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-00008795.jpg

This legal document, dated December 27, 2021, is a filing to Judge Alison J. Nathan arguing that the jury in Ms. Maxwell's trial is confused. The author contends that the court's response to a jury note improperly allows them to consider conduct that occurred in New Mexico as a basis for conviction on counts requiring a violation of New York law. The filing cites legal precedent to argue that New York lacks jurisdiction over conduct occurring entirely out-of-state and that this issue could warrant vacating a potential conviction.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008794.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing from December 2021, presents an argument from Ms. Maxwell's defense to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The defense contends that a supplemental jury instruction given by the court was incorrect and prejudicial, citing multiple Second Circuit precedents to argue that confusing or misleading instructions at a critical stage of deliberation can be grounds for reversal. The filing asserts that this error applies to multiple counts and requests a curative instruction.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008791.jpg

This legal document, dated December 27, 2021, is a filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the trial of Ms. Maxwell. The filing argues that without specific jury instructions, there is a risk of the jury convicting Ms. Maxwell based on a 'constructive amendment' to the indictment, which would be a per se violation of her constitutional rights. The argument is supported by citing several legal precedents from the Second Circuit and the Southern District of New York.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008786.jpg

This document is page 80 of a court filing (Document 565) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 19, 2021. It contains the concluding remarks and jury instructions for the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, specifically instructing jurors on the standard of proof (reasonable doubt), the necessity of ignoring sympathy, and the conduct expected during deliberations. The text emphasizes that the burden of proof lies with the Government.

Court filing - jury instructions (concluding remarks)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008784.jpg

This legal document, filed on December 19, 2021, is a specific instruction (No. 58) from a judge to a jury in a criminal case. The judge explicitly directs the jurors not to consider any potential punishment for the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, during their deliberations. The document clarifies that the jury's only role is to determine guilt or innocence based solely on the evidence presented by the Government, while the duty of sentencing belongs exclusively to the judge.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008775.jpg

This document is a jury instruction, specifically Instruction No. 49, from a legal case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on December 19, 2021. It informs the jury that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, did not testify and that they are legally prohibited from drawing any negative conclusions or adverse inferences from her silence. The instruction emphasizes that the burden of proof lies entirely with the Government and never shifts to the defendant.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008774.jpg

This document is a limiting instruction (Instruction No. 48) issued to the jury in the criminal trial of Ms. Maxwell on December 19, 2021. The instruction clarifies that evidence of 'similar acts' introduced by the Government cannot be used as direct proof of the charged crimes or as evidence of bad character or a propensity to commit crimes. The jury is only permitted to consider this evidence for the limited purpose of determining if Ms. Maxwell acted knowingly and intentionally or utilized a common scheme or plan.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008771.jpg

This document is a jury instruction, specifically Instruction No. 45, from a legal case filed on December 19, 2021. It directs the jury on how to handle evidence of a witness's prior inconsistent statements, specifying that such evidence should only be used to assess the witness's credibility and not as direct evidence of Ms. Maxwell's guilt. The jury is tasked with determining the reason for any inconsistency and how much weight to give the testimony.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008766.jpg

This document is page 60 of a court filing (Document 565) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 19, 2021. It contains Jury Instruction No. 43 regarding 'Inferences,' defining what an inference is and explaining the jury's role in drawing them from evidence. The instruction explicitly warns the jury that they cannot infer Ms. Maxwell's guilt solely based on her presence at a crime scene or knowledge that a crime was being committed.

Court filing / jury instructions
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008763.jpg

This document is a page from the jury instructions (Instruction No. 40) for the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 19, 2021. It defines the legal concept of 'Venue' within the Southern District of New York and lists the specific counties included in that jurisdiction. The instruction clarifies that the Government must prove venue by a 'preponderance of the evidence' rather than 'beyond a reasonable doubt,' stating that Maxwell must be acquitted of any specific offense if venue is not established for it.

Court document (jury instructions)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008758.jpg

This document is a page of jury instructions from a legal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 19, 2021. The instructions detail the legal standards for a jury to find a defendant guilty of conspiracy, specifically regarding 'overt acts'. It explicitly states that for Counts One and Three, the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, cannot be convicted based solely on the testimony of a witness named Kate, requiring additional evidence.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008755.jpg

This legal document, part of a court filing from December 19, 2021, appears to be jury instructions related to the case against Ms. Maxwell. It carefully defines what constitutes membership in a criminal conspiracy, clarifying that mere presence, knowledge, or association with conspirators is not sufficient for a conviction. The text emphasizes that the prosecution must prove the defendant actively participated with knowledge of the conspiracy's unlawful goals and an intent to help achieve them.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008754.jpg

This document is a page from a court filing, likely jury instructions, from a criminal case against Ms. Maxwell. It outlines the legal standards for proving her involvement in a conspiracy, stating that the Government must establish her knowing participation but does not need to prove she knew all details, knew all other members, or was involved from the beginning. The text clarifies that even a limited role or a single act could be sufficient for a guilty verdict if she was aware of the conspiracy's criminal aims.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008753.jpg

This document is a jury instruction (No. 35) from a federal criminal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 19, 2021. It explains the second element of a conspiracy charge, requiring the Government to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, knowingly and willfully joined the conspiracy. The instruction defines these terms as deliberate and purposeful actions, distinguishing them from mistake, negligence, or carelessness, and notes that knowledge must be inferred from evidence.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008752.jpg

This document is page 46 of a court filing (Document 565) from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 19, 2021. The text contains jury instructions explaining the burden of proof for Count Five of the indictment regarding conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors. It clarifies that the objective is proved if the jury finds Maxwell agreed with at least one other person to commit the elements of the offense.

Court document (jury instructions / legal filing)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008747.jpg

This document is a jury instruction (Instruction No. 31) from a federal court case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 19, 2021. It explains the legal definition of conspiracy as it pertains to charges against Ms. Maxwell in Counts One, Three, and Five of an indictment, referencing Title 18, Section 371 of the United States Code. The instruction clarifies that a conspiracy is a separate crime from the underlying offense and can be found even if the object of the conspiracy was never committed.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008746.jpg

This document is a page from a court filing, likely jury instructions, dated December 19, 2021. It outlines the legal criteria for finding the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, guilty as an 'aider and abettor' in a criminal venture. The text specifies that guilt depends on whether she knowingly associated with the venture and acted to make it succeed; otherwise, she must be found not guilty under this theory.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008743.jpg

This legal document, filed on December 19, 2021, contains jury instructions for a criminal case against Ms. Maxwell. Specifically, it is Instruction No. 29, which defines the fourth element of Count Six, "Sex Trafficking of an Individual Under the Age of 18." The instruction explains the legal definition of "interstate commerce" and clarifies that the Government must prove Ms. Maxwell's conduct affected it, even minimally, but does not need to prove she intended to do so or that actual travel occurred.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008741.jpg

This document is Instruction No. 27 from a legal case, filed on December 19, 2021, pertaining to Count Six: Sex Trafficking of an Individual Under the Age of 18. It specifies that the Government must prove Ms. Maxwell knew Carolyn was under eighteen years of age, and directs the application of a previously provided definition of 'knowingly' in this determination. The document is part of a larger court filing, page 35 of 83.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008736.jpg

This document is a jury instruction (No. 22) from a legal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 19, 2021. It specifies the third element the Government must prove for Count Four of an indictment: that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, knew the individual referred to as 'Jane' was under seventeen years old at the time of the alleged criminal acts.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008735.jpg

This legal document is a jury instruction for Count Four in the case against Ms. Maxwell, concerning the transportation of an individual under 17 for illegal sexual activity. It details the second element the government must prove: that Ms. Maxwell knowingly transported 'Jane' across state lines with the intent for her to engage in sexual activity. The instruction clarifies that this illegal purpose need not be the sole reason for the travel, but must be a 'significant or motivating purpose' and not merely incidental.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008734.jpg

This legal document, filed on December 19, 2021, is a jury instruction for 'Count Four' in the criminal case against Ms. Maxwell. It outlines the first element the Government must prove: that Ms. Maxwell knowingly transported an individual named Jane across state lines for illegal sexual activity. The instruction clarifies that direct personal transportation is not required; arranging the travel, such as by purchasing tickets, is sufficient, and the defendant's intent is a key factor.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008731.jpg

This legal document, filed on December 19, 2021, outlines the jury instructions for Count Two against Ms. Maxwell, which alleges a violation of New York Criminal Law. The count specifies that between 1994 and 1997, Ms. Maxwell enticed a minor named Jane across state lines for sexual activity, constituting Sexual Abuse in the Third Degree under New York Penal Law § 130.55. The document defines "sexual contact" and clarifies that under New York law, a person under seventeen is legally incapable of consent, but the prosecution must prove Ms. Maxwell knew of Jane's age.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008730.jpg

This legal document, part of Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, provides jury instructions for Count Two against Ms. Maxwell, specifically focusing on the third element: "Enticement to Engage in Illegal Sexual Activity." It defines what constitutes acting "intentionally" and clarifies that the government must prove that a "significant or motivating purpose" for encouraging an individual named Jane to travel across state lines was for illegal sexual activity, not that it was the sole purpose.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00008728.jpg

This document is page 22 of 83 from a court filing (Document 565) dated December 19, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains Jury Instruction No. 15 regarding 'Count Two: Enticement to Engage in Illegal Sexual Activity,' specifically defining the 'First Element' and the legal definition of acting 'Knowingly.' It outlines the burden of proof on the government to establish that Maxwell persuaded or coerced individuals to travel in interstate commerce.

Court filing (jury instructions)
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

Returning a call

From: MS. NECOLE HESSE
To: Ms. Maxwell

Ms. Necole Hesse called Ms. Maxwell at 6:55 PM. The message was 'RETURNIN YOUR CALL'. The callback number is 832 6777. The message was taken by 'Rushi'.

Phone message
2004-04-25

PB manual

From: Sally Hayden
To: Ms. Maxwell

An email sent at 6:46 p.m. on May 25, 2001, from Sally to Ms. Maxwell. It is a response to a prior email and discusses the status of a "PB manual" and a conversation with "John".

Email
2001-05-25

Unknown

From: Sally Hayden
To: Ms. Maxwell

Discusses a conversation with John; response to a prior email.

Email
2001-05-25

Check off lists

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: ["John"]

Ms. Maxwell mentions faxing check off lists to John about two weeks prior to her May 25th email in preparation for the household manual.

Fax
2001-05-11

Travel invitation

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: CAROLYN

Invited Carolyn to travel from Florida to a place outside of Florida with Epstein

Invitation
2001-01-01

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity