Ms. Maxwell

Person
Mentions
1982
Relationships
520
Events
872
Documents
955

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.
520 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
organization The government
Legal representative
15 Very Strong
68
View
person MR. EPSTEIN
Business associate
15 Very Strong
20
View
person Epstein
Business associate
13 Very Strong
23
View
person Ms. Sternheim
Client
13 Very Strong
11
View
person Juror No. 50
Legal representative
12 Very Strong
35
View
person Jeffrey Epstein
Business associate
12 Very Strong
17
View
person Mr. Everdell
Client
12 Very Strong
12
View
person Juror No. 50
Juror defendant
12 Very Strong
7
View
organization The government
Adversarial
12 Very Strong
16
View
person Bobbi C. Sternheim
Client
11 Very Strong
16
View
person Judge Nathan
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
11
View
person JANE
Alleged perpetrator victim
11 Very Strong
6
View
person Epstein
Co conspirators
11 Very Strong
11
View
organization GOVERNMENT
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
55
View
person Judge Preska
Legal representative
11 Very Strong
10
View
person JANE
Defendant victim
10 Very Strong
6
View
person Jeffrey Epstein
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
5
View
person Mr. Everdell
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
6
View
person Epstein
Financial
10 Very Strong
7
View
organization GOVERNMENT
Adversarial
10 Very Strong
21
View
person Jeffrey Epstein
Association
10 Very Strong
11
View
person Epstein
Friend
10 Very Strong
7
View
person Jeffrey Epstein
Professional
10 Very Strong
9
View
organization The Court
Legal representative
10 Very Strong
10
View
person Epstein
Professional
10 Very Strong
7
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
N/A N/A Ms. Maxwell's Sentencing Proceeding Court View
N/A N/A Jury Charge/Instructions regarding circumstantial evidence and inferences. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Jury Selection (Voir Dire) Courtroom View
N/A N/A Detention Hearing Decision Court View
N/A N/A Narrator arrives at Jeffrey's, goes to massage room where Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell are waiting... Jeffrey's residence, massag... View
N/A N/A Request by Daily News to unseal documents related to Ms. Maxwell's new trial effort. N/A View
N/A N/A Took Minor Victim-2 to a movie Unknown View
N/A N/A Sentencing hearing regarding fines, restitution, and guideline calculations. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Period when alleged events took place (described as 'over 25 years ago') Unknown View
N/A N/A Court hearing regarding sentencing enhancements for Ghislaine Maxwell. Courtroom View
N/A N/A Alleged massages of Epstein by Accuser-3 England View
N/A N/A Witness duties regarding household preparation Epstein Residence View
N/A N/A Flight to New Mexico New Mexico View
N/A N/A Court hearing regarding upcoming sentencing and review of the presentence report. Courtroom (Southern District) View
N/A N/A Last bail hearing where the Court expressed concern about lack of ties. Court View
N/A N/A Testimony of Mr. Alessi regarding Ms. Maxwell's use of the telephone directory. Courtroom (implied) View
N/A N/A Ms. Maxwell's forthcoming motion before Judge Nathan. Court View
N/A N/A Jury Charge/Instructions regarding Count Four Courtroom View
N/A N/A Ms. Maxwell visited Mar-a-Lago for potential treatment. Mar-a-Lago View
N/A N/A Acts alleged in Count Four of the Indictment (Transportation of a Minor to Engage in Illegal Sexu... Not specified View
N/A N/A Criminal Trial District Court View
N/A N/A Transportation of Jane in interstate or foreign commerce. Interstate/International View
N/A N/A Sighting of Virginia Roberts Mar-a-Lago View
N/A N/A Spa Check Mar-a-Lago (Spa) View
N/A N/A Three bail renewal hearings Court View

DOJ-OGR-00001007.jpg

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.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000982.jpg

This legal document is a page from a bail application for Ms. Maxwell, filed on July 10, 2020. The argument presented is that her proposed bail conditions are consistent with precedents set in other high-profile cases within the same circuit, citing the releases of defendants like Esposito, Marc Dreier, and Bernie Madoff, who were also considered significant flight risks. The document also notes that Maxwell is not relying on her family and friends to co-sign the bond in order to protect their privacy.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000980.jpg

This document is a legal defense filing arguing that Ms. Maxwell is not a flight risk because her potential prison sentence is likely only 10 years, contrary to the government's claims of "decades." It outlines significant legal challenges the defense intends to raise, including a prior non-prosecution agreement involving Epstein, statute of limitations issues, and the difficulty of prosecuting decades-old conduct.

Legal filing / memorandum of law
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000974.jpg

This legal document argues that Ms. Maxwell is not a flight risk, citing prior court decisions where defendants who knew of impending charges did not flee. It emphasizes that the government had no evidence of Ms. Maxwell planning to leave the country and arrested her without warning before a holiday. The document further contends that Ms. Maxwell's actions to avoid public scrutiny after Epstein's arrest do not indicate an intent to flee.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000973.jpg

This legal document, filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell, argues that she is not a flight risk and should be granted release. It refutes the government's claim of her 'frequent international travel' by emphasizing that she has remained in the United States since Jeffrey Epstein's arrest in July 2019 and subsequent death in August 2019. The filing contends that her decision to stay in the U.S. despite intense media scrutiny and public calls for her prosecution demonstrates she has no intention of fleeing.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000972.jpg

This legal document, filed on July 10, 2020, argues that Ms. Maxwell is not a flight risk and should be granted bail. It asserts that she has strong ties to the United States, including being a naturalized citizen since 2002, having close family in the country, and having resided there for almost 30 years. The document also states she has no prior criminal record and has actively participated in U.S. legal proceedings since 2015, demonstrating her intent to remain and fight the allegations against her.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000971.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, has successfully rebutted the legal presumption that she is a flight risk. It asserts that the government has failed to meet its burden of proving that no set of bail conditions could reasonably ensure her appearance in court. The document cites several legal precedents to support its claim that the Court should order Ms. Maxwell's release under her proposed conditions.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000967.jpg

This document is a page from a legal filing arguing for the release of Ms. Maxwell, citing increased COVID-19 risks in prisons and the inability to adequately prepare a defense while detained. The text references the 'Stephens' case as a precedent where a defendant was released under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) because prison lockdowns prevented necessary legal preparation.

Legal brief / court filing fragment
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000963.jpg

This legal document argues for Ms. Maxwell's bail, asserting that the government's position on her danger to the community is inconsistent with its stance on Epstein. It highlights the COVID-19 pandemic as a health risk and an impediment to her defense, and contends that Ms. Maxwell is not a flight risk due to her strong community ties, U.S. citizenship, lack of criminal record, and continued presence in the U.S. since Epstein's arrest.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000932.jpg

This legal document page (dated April 1, 2021) argues that the government lacks any contemporaneous documentary evidence (emails, texts, police reports) to corroborate allegations against Ghislaine Maxwell regarding conduct between 1994 and 1997. The defense asserts that Maxwell is being prosecuted as a 'substitute' for Jeffrey Epstein following his 'inexplicable death' at the MCC, noting that she was not named in Epstein's original indictment.

Legal filing / court brief (appellate)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000931.jpg

This legal document argues that the trial court improperly denied bail to Ghislaine Maxwell by relying on the government's proffer, which was based on an indictment. The author contends that an indictment is merely an accusation and not evidence, citing legal precedent and pattern jury instructions from the Third Circuit to support this claim. The document asserts that the court should order Maxwell's release.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000930.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that the pretrial detention conditions for a defendant, Ms. Maxwell, are 'untenable' and prevent her from adequately preparing for trial. The filing cites legal precedents, including United States v. Jackson and United States v. Melendez-Carrions, to assert that prolonged pretrial detention under such circumstances constitutes unconstitutional punishment and violates due process.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000929.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues for the temporary release of a defendant, Ms. Maxwell, under statute § 3142(i). It contends that her incarceration prevents her from adequately preparing for her upcoming trial in July, given the millions of pages of discovery documents she cannot effectively review. The argument compares her situation favorably to a precedent case, Robertson, to demonstrate the necessity of her release for a fair defense.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000920.jpg

This legal document is a page from a filing arguing that the district court erred in denying bail to Ms. Maxwell. The author contends that the court improperly relied on the government's weak and unsubstantiated allegations, which are based on old, anonymous hearsay. The document concludes by asserting that Ms. Maxwell should be granted bail or the case should be remanded.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000919.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that the indictment against Ms. Maxwell is a direct consequence of Jeffrey Epstein's death and the resulting media frenzy, positioning her as a 'scapegoat'. The author contends that the case against her is weak, citing the lack of charges against her in 2019 alongside Epstein or in his 2008 Florida case. The document also notes that the government recently superseded the indictment to add a new anonymous accuser.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00000914.jpg

This legal document is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, arguing for her innocence. It claims the government's evidence is weak and consists of old, untested hearsay, and that the prosecution is motivated by the 'Epstein Effect'—a need for a scapegoat following the public outrage over Jeffrey Epstein's death in custody. The filing asserts that this effect has biased prosecutors, the Bureau of Prisons, and the public against her.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00021073.jpg

This document is the introduction to a legal filing, likely from the defense of Ms. Maxwell, arguing that her prosecution was improper. It alleges the Government used her as a proxy for the deceased Jeffrey Epstein, breached a non-prosecution agreement, and collaborated with complainants' attorneys who had a financial interest in the outcome via the Epstein Victims Compensation Program (VCP). The filing cites a specific instance where a complainant, "Jane," received $5,000,000 from the VCP after cooperating with the government's case against Maxwell.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00021066.jpg

This legal document, part of Case 22-1426, details the charges from a second superseding indictment filed on March 29, 2021, against a defendant identified in a footnote as Ms. Maxwell. The charges include sex trafficking conspiracy, enticement of a minor, and perjury. The document states the defendant was acquitted on one count but convicted on the others, and subsequently moved for a new trial after a juror admitted to making false statements during jury selection.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00021050.jpg

This document is a Table of Contents page (page ii) from a legal appeal filed on February 28, 2023. It outlines arguments regarding the Statute of Limitations (Point II) and allegations that Juror No. 50 made false statements during voir dire, denying Ms. Maxwell a fair trial (Point III). The document specifically references the Mann Act, Section 3283, and the McDonough Test regarding juror bias.

Legal filing (appeal brief table of contents)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00021045.jpg

This document is a court transcript from February 28, 2023, capturing the conclusion of a legal proceeding. The judge clarifies the guideline fine range is 20 to 200,000 per count, which is confirmed by counsel. Before adjourning, the judge thanks the victims, their counsel, counsel for Ms. Maxwell, and counsel for the government.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00021031.jpg

This document is a court transcript from February 28, 2023, in which an attorney, Ms. Moe, responds to a judge's question about the hierarchy of a criminal conspiracy. Ms. Moe argues that trial evidence shows the unnamed defendant held a leadership position superior to that of Sarah Kellen, who was an assistant to Ms. Maxwell and Epstein. The argument is based on the defendant's role shifting over time and Kellen taking on tasks like calling victims, placing the defendant higher in the scheme's structure.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00021030.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Page 29, filed 02/28/2023) involving the sentencing or legal arguments in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues to the Judge that Maxwell qualifies for a sentencing enhancement as an 'organizer or leader' because trial evidence proved she supervised Sarah Kellen. The discussion centers on whether the criminal activity involved five participants or was 'otherwise extensive,' with the government asserting Maxwell's supervision of Kellen satisfies the legal requirements.

