracy with Jeffrey Epstein to entice and transport minors for illegal sex acts (1994-2004), sex trafficking (2001-2004), and perjury.
DOJ-OGR-00003129.jpg
This document is page 195 of 239 from a legal filing (Document 204) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330), filed on April 16, 2021. The text argues for the admissibility of evidence regarding 'Minor Victim-3' under Federal Rules of Evidence 403 and 404(b), stating that the defendant's grooming patterns were idiosyncratic and that the evidence is not unfairly prejudicial compared to the charges involving Victims 1 and 2. It explicitly states the defendant witnessed and participated in the abuse of victims at the hands of Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00003128.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) arguing for the admissibility of evidence under Rule 404(b). It details the defendant's 'modus operandi' of befriending minors (specifically Minor Victim-3), normalizing sexual topics, and arranging travel to facilitate sexual acts with Epstein. A footnote addresses the defense's anticipated argument regarding lack of knowledge or intent.
DOJ-OGR-00003125.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 16, 2021, is a government response in a criminal case. The prosecution argues that evidence concerning 'Minor Victim-3' is admissible to prove a conspiracy, even though a direct charge based on her testimony is time-barred because she turned 25 before 2003. The government asserts that the charges remain timely due to the involvement of 'Minor Victim-1' and 'Minor Victim-2' and distinguishes the current case from a cited precedent (*Hsia*) by stating the alleged conduct, grooming a minor for Jeffrey Epstein, is central to the conspiracy.
DOJ-OGR-00003116.jpg
This page is from a legal filing (Document 204) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330), filed on April 16, 2021. The prosecution argues against the defendant's motion to dismiss, citing legal precedents (United States v. Young, Edwards v. Mazzuca) to establish that specific dates are not required in indictments regarding sexual abuse of minors due to memory limitations of victims. The text specifically highlights 'Minor Victim-1' who suffered abuse over multiple years, arguing that a timeframe is sufficient for the indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00003089.jpg
This legal document, part of case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE filed on April 16, 2021, presents an argument that a jury could find the defendant's testimony to be false. The prosecution argues that the defendant, likely Maxwell, falsely claimed to be unaware of any minors at Jeffrey Epstein's properties besides Giuffre, contradicting an indictment alleging interactions with 'Minor Victim-1'. The document refutes the defense's claims that the questions were ambiguous or improper, citing the defendant's own statements that the events in question 'never happened'.
DOJ-OGR-00003016.jpg
This legal document is a filing by the Government arguing that there was no due process violation regarding the timing of an indictment. The Government contends that the delay was justified because two critical witnesses, Minor Victim-1 and Minor Victim-3, only came forward to be interviewed in August and September 2019, less than a year before the indictment was sought in June 2020. The document cites legal precedents to support the position that delays caused by witness unavailability are permissible and that prosecutors can wait until an investigation is complete before seeking charges.
DOJ-OGR-00003009.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues against the admissibility of certain evidence in the case against Epstein. It cites multiple legal precedents establishing that proof of lawful conduct on some occasions is irrelevant to disproving a specific criminal charge. The document applies this to the Epstein case, asserting that a prior investigation's findings about his conduct in the 2000s are irrelevant to the current charges from 1994-1997, and notes that two key victims were only interviewed for the first time in late 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00003008.jpg
This legal document is a filing that argues against a defendant's motion. The defendant claims that testimony from Michael Casey (agent for Minor Victim-1) and Detective Recarey would have been exculpatory. The filing counters that this proposed testimony is speculative, unsubstantiated, likely inadmissible hearsay, and ultimately irrelevant to the charges that the defendant assisted Epstein in the grooming and abuse of other victims.
DOJ-OGR-00003006.jpg
A page from a court filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The text argues against Maxwell's motion claiming prejudice due to pre-indictment delay, specifically rejecting her assertion that the deaths of potential witnesses (Jeffrey Epstein, his mother, Michael Casey, and Detective Recarey) harmed her defense. The court/prosecution argues it is highly speculative to assume Epstein would have waived his Fifth Amendment rights to testify in Maxwell's favor and be found credible by a jury.
DOJ-OGR-00002992.jpg
This page is from a government filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), arguing against the defendant's motion to dismiss based on the statute of limitations. The text asserts that the Ex Post Facto Clause is not violated because the limitations period had not expired for Counts One through Four when it was extended in 2003. Footnotes address the specific ages of Minor Victims 1, 2, and 3 in relation to the 2003 extension and discuss the 'Landgraf' Supreme Court precedent regarding legislative retroactivity.
DOJ-OGR-00002977.jpg
This document is a page from a Government legal filing opposing Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to dismiss her indictment. The Government argues that the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) signed by Jeffrey Epstein in Florida cannot logically grant Maxwell immunity for future crimes (specifically perjury) committed a decade later, nor grant her broader immunity than Epstein himself received. A footnote clarifies the scope of the original Florida investigation, noting that while Minor Victim-2 was interviewed then, Minor Victims 1 and 3 were not interviewed and did not speak to law enforcement until 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00005569.jpg
This document is page 15 of a Government filing dated October 29, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). It discusses the Government's proposal to protect the identities of Minor Victims 1, 3, 4, and 6 through the use of pseudonyms or first names only during testimony. The text explicitly links the 'intimate details of childhood sexual abuse' to both the defendant and Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00005562.jpg
This is page 8 of a legal document (Document 383) filed on October 29, 2021, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The document argues for the privacy rights of minor victims, dismissing the defense's arguments about case publicity as irrelevant. A specific section concerning 'Minor Victim-1' is introduced but is entirely redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00005556.jpg
This document is the table of contents for a legal motion filed by the government on October 29, 2021, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The motion outlines arguments to protect the privacy of minor victims by allowing testimony under pseudonyms and sealing exhibits. It also seeks to preclude the defense from introducing what the government deems irrelevant evidence and improper arguments, including prior investigations of the defendant and the government's alleged motives.
DOJ-OGR-00005410.jpg
This document is page 17 of 54 from a court filing (Document 380) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. It argues for the sealing of exhibits containing the names or last names of specific minor victims (Minor Victim-1, 3, 4, 6) and Witness-1 to prevent harassment and protect privacy, citing various legal precedents. A footnote also argues that courtroom sketch artists should be precluded from drawing the faces of victims.
DOJ-OGR-00005405.jpg
This legal document, filed on October 29, 2021, is a motion from the Government requesting protective measures for witnesses and minor victims in a criminal case. The Government asks the Court to allow several witnesses to testify using pseudonyms or first names only to protect the identities of the minor victims they are testifying about. The motion also requests that a non-testifying minor victim be referred to by her first name only in open court.
DOJ-OGR-00005404.jpg
This is a legal document filed on October 29, 2021, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. In this filing, the Government argues for protective measures for victims who are expected to give sensitive testimony about sexual abuse that occurred when they were minors. Specifically, the Government requests that 'Minor Victim-1' and 'Minor Victim-3' be allowed to testify under pseudonyms to protect their well-being and prevent harassment.
DOJ-OGR-00005398.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Document 380 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated October 29, 2021. In it, the Government requests that the Court implement protective measures for several minor victims and related witnesses, such as using pseudonyms or first names only during trial and sealing exhibits containing their full names. The filing argues that these measures are necessary to protect the victims from harassment and are legally permissible limitations on the defendant's Confrontation Clause rights.
DOJ-OGR-00002877.jpg
This legal document is a letter from the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP (BSF) to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated March 22, 2021, regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. BSF objects to a subpoena issued by Maxwell's defense, arguing it is overly broad and lacks clarity on which victims require notice, while clarifying that the firm represents victims Annie Farmer (Minor Victim-2) and Virginia Giuffre. The firm states its intention to notify all Epstein victims it represents about the subpoena out of an abundance of caution.
DOJ-OGR-00002680.jpg
This document is a preliminary statement from a legal motion filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell on February 4, 2021. The defense requests that the Court strike allegations related to 'Accuser-3' from the indictment, arguing that the alleged conduct occurred in England where Accuser-3 was above the age of consent and did not involve travel. The motion claims the government is improperly using these allegations to bolster its case regarding Mann Act violations involving 'Accuser-1' and Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00005836.jpg
This document page discusses legal arguments regarding the admissibility of testimony from "Minor Victim-3" in a case involving Jeffrey Epstein and a defendant. The text argues against the defense's claim that such testimony would be unfairly prejudicial or cause confusion regarding United Kingdom law, asserting that jury instructions will be sufficient.
DOJ-OGR-00005833.jpg
This legal document is a court filing, page 50 of 84, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on October 29, 2021. It outlines the defense's argument to dismiss allegations concerning "Minor Victim-3," claiming the defendant's conduct with her was lawful in the United Kingdom and that she was an adult when she was later abused by Epstein in the U.S. The defense contends the government mistakenly charged the defendant, believing Minor Victim-3 was a minor at the time of the alleged sex acts with Epstein.
Scheduling appointment
Scheduling appointment for Minor Victim-1 to engage in paid sex acts with Epstein.
No Subject
Scheduling appointment for sex acts with Epstein.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity