| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
19
Very Strong
|
26 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Representative |
17
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Opposing counsel |
15
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
11
Very Strong
|
228 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Opposing counsel |
11
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Mrs. Hesse
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
your Honor
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Maguire
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
28 | |
|
person
the Judge
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
27 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
MR. COHEN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Professional adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
Special Agent Maguire
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional adversarial |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Ms. Drescher
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Opposing counsel |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Business associate |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. McHugh
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 |
| 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 April 1, 2021, detailing the beginning of a victim's testimony. A victim, identified as Annie Farmer, begins her statement by accusing Ghislaine Maxwell of being a sexual predator who groomed and abused her when she was 16. The transcript also includes a quote from a 'Jane Doe' expressing fear that the accused is a flight risk with international connections.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. Prosecutor Ms. Moe reads a written statement from an anonymous victim ('Jane Doe') to the court. The statement accuses Ghislaine Maxwell of sadistic manipulation, claiming she was 'in charge,' recruited other victims for amusement, and was essential to Jeffrey Epstein's ability to commit abuse.
This document is a court transcript from April 1, 2021, detailing the government's argument for detaining a defendant pending trial. The government's representative, Ms. Moe, asserts the defendant is an extreme flight risk, citing her possession of three passports, large sums of money, and international connections. The court clarifies that the government's argument is based solely on flight risk and not on any danger the defendant poses to the community.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, where a speaker, Ms. Moe, is arguing that the defendant is a flight risk. Ms. Moe presents evidence of the defendant's significant wealth, citing bank records from January 2019 that show an annual income between $200,000 and $500,000, a net worth over $10 million, and a trust account with over $4 million in assets.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021. It features a dialogue between the Court and prosecutor Ms. Moe regarding the details of the defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) arrest. The discussion focuses on the defendant's refusal to open the door for law enforcement and the specific allegation that she attempted to block location monitoring by wrapping a mobile phone in foil.
This document is a transcript page from a court hearing dated April 1, 2021, involving prosecutor Ms. Moe and the Judge. Ms. Moe argues that the defendant (contextually Ghislaine Maxwell) poses a flight risk because she successfully purchased real estate under a fake name and lived undetected for a year. The Judge questions why this specific information was not presented until the government's reply brief.
This document is a court transcript from April 1, 2021, capturing a dialogue between a judge and Ms. Moe regarding a defendant's bail. The judge raises the issue of the defendant's motive for hiding—whether it was to evade authorities or for privacy from the press, especially given the public interest following Mr. Epstein's indictment. Ms. Moe argues that the motive is irrelevant; the crucial fact for the bail determination is that the defendant has demonstrated a clear ability and willingness to live in hiding.
This document is a transcript from a court case, specifically a discussion regarding the defendant's financial information. The court questions Ms. Moe about the defendant's reported income and the government's perspective on its plausibility.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, concerning the case against Ms. Maxwell. A speaker, likely the prosecutor, argues that Maxwell is a flight risk due to the seriousness of the charges, which involve an "ongoing scheme to abuse multiple victims" with Jeffrey Epstein, and her recent efforts to conceal her whereabouts in New England. The judge then questions a lawyer, Ms. Moe, about a defense claim that Maxwell had maintained contact with the government through her counsel.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) involving a detention hearing. Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues that the female defendant (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) should be denied bail because she poses an extreme flight risk, has significant undisclosed financial means, strong international ties, and is charged with the sexual abuse of minors. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen is present, and the judge indicates that alleged victims will also be heard.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021. The Judge sets a firm trial date for July 12, 2021, and rules to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act to allow for discovery and defense preparation. The proceedings then transition to arguments regarding the government's motion for detention (bail hearing), involving attorneys Mr. Cohen (Defense) and Ms. Moe (Government).
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding where the judge, defense counsel (Mr. Cohen), and government counsel (Ms. Moe) discuss scheduling. The court sets a trial date for July 12, 2021. The government, through Ms. Moe, requests that the time between the hearing and the trial be excluded under the Speedy Trial Act to allow for discovery and motions.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 21-770) dated April 1, 2021, documenting a scheduling hearing. The Judge sets the trial commencement date for July 12, 2021, and establishes a timeline for discovery disclosures and pretrial motions running from August 2020 through January 2021. Ms. Moe, representing the government, estimates the prosecution's case will take two weeks, but suggests blocking out three weeks total for the trial.
This document is a transcript page from a court proceeding dated April 1, 2021 (likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell bail hearing). The text details the government's protocol for notifying victims via an opt-in process and outlines how three specific victims will participate in the bail hearing: one via memorandum, one via a statement read by the government, and one speaking directly. Attorneys Ms. Moe and Mr. Cohen confirm they have conferred and agreed upon a schedule with the Court.
This document is a court transcript from April 1, 2021, detailing a discussion between the judge, defense counsel (Mr. Cohen), and government counsel (Ms. Moe) about establishing a schedule for motions and discovery. Mr. Cohen clarifies the schedule by adding a previously omitted August 21 deadline for search warrant applications, which Ms. Moe confirms was included in a prior email to the judge's chambers. The parties are working to finalize deadlines for various legal filings in the case.
This document is a transcript from a court hearing dated April 1, 2021. The Judge is pressing Ms. Moe (likely a government attorney) on the thoroughness of discovery and timely disclosures. Ms. Moe confirms her team met personally with the FBI in Florida to ensure they obtained a 'comprehensive set of materials.' The Judge emphasizes that they must actively retrieve files rather than just accepting initial representations. The discussion then moves to setting a schedule previously discussed with Mr. Cohen.
This document is a court transcript from April 1, 2021, detailing a discussion about discovery materials. A representative, Ms. Moe, informs the judge that physical files from a prior F.B.I. investigation into Jeffrey Epstein in Florida have been transferred to the New York F.B.I. office for scanning and review. The judge then inquires about the process for identifying and disclosing any other relevant information beyond these specific files.
This document is a court transcript from April 1, 2021, in which a government representative, Ms. Moe, outlines the scope of materials to be provided in discovery. These materials include search warrants, subpoena returns, electronic data, and files from a prior investigation in the Southern District of Florida. Ms. Moe also updates the court on the status of a proposed protective order being negotiated with the defense counsel.
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding on April 1, 2021. During the hearing, the defendant, after confirming consultation with their attorney, waives the public reading of the indictment and pleads not guilty. The court accepts the plea and then transitions to a scheduling conference, instructing the government's representative, Ms. Moe, to provide a status update on discovery.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, covering the arraignment of Ghislaine Maxwell on a superseding (S1) indictment. The prosecution (Ms. Moe) explains that the new indictment includes a 'ministerial correction' regarding civil docket numbers in the perjury counts (Five and Six). The Judge questions both Maxwell and her attorney, Mr. Cohen, to ensure they have reviewed and discussed the changes.
This is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, where the judge justifies holding the proceeding with COVID-19 safety measures, referencing a national emergency and ensuring public trial rights are upheld. The judge then transitions to the arraignment, confirming with counsel Ms. Moe that it is for an S1 superseding indictment and asking for an explanation of the changes from the original indictment.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, concerning Case 21-770. It details a discussion between the Judge, Ms. Moe (Government), and Mr. Cohen regarding the necessity of conducting the arraignment and bail hearing remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court affirms that the proceeding cannot be delayed as the detained defendant is seeking bail and notes the significant public interest in the case.
This document is a court transcript from April 1, 2021, detailing the beginning of a remote legal proceeding. The judge (THE COURT) confirms the presence of counsel (MS. MOE), a court reporter, and a Pretrial Services Officer (Leah Harmon). The judge states the purpose of the hearing—an arraignment, scheduling conference, and bail hearing—and explains it is being conducted remotely under the authority of the CARES Act due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding on April 1, 2021, in Case 21-770. The judge begins by confirming that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, has a working audio and video connection. The discussion then turns to a technical issue raised by Ms. Moe, who reports that the public call-in line is full, and the court expresses concern about an alternative listening arrangement involving a speakerphone.
This document is a court transcript from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, filed on August 6, 2019. The transcript captures a discussion between the judge, Ms. Moe (representing the government), and Mr. Weinberg (representing the defense) to schedule future court dates. Key dates set include an appearance on October 28, a briefing deadline on February 24, 2020, and an oral argument on March 12, 2020.
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