Court transcript / legal filing
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00021017.jpg

This legal document page details the court's reasoning for rejecting the Defendant's proposed jury instructions. The court argues that it correctly instructed the jury on the sole predicate offense under New York Penal Law, avoiding confusion that the Defendant's proposals regarding other jurisdictions' laws and specific witness testimonies (from Kate, Annie, and Jane) would have created. The document concludes that the Defendant's claim of potential jury error, specifically regarding conduct in New Mexico versus New York, is speculative and implausible.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00020932.jpg

This document is a juror questionnaire from a legal case involving Ms. Maxwell, filed on March 9, 2022. Juror 50 indicates they have not formed an opinion about Ms. Maxwell that would impede impartiality, but they have heard about Jeffrey Epstein from CNN, specifically regarding his death and that he was in jail awaiting trial. The juror denies ever publicly stating or posting opinions about either individual.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00020931.jpg

This document is a juror questionnaire for a case involving Ms. Maxwell, filed on March 9, 2022. Juror 50 indicates they have previously heard of Ms. Maxwell from CNN.com, recalling that she was Jeffrey Epstein's girlfriend. The juror states they have not formed an opinion on Ms. Maxwell's guilt or innocence.

Juror questionnaire
2025-11-20
Total Received
$43,000,000.00
6 transactions
Total Paid
$51,600,000.00
14 transactions
Net Flow
-$8,600,000.00
20 total transactions
Date Type From To Amount Description Actions
N/A Received Epstein Ms. Maxwell $10,000,000.00 Bequest from estate View
N/A Paid Ms. Maxwell Court $0.00 Judge intends to impose a fine. View
N/A Received Epstein Ms. Maxwell $10,000,000.00 Bequest listed as an asset View
N/A Paid Ms. Maxwell Government/Victims $0.00 Restitution (Government is not seeking restitut... View
N/A Paid Ms. Maxwell Unspecified $0.00 Sale of 69 Stanhope Mews and purchase of Kinner... View
N/A Received Jeffrey Epstein Ms. Maxwell $0.00 Purchase of a large townhouse. View
N/A Received Epstein Ms. Maxwell $23,000,000.00 Transfer of funds confirmed by bank statements. View
2023-06-29 Paid Ms. Maxwell Court/Government $0.00 Discussion regarding a court-imposed fine and M... View
2022-07-22 Paid Ms. Maxwell the government $0.00 Judge intends to impose a fine; amount not spec... View
2021-03-22 Paid Ms. Maxwell Attorney Escrow A... $0.00 Funds for legal services presently held in atto... View
2021-02-23 Paid Ms. Maxwell Court $0.00 Proposed bond (amount not specified on this pag... View
2021-02-23 Paid Ms. Maxwell Escrow $0.00 Money currently held in escrow for legal fees. View
2020-12-01 Paid Ms. Maxwell N/A $22,000,000.00 Reported assets in support of bail application. View
2020-07-01 Paid Ms. Maxwell N/A (Reporting) $3,800,000.00 Assets reported by Maxwell in July 2020 View
2020-07-01 Paid Ms. Maxwell N/A $3,800,000.00 Assets reported by Ms. Maxwell in July 2020 View
2020-01-01 Paid Ms. Maxwell N/A $22,000,000.00 Assets reported in support of bail application. View
1997-01-01 Received Unknown Ms. Maxwell $0.00 Deal closed for leasehold property. View
1997-01-01 Paid Ms. Maxwell Mr. and Mrs. O'Neill $0.00 Closing of the deal for property sale. View
1996-01-01 Received Unknown Ms. Maxwell $0.00 Contracts exchanged for leasehold property. View
1996-01-01 Paid Ms. Maxwell Mr. and Mrs. O'Neill $0.00 Exchange of contracts for property sale. View
As Sender
52
As Recipient
28
Total
80

Divorce

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Her Spouse

Discussed divorce to create distance and protect him from consequences of association.

Discussion
N/A

Discovery Disc

From: the government
To: Ms. Maxwell

Federal Express envelope containing an unreadable discovery disc.

Mail
N/A

Missed Call

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: MR. EPSTEIN

Telephoned / Please Call

Call
N/A

Declaration and notice of motion to withdraw

From: HMF
To: Ms. Maxwell

HMF served a copy of the declaration and notice of motion to withdraw on Ms. Maxwell via her new counsel, Mr. Markus.

Service of legal document
2025-08-06

Newspaper

From: Unknown
To: Ms. Maxwell

Received a copy of the New York Times issued in October.

Mail
2025-03-01

Confirmation of decision not to testify

From: THE COURT
To: Ms. Maxwell

Judge asks Maxwell directly if it is correct that she has decided not to testify.

Meeting
2022-08-10

Attorney Glassman

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: The Court (implied)

A letter from Ms. Maxwell's side regarding the testimony of Attorney Glassman.

Letter
2021-12-03

Exhibit List

From: Counsel
To: Ms. Maxwell

Counsel hand-delivered and deposited exhibit list in the MDC legal mailbox.

Delivery
2021-10-17

Waiver Form Review

From: Mr. Cohen and Chris Ev...
To: Ms. Maxwell

Attorneys read the waiver form to Maxwell and received authorization to sign on her behalf.

Meeting
2020-12-10

Request for production of discovery materials

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: ["The Court"]

Ms. Maxwell sent a detailed letter requesting the production of discovery materials under Rule 16 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Brady v. Maryland, and Giglio v. United States. The Government has not yet responded.

Letter
2020-10-13

Request to stay unsealing process

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Judge Preska

Maxwell asked for a stay claiming awareness of critical new information but could not disclose details due to a protective order.

Motion/request
2020-10-09

Denial of stay

From: Judge Preska
To: Ms. Maxwell

Judge Preska declined to stay the unsealing but offered to reevaluate if Judge Nathan modified the protective order.

Court order/ruling
2020-10-09

Request for leave to be excused from publicly filing a re...

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: THE COURT

This document is a filing by Ms. Maxwell requesting permission to not publicly file a redacted version of Appendix Volume 2, citing confidential material under a criminal protective order related to two ongoing appeals.

Court filing
2020-09-24

Modification of protective order

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: The government / Judge...

Request to share information with other judicial officers under seal.

Legal motion/request
2020-09-10

No Subject

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Unknown

Ms. Maxwell used the phone subscribed to 'Terramar Project, Inc.' to make calls as late as May 2020.

Phone call
2020-01-01

No Subject

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Unknown

Ms. Maxwell used the phone subscribed to "Terramar Project, Inc." to make calls as late as May 2020.

Phone call
2020-01-01

Sex toys at Palm Beach house

From: Interviewer
To: Ms. Maxwell

Maxwell denied recalling sex toys at Epstein's house.

Deposition
2016-07-01

Civil Defamation Action

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: litigants

Testimony provided under oath involved in the perjury counts.

Deposition
2016-07-01

Civil Defamation Action

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: litigants

Testimony provided under oath involved in the perjury counts.

Deposition
2016-04-01

Recruitment of underage girls

From: Interviewer
To: Ms. Maxwell

Maxwell denied knowing about a scheme to recruit underage girls.

Deposition
2016-04-01

Civil Depositions

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Civil Litigation Attor...

Two civil depositions where Maxwell allegedly made materially false statements.

Meeting
2016-01-01

Epstein investigation

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: [Redacted Name 4]

Ms. Maxwell called an individual living outside of Sydney to inform them that Mr. Epstein was being investigated and that if they refused to cooperate, they'd be 'taken care of'.

Call
2007-01-01

Request for call back

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: MR. EPSTEIN

"TELL HIM TO CALL ME"

Call
2004-07-25

Called but not very important

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: MR Epstein

At 7:44 AM, Ms. Maxwell called for Mr. Epstein, leaving a message that the call was not very important.

Phone call
2004-06-06

Called, not important

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: MR Epstein

A message for Mr. Epstein from Ms. Maxwell, taken at 7:44 AM, stating she "CALLED BUT NOT VERY IMPORTENT".

Phone call message
2004-06-06

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity