| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Co counsel |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. COHEN
|
Opposing counsel |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. COHEN
|
Professional adversarial |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Mrs. Hesse
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Nicole Hesse
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
colleagues
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Opposing counsel |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Professional adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional opposing counsel |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Hesse
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Maguire
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Dr. Dubin
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Honor
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Prosecutor witness |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Adversarial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Brian
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Court proceeding regarding trial schedule, closing arguments, and jury deliberation timing relati... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Deliberations and Court Response to Note | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding the admissibility of photographic exhibits and the timing of defense obj... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing Hearing (likely for Ghislaine Maxwell) | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding sentencing enhancements for Ghislaine Maxwell. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Dismissal of Counts Seven and Eight against Ghislaine Maxwell. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Carolyn testified and wrote down her mother's phone number to avoid saying it aloud. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding sentencing or appeal arguments (Case 22-1426). | Courtroom (likely SDNY) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Jane | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding upcoming sentencing and review of the presentence report. | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Prosecution announces intent to rest case | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing Hearing / Pre-sentencing argument | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of witness Patrick McHugh | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of witness Kelly Maguire | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of witness Dubin regarding media reports of Epstein's flight logs | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Nicole Hesse | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing Hearing Calculation | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding Maxwell's sentencing or appeal points concerning her role in the conspiracy. | Courtroom (likely SDNY) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Conclusion of Shawn's testimony and calling of Nicole Hesse to the stand. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding the admissibility of Exhibit 52 (a book) to the jury. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discussion regarding jury deliberation schedule and closing arguments | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Direct examination of witness Dubin regarding sexualized massages and relationship timeline. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal sidebar regarding cross-examination of witness 'Jane'. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government meeting with witness Brian | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding jury questions and instructions for Count Four. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
This document is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, capturing a dialogue between a judge (THE COURT) and a government attorney (MS. MOE). The discussion centers on the legal end date of a conspiracy, with the government arguing it extended through 2004 and into 2005. The judge expresses concern that the evidence cited by the government is 'post conspiracy' because it falls after the date in the indictment and, crucially, after a person named Carolyn turned 18, an event upon which the conspiracy's continuation was legally dependent.
This document is a partial transcript from a court hearing on July 22, 2022, discussing factual objections and the calculation of sentencing guidelines. The Court, Mr. Everdell, and Ms. Moe participate in the discussion, with the Court adopting PSR recitations and outlining the process for guideline calculation. The defense contends a guideline calculation of 51 to 63 months' imprisonment, while the government's contention is cut off.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated July 22, 2022, involving Ms. Sternheim (defense) and Ms. Moe (government). The proceedings cover administrative confirmations of filings on ECF and a substantive discussion regarding the government's compliance with the 'Justice For All Act.' Specifically, Ms. Moe confirms that the government has notified six victims, proven at trial to be impacted, about the upcoming sentencing and their right to be heard.
Ms. Moe argues that trial evidence proves Maxwell supervised Sarah Kellen, satisfying the requirement for an organizer/leader enhancement.
Requesting an above-guideline sentence to hold the defendant accountable and send a message that no one is above the law.
Ms. Moe updates the court that the prosecution anticipates resting their case 'this week' and discusses sealing a document containing pseudonym identities.
Discussion regarding whether photographs corroborate a witness's blind description of a residence interior given the time lapse.
Conferring with the agent involved in breaching the door to verify information.
Clarifying the start date of travel bookings (1999) and the date range of records in exhibit RS-1 (1999-2006).
Ms. Moe argues the request is premature but states that if the defense rests the week of the 20th, the jury should be permitted to deliberate.
Argument regarding clarification of New York vs New Mexico law in jury charges.
Prosecution opening statement regarding sentencing recommendation for Ghislaine Maxwell.
Ms. Moe spoke with Jane's attorney following Jane's testimony, reminding him of something.
Ms. Moe states that if the conspiracy end date mentioned by the court (July 2004) differs from the sentencing transcript, they will submit a letter to the Court.
Ms. Moe states that if a review of exhibits shows a different date than the sentencing transcript, 'we will submit a letter to the Court'.
Ms. Moe states that if a review of exhibits shows a different date than the sentencing transcript, 'we will submit a letter to the Court'.
MS. MOE argues to the Court that a conspiracy was still active at the end of 2004, citing Carolyn's testimony about visiting Epstein's house as evidence.
MS. MOE argues to the Court that a conspiracy was still active at the end of 2004, citing Carolyn's testimony about visiting Epstein's house as evidence.
Ms. Menninger reports to the court that "Ms. Moe and I spoke briefly."
Ms. Moe spoke with Jane's attorney following Jane's testimony, recalling that she told and reminded him of something (the details are cut off).
Ms. Moe suggests that during the court break, they will send an email containing a copy of the notes to the judge's chambers.
Ms. Moe states that if the conspiracy end date from the exhibits differs from the sentencing transcript, she will submit a letter to the Court.
Ms. Moe questions Special Agent Maguire about their employment at the FBI, their assignment to the C20 child exploitation and human trafficking task force, their specific job responsibilities, and their involvement in an FBI operation on July 6, 2019.
Ms. Moe refers to a note she made about a conversation with Mr. Glassman, which she argues cannot be an exhibit at trial.
Ms. Moe argues that trial evidence shows a conspiracy continued through 2004 and into 2005. The Court challenges this, suggesting the evidence is for post-conspiracy conduct as it exceeds the date of Carolyn's 18th birthday, a key element of the charge.
MS. MOE asks the Court to confirm that the anonymity order for the witness Kate, particularly regarding sketch artists, is in effect.
Ms. Moe, when asked to respond to Mr. Everdell's point, declines to offer a verbal rebuttal and states that they rest on their previously submitted briefing on the issue.
Ms. Moe objects to the judge's calculation under guideline 3D1.4, stating that 5 units should add 4 levels, not 5.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity