| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Kate
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Judicial judge defendant |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
prison staff (warden, guards)
|
Adversarial |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Grumbridge
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
the O'Neills
|
Business associate |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Loftus
|
Professional expert witness litigant |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Espinosa
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
women in her unit
|
Professional tutor student |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Professional potential bias |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
government, DOJ, BOP, MDC, prosecutors, Court, and accusers
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
her counsel
|
Client |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Perpetrator victim alleged |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Rodgers
|
Acquaintance |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Julié
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
anonymous accusers
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Judge
|
Judicial |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Annie Farmer
|
Acquaintance |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
judges in the Southern District of New York
|
Adversarial professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Juan Alessi
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Perpetrator victim |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Associative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
witness
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell’s Family and Friends
|
Friend |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Lawyers
|
Professional |
6
|
1 |
| 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 |
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) was intended to provide broad immunity to co-conspirators. It cites a Department of Justice Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) report where Epstein's counsel stated Epstein wanted to be the sole person to take blame. The document also notes that at the time of the agreement, the Government believed it lacked specific evidence against individuals like Ms. Maxwell, despite having interviewed accusers.
This document is a legal brief from a court case, dated July 27, 2023, filed on behalf of Ms. Maxwell. It argues that her sentence was erroneous due to a miscalculation and an unsupported four-point enhancement. The brief also contends that Ms. Maxwell is a third-party beneficiary of a non-prosecution agreement that should have barred the USAO-SDNY from prosecuting her, and requests that her conviction be reversed or the case be remanded.
This legal document is a preliminary statement in reply for an appeal by Ms. Maxwell. She argues that her prosecution was barred by a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) and that the District Court erred in its handling of ambiguities related to it. Additionally, she contends the court abused its discretion regarding Juror 50, citing the juror's false answers on a questionnaire and concealed past trauma as grounds for a valid challenge for cause.
This document is a page from the Table of Contents (page ii) of a legal appeal filed on July 27, 2023. It outlines arguments regarding procedural errors by the District Court, specifically concerning the questioning of 'Juror 50' regarding bias and the sentencing of Ms. Maxwell. The page specifically references Case 22-1426.
This document is the table of contents for a legal filing in Case 22-1426, dated July 27, 2023. The filing presents two main arguments on behalf of Ms. Maxwell: first, that a non-prosecution agreement makes her a third-party beneficiary and bars the USAO-SDNY from prosecuting her, and second, that the District Court erred by not removing Juror 50 for cause after the juror provided dishonest testimony and concealed information about being a victim of child sex abuse during voir dire.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 22-1426) recording the final moments of a hearing involving Ms. Maxwell. The Judge clarifies the fine guidelines ($20,000 to $200,000 per count), thanks the counsel, the victims who provided statements, and the government before adjourning the session.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 22-1426) regarding the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell. During the proceeding, Maxwell's attorney, Ms. Sternheim, requests that Maxwell be designated to the BOP women's facility in Danbury and enrolled in the FIT (Female Integrated Treatment) program to address trauma. The Court agrees to make this recommendation and subsequently grants the government's motion, presented by Ms. Moe, to dismiss Counts Seven and Eight.
This document is a transcript page from the sentencing hearing of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 22-1426) dated June 29, 2023. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim argues that a bequest in a will mentioned by the court is 'unactualized' and Maxwell has received nothing. The Court acknowledges this but concludes Maxwell has 'additional assets' sufficient to pay the fine and proceeds to formally impose the sentence.
This document is a page from a court transcript of a sentencing hearing dated June 29, 2023. The judge orders the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, to serve five years of supervised release and pay a $750,000 fine, rejecting her claim of inability to pay by citing a $10 million bequest she received from Epstein. The judge also imposes a mandatory special assessment and notes that the government is not seeking restitution or forfeiture.
This document is a court transcript from a sentencing hearing on June 29, 2023. The judge sentences Ms. Maxwell to 240 months (20 years) in prison, followed by five years of supervised release, noting her lack of remorse but following the Probation Department's recommendation. The total sentence is composed of concurrent sentences for three different counts.
This document is a page from a sentencing transcript for Ghislaine Maxwell. The judge is discussing sentencing factors, noting her age (over 60), lack of prior convictions, and the government's admission that she is not a continuing danger, while balancing this against her 'decade-long pattern of predatory activity.' The text also references mitigation arguments regarding her difficult family history (overbearing father, death of brother) and her charitable works and tutoring of inmates.
This document is a page from a court transcript where a judge is explaining the rationale for sentencing Ms. Maxwell. The judge states the sentence must be substantial to reflect the severity of her crime, the harm caused, and to serve as a general deterrent for similar offenses. The judge also emphasizes that the rule of law applies equally to everyone, regardless of wealth or social status, and that 'nobody is above the law'.
This document is a court transcript from a sentencing hearing on June 29, 2023. The judge confirms with defense counsel, Ms. Sternheim and Ms. Moe, that there are no objections to the supervised release conditions recommended by the Probation Department. The judge also clarifies that although Count Six involves mandatory restitution, the government's position is that none should be ordered because all victims have already been compensated.
This document is a page from a court transcript of a sentencing hearing for Ms. Maxwell, dated June 29, 2023. The speaker, likely defense counsel, argues for leniency by highlighting Ms. Maxwell's positive contributions while incarcerated at the MDC, such as tutoring fellow inmates, and points to her age and lack of prior criminal history. While acknowledging the 'terrible conduct' for which she is being sentenced, the speaker emphasizes her client's good deeds and lack of danger to society.
This document is a page from a court transcript of a sentencing hearing for Ghislaine Maxwell, dated June 29, 2023. The speaker, likely her defense counsel, argues for a reasonable sentence by citing mitigating factors from her life. These factors include the traumatic accident and death of her eldest brother, the overwhelming influence of her 'narcissistic' father, and the 'controlling, demanding, manipulative' influence of Jeffrey Epstein on her adulthood.
This document is a court transcript from a sentencing hearing on June 29, 2023. Attorney Sternheim is speaking on behalf of her client, Ms. Maxwell, addressing the court and Judge Nathan. Ms. Sternheim acknowledges the courage of the victims and argues against the government's request for a sentence of 'multiple decades in prison' for Ms. Maxwell, who is nearly 61 years old.
This document is a court transcript from June 29, 2023, detailing a procedural discussion about the order of statements. Counsel Ms. Moe asks the Court's preference for when victims should speak, and the Court outlines the sequence as government, victims, defense counsel, and then Ms. Maxwell. After confirming no objections from counsel, the Court calls for a luncheon recess until 1:00.
This document is a page from a court transcript (likely the sentencing hearing) for Ms. Maxwell. The judge rejects the defense's claim that Maxwell is indigent, citing her previous report of $22 million in assets and a lack of documentation regarding her marriage or divorce settlement, and states an intention to impose a fine. The judge also notes that the government is not seeking restitution and prepares to discuss sentencing guidelines after a lunch break.
This document is a page from a court transcript (related to Case 22-1426) involving the sentencing or fining of Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court overrules an objection regarding the inclusion of specific assets in the Presentence Investigation Report (PSR), specifically citing a $10 million bequest from Jeffrey Epstein to Maxwell. The Judge notes that despite Maxwell's claim of inability to pay, she had significant assets, including $3.8 million reported in July 2020.
This document, a legal transcript from June 29, 2023, discusses a criminal case, specifically focusing on the roles of Ms. Maxwell and Sarah Kellen. It analyzes trial testimony from Carolyn and Juan Alessi, concluding that Sarah Kellen replaced Ms. Maxwell in scheduling massage appointments, rather than being supervised by her. The text emphasizes a 'clear break' in their respective responsibilities.
This legal document, dated June 29, 2023, details a court's decision to overrule objections in Case 22-1426. The objections concerned the defendant's identification and isolation of minor girls, and a scheme developed by the defendant and Epstein to recruit girls for sexualized massages. The court found that trial evidence and testimony from witnesses like Annie and Jane supported the existence of this recruitment scheme, which involved a chain of recruitment from the defendant to Virginia, then to Carolyn, and further to Carolyn's friends.
This court transcript page, dated June 29, 2023, documents a judge overruling several objections from attorney Mr. Everdell. The judge upholds evidence against the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, including testimony that she targeted a victim named Virginia, metadata suggesting she authored an essay, and the assertion that she received approximately $23 million from co-conspirator Epstein.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 22-1426) concerning the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell. The proceedings cover the confirmation of victim notification postings on the U.S. Attorney's website. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim and the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, both confirm on the record that they have reviewed the presentence report and discussed it. Ms. Sternheim notes that co-counsel Mr. Everdell will handle objections.
This page from a legal brief (Case 22-1426) argues that Ms. Maxwell was deprived of an impartial jury due to Juror No. 50 providing false answers during voir dire. It details that the juror concealed his history as a victim of child sexual abuse by his step-brother, justifying his false answers on questions 25, 48, and 49 by citing his 'healing process,' distraction, and personal definition of family.
This document, dated September 28, 2020, is a legal argument asserting that a writ of mandamus is necessary to address inconsistent decisions by judges in the Southern District of New York concerning Ms. Maxwell's motion to consolidate. It concludes by recommending that the Court deny the government's motion to dismiss the appeal, emphasizing that deposition material will become moot once unsealed.
| 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 |
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.
The document mentions an incident where 'allegedly Ms. Maxwell got on the phone and somehow arranged for Jane to get back to Palm Beach'.
Early on, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness by beeper if she needed something.
Legal emails prematurely deleted by MDC in violation of policy.
Federal Express envelope containing an unreadable discovery disc, delayed by two weeks.
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness (Rodgers) via beeper to convey information about upcoming flights on Mr. Epstein's planes.
The document alleges that all of Ms. Maxwell's legal emails were erased from the CorrLinks system.
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via beeper to provide information about an upcoming flight.
Ms. Maxwell's CorrLinks emails were allegedly erased by guards.
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).
Guards are described as feverishly writing while observing Ms. Maxwell during videoconferencing with her counsel.
Ms. Maxwell provided instructions to Alessi regarding his duties at the residence, which involved tasks in various rooms and areas of the property.
After beepers were no longer used, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via cell phone to provide information about an upcoming flight.
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.
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.
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.
The document references prior conversations between the witness (Rodgers) and Ms. Maxwell, which are the basis for a question from the attorney.
The document references prior conversations between the witness (Rodgers) and Ms. Maxwell, which are the basis for a question from the attorney.
Ms. Maxwell asked Judge Preska to stay the unseal proceedings to allow her to get permission to share confidential information from a criminal case.
Ms. Maxwell asked Judge Nathan for permission to share information under seal with Judge Preska.
Judge Nathan denied Ms. Maxwell's request to share information with Judge Preska.
Judge Preska denied Ms. Maxwell's request for a stay, stating there was no factual basis.
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.
Carolyn testified that Ms. Maxwell would call her to arrange massage appointments, which was considered important evidence for sex trafficking charges.
Delivery of her mail was significantly delayed.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity