Ms. Maxwell
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
15
Very Strong
|
68 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Business associate |
15
Very Strong
|
20 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Business associate |
13
Very Strong
|
23 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Client |
13
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
35 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Business associate |
12
Very Strong
|
17 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Client |
12
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Juror defendant |
12
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Adversarial |
12
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
Bobbi C. Sternheim
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
Judge Nathan
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Alleged perpetrator victim |
11
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Co conspirators |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
55 | |
|
person
Judge Preska
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Defendant victim |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Financial |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Association |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Friend |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 |
| 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-00001394.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, requests a 90-day continuance for her trial, originally set for July 12, 2021. The defense argues that the government's recent disclosure of 226 witnesses necessitates more time for investigation and preparation. The request is made reluctantly, acknowledging it will prolong Ms. Maxwell's 'miserable and punishing detention'.
DOJ-OGR-00001392.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim on behalf of their client Ms. Maxwell, details the significant challenges the defense faces in reviewing a massive amount of discovery evidence. The defense argues that new charges, the addition of 'Accuser-4', and the sheer volume of materials (including 214,000 photos and 250,000 non-searchable documents) necessitate a lengthy re-review process. The document also mentions technical difficulties with an FBI-supplied laptop, further complicating and delaying their review of 'Highly Confidential' photographs.
DOJ-OGR-00001391.jpg
This page from a legal filing by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim argues that recent voluminous discovery materials, including witness interviews, contain exculpatory information for Ms. Maxwell that requires significant time to investigate. The defense disputes the government's claim that no additional time is needed, asserting that millions of pages from Epstein's devices, previously irrelevant, are now pertinent due to the expanded scope of the superseding indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00001383.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues on behalf of Ms. Maxwell against the Government's handling of her abuse allegations. The defense claims the Government's conclusion that the abuse was 'unfounded' is a 'self-serving proclamation' based on a Bureau of Prisons video review that neither the prosecutors, court, nor defense have seen. The document demands the video be produced for review and accuses the Government of hypocrisy and a desire to humiliate Ms. Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00001382.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that the U.S. Government's description of inmate Ms. Maxwell's prison conditions is false. It counters claims of amenities by detailing harsh realities such as sleep deprivation from guards' actions, solitary confinement, unsanitary conditions, and inadequate resources for trial preparation. The filing asserts the government's information is based on unreliable, multi-layered hearsay from prison staff to the prosecutor.
DOJ-OGR-00001380.jpg
This legal document, page 8 of a filing in case 21-770, argues on behalf of defendant Ms. Maxwell. It claims that preparing for trial from custody is impossible due to pandemic restrictions and an overwhelming 2.7 million pages of discovery. The filing criticizes the Government's response and alleges that newly provided evidence is actually exculpatory Brady material that undermines the prosecution's case.
DOJ-OGR-00001378.jpg
This is page 6 of a legal brief filed on April 19, 2021, in Case 21-770 (United States v. Maxwell). The text argues that the lower court failed to ensure the reliability of the government's evidence during bail hearings, citing legal precedents *LaFontaine* and *Martir*. The defense contends that unlike the *Martir* case, Ms. Maxwell actively challenged the government's 'flimsy proffer' through multiple hearings, but the court accepted the government's claims 'blindly' and 'uncritically.'
DOJ-OGR-00001377.jpg
This legal filing argues that the case against Ms. Maxwell is weak because the anonymous accusers' stories are contradictory, uncorroborated, and fabricated for money and fame, only emerging after Epstein's death. The document also contends that the district judge erred by accepting the indictment as proof of a strong case and that the government's reliance on legal precedents is misplaced due to a lack of meaningful evidence presented.
DOJ-OGR-00001352.jpg
This legal document is the second page of a letter dated January 14, 2021, from attorney Christian R. Everdell to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The letter requests that the court order the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to grant his client, Ms. Maxwell, laptop access on weekends and holidays to review millions of discovery documents for her defense. The document includes a signed order from Judge Nathan, dated January 15, 2021, granting this unopposed request.
DOJ-OGR-00001348.jpg
This document is a letter from BOP Staff Attorneys at MDC Brooklyn addressing the court regarding the conditions of Ms. Maxwell's confinement. It details her compliance with COVID-19 protocols, meal schedules, health status, and access to legal and social communications.
DOJ-OGR-00001346.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, addresses the court regarding the stringent and individualized detention conditions of a detainee, Ms. Maxwell. The filing notes that a previous letter of complaint received no meaningful response and suggests that the facility's warden, Warden Tellez, should be directed to provide a first-hand explanation to the court for these specialized conditions.
DOJ-OGR-00001323.jpg
This legal document, page 6 of a filing from April 12, 2021, summarizes Judge Nathan's findings that defendant Ms. Maxwell is a significant flight risk. The judge's determination is based on the strength of the government's evidence, Maxwell's substantial international ties, multiple foreign citizenships (including French), significant financial resources, and a lack of strong ties to the United States.
DOJ-OGR-00001288.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim regarding the confinement conditions of Ms. Maxwell. It details complaints about sleep deprivation due to flashlight checks, physical abuse during searches, retaliation by guards, restricted movement within her cell, poor food quality involving melted plastic, and contaminated water.
DOJ-OGR-00001259.jpg
This is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated March 23, 2021, arguing for the release of Ghislaine Maxwell on bail. The text argues that Maxwell's offer to renounce her French and British citizenship negates the flight risk concerns regarding extradition protection in France. It cites a Mr. Julié to interpret French Article 696-4, asserting that one who loses French nationality is not protected from extradition.
DOJ-OGR-00001237.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated February 23, 2021, arguing for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. The text outlines that Maxwell has renounced her foreign citizenship (France/UK) to address extradition concerns and proposes a strict asset monitoring system where all liquid assets belonging to her and her spouse will be moved to a 'New Account' overseen by a court-appointed monitor. This is intended to mitigate the Court's fear that her wealth could be used to facilitate flight.
DOJ-OGR-00001226.jpg
This legal document page discusses a bail hearing for a defendant, Ms. Maxwell. It recounts that the Court initially found her financial disclosures incomplete but notes she has since provided a more detailed report from a UK accounting firm, Macalvins, covering 2015-2020. Despite the new report, which was also reviewed by a former IRS agent, the Court remains unpersuaded that the proposed bail package, secured by property, cash, and bonds, would reasonably assure her appearance in court.
DOJ-OGR-00001194.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues on behalf of Ms. Maxwell for bail. It refutes the government's claims by stating that her relationship with her spouse is a strong tie to the country, and that discussions of divorce were a protective measure, not indicative of a weak bond. The document also asserts that Ms. Maxwell has been fully transparent about her and her spouse's finances, accusing the government of baselessly claiming she was deceptive rather than challenging the accuracy of the financial reports provided.
DOJ-OGR-00001193.jpg
This document is a defense filing arguing that the government has not met its burden in opposing bail for Ms. Maxwell. It asserts that her spouse and friends have come forward to support her bond, demonstrating strong ties to the U.S., contrary to the government's claims. It also addresses footnotes regarding the government's failure to scrutinize accusers and the defense's ongoing legal challenges to the indictment.
DOJ-OGR-00001192.jpg
This page from a defense filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) argues that the government's case against Ghislaine Maxwell relies entirely on the uncorroborated testimony of three accusers, specifically noting that Counts Two and Four rely solely on 'Minor Victim-1'. The defense asserts that the government only began issuing subpoenas regarding Maxwell after Jeffrey Epstein's death, suggesting the case was assembled 'after the fact'. A large block of text regarding specific government evidence is redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00001191.jpg
This is page 6 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on December 28, 2020, arguing for the release of Ms. Maxwell on bail. The defense argues that the government has conceded its case relies almost entirely on the testimony of three unidentified witnesses regarding events from over 25 years ago, rather than 'significant contemporaneous documentary evidence' as previously claimed. The document asserts that existing documentary evidence pertains to Jeffrey Epstein, not Maxwell, and notes that specific government concessions on this matter are redacted in the text.
DOJ-OGR-00001187.jpg
This document is the Table of Contents for a legal filing (likely a reply brief in support of a bail motion) filed on December 23, 2020, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that the government's case is weak (relying on only three witnesses), that Maxwell has substantial ties to the US (including a spouse whose name is redacted), that she has disclosed all finances for bond, and that the COVID surge at the MDC justifies her release. It also refutes the claim that she is a flight risk or that extradition from France or the UK would be refused.
DOJ-OGR-00001149.jpg
This document is page 4 (stamped page 7 of 36) of a legal filing in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It details the Court's reasoning for denying bail and detaining Maxwell, citing her serious flight risk, lack of U.S. ties, French citizenship (non-extradition), and extraordinary financial resources. The Court also noted that Maxwell's financial disclosures to Pretrial Services were likely incomplete.
DOJ-OGR-00001139.jpg
This legal document outlines two major impediments to Ms. Maxwell's defense preparation. Firstly, it details persistent technical failures with discovery materials provided by the government, including broken and malfunctioning hard drives, which have left her without access to readable evidence for over four months. Secondly, it describes the added burdens of a 14-day COVID-19 quarantine and heightened exposure risk at the MDC due to contact with untested staff, further limiting her ability to review case materials and prepare for trial.
DOJ-OGR-00001134.jpg
This document is page 32 of a legal filing (likely a defense motion) dated January 25, 2021, arguing that discovery evidence fails to implicate Ghislaine Maxwell. The text asserts there are no contemporaneous records (emails, texts, police reports) from 1994-1997 linking her to the alleged conspiracy and claims existing police reports are exculpatory. Significant portions of the arguments are redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00001131.jpg
A page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated December 14, 2020, arguing for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. The text cites an expert, Mr. Julié, who argues that France would not protect Maxwell from extradition to the U.S. if she fled there, citing her U.S. citizenship, waiver of rights, and diplomatic interests. A footnote notes that French authorities have broadened their investigation into Jeffrey Epstein to include Maxwell, reducing her incentive to flee to France.
| 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 |
A booklet/checklist
Mr. Alessi recalls telling Ms. Maxwell that he would not confirm or do the work required by a booklet/checklist because it was too much work on top of his daily duties.
Travel arrangement for Jane
The document mentions an incident where 'allegedly Ms. Maxwell got on the phone and somehow arranged for Jane to get back to Palm Beach'.
Needing something
Early on, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness by beeper if she needed something.
Legal Emails
Legal emails prematurely deleted by MDC in violation of policy.
Discovery Disc
Federal Express envelope containing an unreadable discovery disc, delayed by two weeks.
Upcoming flight information
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness (Rodgers) via beeper to convey information about upcoming flights on Mr. Epstein's planes.
Legal matters
The document alleges that all of Ms. Maxwell's legal emails were erased from the CorrLinks system.
Upcoming flight on one of Mr. Epstein's planes
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via beeper to provide information about an upcoming flight.
CorrLinks emails
Ms. Maxwell's CorrLinks emails were allegedly erased by guards.
Non-legal personal matters
Her non-legal phone calls are monitored in real time, and information from them was used by staff to confront her about a personal matter (the death of someone close to her).
Legal consultation
Guards are described as feverishly writing while observing Ms. Maxwell during videoconferencing with her counsel.
Performance of duties at the residence
Ms. Maxwell provided instructions to Alessi regarding his duties at the residence, which involved tasks in various rooms and areas of the property.
Upcoming flight on one of Mr. Epstein's planes
After beepers were no longer used, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via cell phone to provide information about an upcoming flight.
Household duties
Ms. Maxwell gave the witness, Juan, many instructions on how to perform his duties, including cleaning the house, serving, managing the kitchen, preparing shopping lists, and maintaining cleanliness.
Detention conditions
Ms. Maxwell filed written complaints through internal prison procedures to her unit counselor, the warden, and the regional office to seek remediation for her conditions, but to no avail.
Upcoming flight information
After beepers were no longer used, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness (Rodgers) via cell phone to convey information about upcoming flights on Mr. Epstein's planes.
Something that happened between her move from a large apa...
The document references prior conversations between the witness (Rodgers) and Ms. Maxwell, which are the basis for a question from the attorney.
Something that happened between her move from a large apa...
The document references prior conversations between the witness (Rodgers) and Ms. Maxwell, which are the basis for a question from the attorney.
Request to stay unseal proceedings
Ms. Maxwell asked Judge Preska to stay the unseal proceedings to allow her to get permission to share confidential information from a criminal case.
Request for permission to share information
Ms. Maxwell asked Judge Nathan for permission to share information under seal with Judge Preska.
Denial of request
Judge Nathan denied Ms. Maxwell's request to share information with Judge Preska.
Denial of stay
Judge Preska denied Ms. Maxwell's request for a stay, stating there was no factual basis.
Events in Ms. Maxwell's life, including her father's deat...
The transcript details a court examination where the witness, Rodgers, is asked about conversations they had with Ms. Maxwell regarding when she moved between various apartments and a townhouse after her father's death.
Setting up massage appointments
Carolyn testified that Ms. Maxwell would call her to arrange massage appointments, which was considered important evidence for sex trafficking charges.
Legal and non-legal mail
Delivery of her mail was significantly delayed.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity