Ms. Maxwell
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1994-01-01 | Alleged abuse | Epstein allegedly "sexually abused" Accuser-3 during massages that Ms. Maxwell encouraged. | London, England | View |
| 1994-01-01 | Interaction | Witness Rodgers interacted with Ms. Maxwell on Mr. Epstein's planes, at the office, and at her ho... | Airplane, office, Ms. Maxwe... | View |
| 1994-01-01 | Alleged criminal activity | The time period during which Ms. Maxwell is alleged to have committed a crime, as stated in the S... | N/A | View |
| 1994-01-01 | Criminal scheme | A single, decade-long scheme between Epstein and Ms. Maxwell to 'groom' and recruit minor girls t... | Epstein’s various residences | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | Transportation of Jane in interstate commerce for illegal sexual activity (Count Four allegations). | Interstate (between states) | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | Time period for Count Three (conspiracy to transport individual under 17). | Interstate commerce | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | Time period for Count Four (transporting individual under 17). | Interstate commerce | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | Conspiracy to entice individuals under 17 to travel to engage in sexual activity (Count One). | Not specified | View |
| 1994-01-01 | Alleged events | A witness, Kate, has testified to events that allegedly took place at the Kinnerton Street property. | Kinnerton Street property | View |
| 1994-01-01 | Period of alleged violations | The government chose to allege violations by Ms. Maxwell only within this narrow time period. | N/A | View |
| 1994-01-01 | N/A | Conspiracy to transport individuals under 17 with intent to engage in sexual activity (Count Three). | Not specified | View |
| 1994-01-01 | Conspiracy | The time period of the conspiracy charged in the indictment against Ms. Maxwell. | N/A | View |
| 1994-01-01 | Crime | Count Four: Transporting an individual under 17 in interstate commerce for sexual activity. This ... | N/A | View |
| 1992-01-01 | N/A | Ms. Maxwell allegedly began living at the property in question according to government testimony. | London property | View |
| 1992-01-01 | N/A | Start date of Maxwell living in 'the home' according to deposition | The home | View |
| 1992-01-01 | Residence | The government has testimony from Ms. Maxwell that she began living at a property in 1992. | N/A | View |
| 1991-10-01 | Visit | Witness visited Ms. Maxwell's apartment on 59th Street in the fall of 1991. | 59th Street apartment | View |
| 1991-01-01 | Arrival | Ms. Maxwell came to Palm Beach for the first time. | Palm Beach | View |
| 1991-01-01 | Meeting | The first meeting between the witness (Rodgers) and Ms. Maxwell. | N/A | View |
| 1990-01-01 | N/A | Time period of the allegations discussed. | Unspecified | View |
| 0018-12-01 | N/A | Potential charging conference date. | Court | View |
| 0009-01-01 | Trip | A potential flight is scheduled for 3:00 PM, referred to as 'Wheels up'. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001128.jpg
This legal document, filed on December 14, 2020, argues that Ms. Maxwell is not a flight risk due to her extreme recognizability and the constant media scrutiny she faces. To further assure the Court of her intent to face charges, she offers to sign irrevocable waivers of her right to contest extradition in both the United Kingdom and France. The filing cites the 1999 case 'United States v. Cirillo' as a legal precedent for using such waivers as a condition for release.
DOJ-OGR-00001126.jpg
This legal document argues that Ms. Maxwell was not attempting to evade arrest but was following established security protocols in response to what her security guard mistakenly identified as an ambush by the press. It further explains that a cellphone was wrapped in tin foil to prevent press access after a court inadvertently released her number, not to evade law enforcement, citing her continued use of the phone and ownership of another, uncovered primary phone as evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00001124.jpg
This legal document, filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell, argues that she was not a flight risk prior to her arrest. It asserts that she intentionally moved to New Hampshire to be within driving distance of New York prosecutors and that her legal counsel was in regular, documented contact with the government for months. The filing aims to counter the government's portrayal of her as a fugitive by demonstrating her intent to remain in the U.S. and face any potential charges.
DOJ-OGR-00001122.jpg
This legal document, filed on August 26, 2020, details numerous violent threats made against Ghislaine Maxwell on social media. It argues that the intense and threatening media attention, fueled by conspiracy theories like QAnon and Pizzagate, made it impossible for her to live a quiet life and forced her to separate from her spouse and leave her home for safety. The document includes direct quotes of the threats and a statement from her spouse describing the terrifying environment.
DOJ-OGR-00001117.jpg
This legal document argues that Ms. Maxwell has addressed the court's concerns about her finances, which were raised at an initial bail hearing. Her defense counsel hired a UK accounting firm, Macalvins, to conduct a thorough five-year financial analysis, and a former IRS Special Agent and Certified Fraud Examiner reviewed and validated this analysis as complete and accurate. The purpose is to demonstrate financial transparency to the court to establish suitable bail conditions.
DOJ-OGR-00001116.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, outlines the financial support for Ms. Maxwell's bail application. It details several bonds being posted by friends and a security company, including a $3.5 million bond from one individual risking their entire assets and a $1 million bond from a security company. The document argues that these significant financial pledges from people who know her well, and who are risking their own livelihoods and reputations, serve as strong evidence that Ms. Maxwell is not a flight risk.
DOJ-OGR-00001115.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues for Ms. Maxwell's release on a $22.5 million bond. It details that her spouse has agreed to post three properties worth approximately $8 million as security, and that numerous family members, friends, and a security company are also prepared to sign significant bonds. The document emphasizes the severe financial hardship these sureties would face if Ms. Maxwell were to violate her bail conditions, using the example of one surety who would post her only asset, a $1.5 million property described as her 'only nest-egg for retirement'.
DOJ-OGR-00001112.jpg
This legal document is part of a bail application for Ms. Maxwell, arguing she should be granted bail under strict conditions. The filing asserts that she has deep family ties to the United States, primarily through her spouse, and is supported by numerous friends and family members who have written letters and agreed to act as sureties, posting significant financial bonds. This is intended to counter the Court's previous concern that she lacked significant ties to the country and was a flight risk.
DOJ-OGR-00001110.jpg
This legal document argues for the reconsideration of Ms. Maxwell's bail application. It cites several legal precedents that allow a court to reopen bail hearings based on new evidence or changed circumstances. The primary new evidence cited is the voluminous discovery (over 2.7 million pages) produced by the government after the initial hearing, which the defense claims raises serious questions about the strength of the government's case.
DOJ-OGR-00001107.jpg
This legal document argues for Ms. Maxwell to be released on restrictive bail. Her defense contends that the government's case lacks corroborating evidence, relies on old testimony, and that her oppressive confinement conditions at the MDC, including a COVID-19 outbreak, are unjust and impede her ability to prepare her defense. The filing also asserts she is not a flight risk, citing expert opinions on extradition from the UK and France.
DOJ-OGR-00001106.jpg
This legal document is part of a court filing by Ms. Maxwell's defense team, presenting new information to support a renewed bail application. The defense provides several pieces of evidence, including a letter from her spouse, character references from friends and family, and a detailed financial report from the firm Macalvins Limited showing assets of approximately $22.5 million. The filing aims to demonstrate Ms. Maxwell's strong ties to the U.S. and counter arguments that she is a flight risk or was hiding from law enforcement.
DOJ-OGR-00001105.jpg
This legal document outlines a series of proposed conditions for the pretrial release of Ms. Maxwell. The conditions include home confinement in New York City with GPS monitoring, supervision by Pretrial Services, surrender of travel documents, and the presence of 24/7 private security guards paid for by Ms. Maxwell. The document argues that these measures, supported by legal precedent from the Second Circuit, are sufficient to ensure she will not flee and will appear in court.
DOJ-OGR-00001098.jpg
This document is the table of contents for a legal filing, specifically a memorandum in support of reconsidering a bail decision for Ms. Maxwell. The arguments outlined focus on her strong family ties in the United States, her willingness to provide financial transparency, and refuting the government's claims that she was a flight risk or was hiding prior to her arrest. The filing also asserts that she has waived extradition rights and that the proposed bail package is more than sufficient to ensure her appearance in court.
DOJ-OGR-00001094.jpg
This legal document, dated April 1, 2021, addresses the issue of attorney-client access for detainees at a federal facility (MDC). It argues that current measures, such as video and phone conferences, are sufficient for defendants like Ms. Maxwell to prepare their defense, especially given the ongoing pandemic in New York City. The court orders the government to work with the defense to ensure adequate communication, noting that the MDC is also planning to resume in-person visits in the near future.
DOJ-OGR-00001093.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, concerning United States v. Maxwell. The judge is ruling against Ms. Maxwell's motion for release, stating that unlike other cases, she has not argued specific health vulnerabilities to COVID-19. The court also rejects the argument that prison restrictions at the MDC prevent her from preparing her defense, noting the case is in early stages.
DOJ-OGR-00001091.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues against granting bail to the defendant, Ms. Maxwell. The prosecution contends that she possesses significant financial resources, has demonstrated sophistication in hiding herself and her assets, and has an extraordinary capacity to evade detection, as evidenced by her behavior after Jeffrey Epstein's arrest. The document concludes that even a bail package with electronic monitoring would be insufficient to prevent her from fleeing.
DOJ-OGR-00001090.jpg
This legal document, dated April 1, 2021, is a court's ruling regarding the defendant, Ms. Maxwell. The court concludes that Ms. Maxwell is a substantial flight risk and that the government has met its burden to show that no conditions of release would be sufficient. The court also finds her proposed bail package, secured by a foreign property worth several million dollars, to be insufficient, citing her failure to provide a full accounting of her financial situation.
DOJ-OGR-00001088.jpg
This legal document details a court's assessment of Ms. Maxwell's flight risk. The court acknowledges Ms. Maxwell's argument that she did not flee the U.S. after Jeffrey Epstein's arrest or during the subsequent investigation, and has remained in contact with the government. However, the court concludes that the seriousness of the crime, potential sentence, her foreign connections, and substantial financial resources provide a strong motive and opportunity to flee, and also notes that her financial disclosures to Pretrial Services were likely incomplete.
DOJ-OGR-00001086.jpg
This legal document excerpt analyzes the factors weighing in favor of Ms. Maxwell's detention, citing the serious nature of the crimes involving minor victims and the substantial sentences she faces if convicted, which could incentivize flight. It notes that the government's evidence, including detailed victim accounts and documentary evidence, appears strong at this early stage of the case.
DOJ-OGR-00001085.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a bail hearing dated April 1, 2021, in case 21-770. It outlines the legal standards for detention, citing 18 U.S.C. 3142(g), and clarifies that the government's argument for detaining the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, is based solely on her being a flight risk, not a danger to the community.
DOJ-OGR-00001083.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (page 79 of the proceeding, page 142 of the filing) dated April 1, 2021, related to Case 21-770 involving Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense attorney concludes arguments for release on strict bail conditions, asserting the government failed to carry its burden. The Court then begins to deliver a ruling, outlining the legal standards for detention versus bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence, and stating that high-profile status or wealth should not influence the application of the law.
DOJ-OGR-00001073.jpg
A page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, featuring arguments by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorney. The attorney argues that the government's citations of 'dangerousness cases' are irrelevant to Maxwell's situation and emphasizes the impossibility of preparing for trial while Maxwell is detained during the COVID-19 crisis, citing lack of in-person access to the client due to BOP restrictions. The Judge attempts to interject at the bottom of the page.
DOJ-OGR-00001061.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, regarding Case 21-770. Defense counsel is arguing before a judge regarding Ghislaine Maxwell's 'risk of flight' status. The defense contends that Maxwell's use of tinfoil or Faraday bags was to prevent phone hacking, not to destroy evidence, and describes a security sweep where agents confirmed with a security guard that Maxwell lives at the house and relies on the guard for groceries.
DOJ-OGR-00001058.jpg
This document is page 117 of a court transcript from Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues before the Court that his legal team (including Haddon Morgan) had informed the government they were available for the voluntary surrender of their client, Ms. Maxwell, should an indictment occur. Cohen expresses frustration that the government arrested Maxwell without contacting them first and criticizes the government's reply brief for attempting to 'throw dirt' on his client.
DOJ-OGR-00001029.jpg
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.
| 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 |
Sniper threat
A high-ranking prison guard told Ms. Maxwell that there was concern she would be shot by a sniper.
Legal and non-legal mail
Delivery of her mail was significantly delayed.
Upcoming flight on one of Mr. Epstein's planes
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via beeper to provide information about an upcoming flight.
Upcoming flight information
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness (Rodgers) via beeper to convey information about upcoming flights on Mr. Epstein's planes.
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'.
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.
Legal matters
The document alleges that all of Ms. Maxwell's legal emails were erased from the CorrLinks system.
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.
Needing something
Early on, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness by beeper if she needed something.
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.
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.
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.
CorrLinks emails
Receipt of CorrLinks emails was significantly delayed and the emails were prematurely deleted by the MDC.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity