This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022, featuring the testimony of Annie Farmer. Defense attorney Ms. Menninger questions Farmer about her desire to prosecute Jeffrey Epstein in 2006, followed by a redirect examination by prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz asking about the impact of Farmer's experiences with Maxwell and Epstein. The page concludes with Farmer beginning to describe her experiences as 'upsetting and confusing'.
A court transcript page from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330) dated August 10, 2022. The Judge discusses sustaining objections and finalizing redactions for a document. Later, following a recess, the Court reconvenes to address a note (likely from the jury) requesting the transcript of Larry Visoski (Epstein's long-time pilot), which is identified as Court Exhibit 20.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The judge confirms with attorneys Ms. Comey and Mr. Everdell that there are no outstanding matters before instructing for the jury to be brought in and for the witness, Mr. Rodgers, to take the stand.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Maxwell) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Shawn by prosecutor Ms. Comey. Shawn testifies about observing a girl named Melissa, who was sixteen at the time, visiting Jeffrey Epstein's house accompanied by a woman named Carolyn. The witness states that after staying inside for an hour, the two females emerged carrying money.
This document is a page from a court transcript in the case 'United States of America v. David Parse.' It records the opening of oral arguments regarding Parse's motion for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel. Defense attorney Paul Shechtman and prosecutors Nanette Davis and Stanley J. Okula, Jr. are present. While part of a larger batch of documents (indicated by the DOJ-OGR Bates stamp) often associated with Epstein-related releases, the text specifically concerns the trial of David Parse.
This document is page 253 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The text records the court instructing the jury to begin deliberations and identifying five alternate jurors (numbers 125, 149, 151, 152, and 170). The Judge provides strict instructions to the alternates to refrain from discussing the case or consuming media until they are either recalled by Ms. Williams or released.
This document is a page from the court transcript of the jury charge in the trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The judge instructs the jury on the requirement for a unanimous verdict, the protocol for filling out the verdict form via the foreperson, and general conduct regarding courtesy during deliberations. The transcript concludes with the judge calling for a sidebar with counsel and the court reporter before submitting the case to the jury.
This document is page 237 of a court transcript (filed 08/10/22) from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains jury instructions delivered by the judge, specifically addressing the use of pseudonyms for witness privacy due to media attention, and 'Instruction No. 45' regarding the credibility of witnesses and impeachment by prior inconsistent statements. The judge instructs the jury that prior inconsistent statements should be used to evaluate credibility, not as affirmative evidence of Maxwell's guilt.
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.
This legal document is an excerpt of a judge's final instructions to a jury in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 19, 2021. The judge outlines the procedural requirements for reaching a unanimous verdict, communicating the verdict to the court via the marshal, and maintaining courtesy and respect during deliberations. The judge also informs the jury of a brief pause for a side bar conference with counsel and the reporter before the case is officially submitted to them.
This document is page 145 (marked internal page 62) of a court filing from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on December 18, 2021. It contains jury instructions regarding the evaluation of witness testimony, specifically addressing how to weigh the testimony of a witness with a prior felony conviction and the use of pseudonyms/first names to protect witness privacy.
This is a page from a court transcript of the opening statement by defense attorney Ms. Sternheim in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. Sternheim argues that while four accusers will testify, the evidence will not support the charges, and she attempts to humanize Maxwell by highlighting her education and skills. The text also frames Jeffrey Epstein's image in the 1990s as a successful, charismatic philanthropist to explain Maxwell's association with him.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a logistical delay in open court involving defense attorney Ms. Sternheim, prosecutor Ms. Comey, and the Judge regarding three jurors who are missing or delayed at the security line. The Judge discusses moving jurors between the first and fifth floors to manage the situation.
This document is a page from a rough draft transcript of a deposition or interview, likely prepared for the House Oversight Committee. The speaker discusses the legal landscape in 2010 regarding a civil suit brought by a victim identified as 'S.R.' against Jeffrey Epstein. The text highlights that while most victims (approx. 31 of 35) referenced in the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) had settled, S.R.'s case was heading to trial, which presented an 'explosive situation' threatening to expose Epstein's crimes and organization in open court.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity