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 Organization closure The TerraMar Project was closed after Epstein’s death to spare her partners from invasion of priv... N/A View
N/A Trial The upcoming trial for which the government is seeking pre-trial notice of evidence from the defe... N/A View
N/A Meeting Ms. Maxwell and Ms. Roberts talked to a young girl. The girl and Ms. Maxwell then went inside a s... spa View
N/A Bail application Ms. Maxwell has a renewed bail application, which is being supported by several individuals (sure... N/A View
N/A Meeting The witness (Alessi) saw the same girl from the spa arrive at a house and introduced her to Ms. M... the house in Palm Beach View
N/A Trial The trial for which jurors were being selected, where the central issue was the credibility of ac... N/A View
N/A Medical procedure/inspection Immediately after receiving two nasal swab COVID tests, Ms. Maxwell was required to remove her ma... MDC View
N/A Erasure of data All of Ms. Maxwell’s legal emails were erased from the CorrLinks system. N/A View
N/A Jury selection A jury selection process in White Plains that is alleged to have resulted in the systematic under... White Plains View
N/A Legal proceeding Argument being made in favor of granting bond to Ms. Maxwell. United States View
N/A Proposed action Ms. Maxwell proposed to renounce her British and French citizenship. N/A View
N/A Surveillance Ongoing 15-minute light surveillance / disruptive flashlight surveillance of Ms. Maxwell's sleepi... MDC View
N/A Threat The MDC has threatened to place Ms. Maxwell in the SHU. MDC View
N/A Proposed action Ms. Maxwell proposed to place her and her spouse's assets into a monitored account. N/A View
N/A Targeting of a person The defendant identified and targeted a person named Virginia after seeing her in the Mar-a-Lago ... Mar-a-Lago parking lot View
N/A Targeting of a person The defendant worked with Epstein to identify and target a person named Jane. N/A View
N/A Trip A trip to New Mexico involving Jane and the defendant. Flight logs showed the defendant was present. New Mexico View
N/A Legal proceeding A renewed bail application was submitted for Ms. Maxwell. Court View
N/A Legal proceeding A previous bail hearing where the Court expressed concern that Ms. Maxwell lacked significant fam... Court View
N/A Legal proceeding The government's case against Ms. Maxwell, which is alleged to be based entirely on the testimony... N/A View
N/A Trial The document discusses the scope of a trial, arguing that introducing certain evidence about gove... N/A View
N/A Alleged criminal act Ms. Maxwell allegedly enticed Jane to travel across state lines with the intent that she would en... N/A View
N/A Flight Visoski describes his general duties during flights on Mr. Epstein's planes, including assisting ... Mr. Epstein's private planes View
N/A Court testimony A questioner (Q) conducts a direct examination of a witness, Mr. Alessi (A), regarding his recogn... N/A View
N/A Trip The transportation of Jane across state lines by Ms. Maxwell, with the alleged purpose of engagin... Interstate commerce (across... View

DOJ-OGR-00032387.jpg

This document consists of four handwritten phone message slips from June 2004 for Jeffrey Epstein. The messages record calls from Ghislaine Maxwell, Francis Ward, and an individual named Tony. The notes, likely taken by an assistant identified as 'R', detail routine communications, including a non-urgent call from Maxwell, a request for a callback from Ward, and notification of an impending visit from Tony.

Message slips
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00032381.jpg

This document contains four telephone message slips, two of which are dated in 2004. The messages are for individuals including 'Gm' (likely Ghislaine Maxwell), 'MS. MAXWELL', and 'Jeffrey'. One significant message from 'Ghislaine' to 'Jeffrey' requests that a redacted individual come to Palm Beach to help her train new staff, indicating operational and staffing activities.

Telephone message log
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00032342.jpg

This police report documents interviews with former Epstein employees Juan and Maria Alessi, conducted on November 21, 2005, regarding their employment and observations at Epstein's Palm Beach residence. The Alessis described their duties, the frequent visits of young female masseuses (estimated by Mr. Alessi to be as young as 16 or 17), and specific details regarding massage preparations and the cleaning of sex toys.

Police incident report
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00004811.jpg

This document is page 2 of a legal filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated July 2, 2021. The defense argues that Ghislaine Maxwell's indictment should be dismissed by citing the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision to vacate Bill Cosby's conviction due to a violation of a non-prosecution promise. The defense asserts that the government is similarly reneging on a formal Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) with Maxwell from over 25 years prior, violating fundamental fairness and due process.

Legal filing (defense letter/motion)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00004746.jpg

This legal document, filed on June 15, 2021, is a letter from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to the Court concerning her client, Ms. Maxwell. Sternheim complains about the recurring problematic conditions, over-management, and hyper-surveillance Ms. Maxwell faces at the MDC, arguing it impedes trial preparation and violates attorney-client privilege. The letter supports its claims by quoting Judge McMahon from another case, who strongly condemned the "disgusting, inhuman" conditions at the MCC and MDC and blamed the incompetence of the Department of Justice and Bureau of Prisons.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00002664.jpg

This page from a legal filing in the case US v. Ghislaine Maxwell argues against the retroactive application of extended statutes of limitations in criminal cases, citing the Ex Post Facto Clause and cases like Landgraf and Stogner. A crucial footnote asserts that the government is barred from prosecuting Maxwell for offenses against Minor Victim-3 because the statute of limitations had already expired when the victim turned 25 (year redacted) prior to the 2003 Amendment.

Court filing / legal brief
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00002663.jpg

This legal document, filed on February 4, 2021, argues against the retroactive application of a 2003 Amendment to the alleged offenses of Ms. Maxwell. The author contends that Congressional intent was clear in rejecting retroactivity and that applying the amendment would have impermissible effects. The argument is supported by legal precedents, including Landgraf, Toussie, and Gentile, which favor interpreting criminal statutes of limitation in a way that provides 'repose' for the defendant.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014745.jpg

This document is page 12 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The judge thanks and discharges the jury, acknowledging their service during the pandemic. Following the jury's dismissal, the court and counsel (Mr. Everdell and Ms. Sternheim) discuss post-verdict logistics, including a briefing schedule and the presentence report, concluding with Ms. Sternheim requesting a court order for Ms. Maxwell to receive a COVID-19 booster shot.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014723.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a legal argument between attorney Mr. Everdell and the presiding judge. Mr. Everdell argues that conduct and travel occurring solely in New Mexico cannot legally form the basis for a conviction of his client, Ms. Maxwell, under New York law, and he requests a supplemental jury instruction to this effect. The judge rejects the request, stating the proposed instruction is incorrect and that Mr. Everdell failed to seek to exclude the related testimony earlier.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014722.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a dialogue between defense counsel, Mr. Everdell, and the Court. Mr. Everdell argues his interpretation of a recent note from the jury, contending that they are confused about whether they can convict his client, Ms. Maxwell, on Count Four based solely on events in New Mexico and are unclear on the jury instructions. The Court acknowledges his position but expresses skepticism about the assumptions being made.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014702.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It records a legal discussion regarding jury deliberations, specifically concerning whether Ghislaine Maxwell arranged flights to or from New Mexico for a person named 'Jane' for the purpose of illegal sexual activity. Attorney Ms. Moe argues that a note from the jury is confusing and that the parties are guessing at the jury's hypothetical questions regarding Count Four.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014701.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between defense attorney Mr. Everdell and the Court regarding a jury note. The debate centers on whether Ghislaine Maxwell can be held criminally liable for arranging a return flight from New Mexico for a victim named 'Jane,' distinguishing the intent of the return flight from the initial flight to the location where sexual abuse allegedly occurred.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014692.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, related to the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It details a discussion regarding the legal definition of the word "entice" and a procedural matter of marking a note as a court exhibit. Additionally, defense attorney Ms. Sternheim raises a concern that Ms. Maxwell was provided an N95 mask but restricted to wearing it only in the courtroom, to which the Judge clarifies the rule applies to the whole courthouse.

Court transcript
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014646.jpg

This document outlines jury instructions for deliberations in the case of Ms. Maxwell, advising jurors not to consider punishment and detailing procedures for electing a foreperson and communicating with the court. It specifies that requests for testimony or other communications must be in writing, signed by the foreperson, and submitted via marshals. The document also provides contact information for Southern District Reporters, P.C.

Court document / jury instruction
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014637.jpg

This document is page 237 of a court transcript (filed 08/10/22) from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains jury instructions delivered by the judge, specifically addressing the use of pseudonyms for witness privacy due to media attention, and 'Instruction No. 45' regarding the credibility of witnesses and impeachment by prior inconsistent statements. The judge instructs the jury that prior inconsistent statements should be used to evaluate credibility, not as affirmative evidence of Maxwell's guilt.

Court transcript / jury instructions
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014634.jpg

This document is page 234 of a court transcript (Document 767) filed on August 10, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains jury instructions regarding the burden of proof, specifically noting that guilt cannot be inferred solely from association with wrongdoers. It also begins 'Instruction No. 44,' detailing how jurors should evaluate the credibility, demeanor, and honesty of witnesses.

Court transcript / jury instructions
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014633.jpg

This legal document is a jury charge from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It provides the jury with the legal definition of an 'inference' and instructs them on how to properly use inferences when weighing evidence presented by the government and the defense. The document specifically prohibits the jury from inferring that Ms. Maxwell is guilty of criminal conduct solely based on her presence at the scene of the crime.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014632.jpg

This document is page 232 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It contains jury instructions (the Charge) regarding the definition and weight of circumstantial evidence versus direct evidence, and Instruction No. 43 regarding inferences. The judge explicitly instructs the jury that they must be satisfied of Ms. Maxwell's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt before convicting her.

Court transcript / jury instructions (charge)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014620.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript, specifically a judge's charge to a jury in the case against Ms. Maxwell. The text outlines the legal requirements for finding someone guilty of conspiracy, emphasizing that mere presence, association, or knowledge of the plan is insufficient. The judge instructs that the jury must find that Ms. Maxwell actively and knowingly participated with the intent to further the conspiracy's unlawful goals, regardless of whether she stood to gain financially.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014619.jpg

This document is page 219 of a court transcript (Document 767, Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It contains the judge's charge to the jury regarding the legal standards for conspiracy as applied to the defendant, Ms. Maxwell. The text explains that the government must prove knowledge and intent, but clarifies that Maxwell did not need to know every detail or member of the conspiracy, nor did she need to be involved from the beginning to be held responsible for the conspiracy's activities.

Court transcript / jury instructions (charge)
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014618.jpg

This document is a page from a legal filing, likely jury instructions, in the criminal case against Ms. Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. The text defines the legal standards for 'willfully and knowingly' entering a conspiracy, stating that the actions must be a 'conscious objective' and not accidental. It instructs that Ms. Maxwell's knowledge must be inferred from evidence, such as conversations she was party to or present for.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014617.jpg

This document is page 217 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. The Court is providing jury instructions regarding Count Five, charging Ghislaine Maxwell with conspiracy to commit sex trafficking of minors between 2001 and 2004. It details Instruction No. 35, which explains the burden of proof required to establish Maxwell's membership in the conspiracy.

Court transcript / jury instructions
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014612.jpg

This legal document, filed on August 10, 2022, is a charge or jury instruction from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It defines the federal crime of conspiracy by quoting States Code, Section 371, and explains the legal concept to the jury. The document specifies that Ms. Maxwell can be found guilty of conspiracy even if the intended crime was not completed and outlines the elements the government must prove for a conviction.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014611.jpg

This document is a page from a court filing, specifically a jury charge in the criminal case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE against Ms. Maxwell, filed on August 10, 2022. It outlines the legal definition and tests for 'aiding and abetting' by presenting three specific questions for the jury to consider. The document also introduces Instruction No. 31 concerning conspiracy charges under Title 18 for Counts One, Three, and Five of the indictment.

Legal document
2025-11-20

DOJ-OGR-00014607.jpg

This document is page 207 of a court transcript (Jury Charge) from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. It details 'Instruction No. 29' regarding 'Count Six: Sex trafficking of an individual under the age of 18.' The judge instructs the jury that the consent or willingness of the victim, identified specifically as 'Carolyn,' is not a valid defense if she was under 18. The text also outlines the 'Fourth element' of the charge, defining 'interstate commerce' and the government's burden of proof regarding Maxwell's conduct affecting it.

Court transcript / 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

Sniper threat

From: high-ranking prison guard
To: Ms. Maxwell

A high-ranking prison guard told Ms. Maxwell that there was concern she would be shot by a sniper.

Verbal communication
N/A

Legal and non-legal mail

From: Unknown
To: Ms. Maxwell

Delivery of her mail was significantly delayed.

Mail
N/A

Upcoming flight on one of Mr. Epstein's planes

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Rodgers

Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via beeper to provide information about an upcoming flight.

Beeper
N/A

Upcoming flight information

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Rodgers

Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness (Rodgers) via beeper to convey information about upcoming flights on Mr. Epstein's planes.

Beeper
N/A

A booklet/checklist

From: Alessi
To: Ms. Maxwell

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.

Conversation
N/A

Travel arrangement for Jane

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Unknown

The document mentions an incident where 'allegedly Ms. Maxwell got on the phone and somehow arranged for Jane to get back to Palm Beach'.

Phone call
N/A

CorrLinks emails

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Unknown

Ms. Maxwell's CorrLinks emails were allegedly erased by guards.

Email
N/A

Non-legal personal matters

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Unknown

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).

Phone call
N/A

Legal consultation

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Counsel

Guards are described as feverishly writing while observing Ms. Maxwell during videoconferencing with her counsel.

Videoconference
N/A

Performance of duties at the residence

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

Ms. Maxwell provided instructions to Alessi regarding his duties at the residence, which involved tasks in various rooms and areas of the property.

Verbal instructions
N/A

Legal matters

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Legal Counsel

The document alleges that all of Ms. Maxwell's legal emails were erased from the CorrLinks system.

Email
N/A

Household duties

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

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.

Verbal instructions
N/A

Detention conditions

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: ["unit counselor (BP8)...

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.

Written complaints
N/A

Needing something

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Rodgers

Early on, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness by beeper if she needed something.

Beeper
N/A

Something that happened between her move from a large apa...

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

The document references prior conversations between the witness (Rodgers) and Ms. Maxwell, which are the basis for a question from the attorney.

Conversation
N/A

Something that happened between her move from a large apa...

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

The document references prior conversations between the witness (Rodgers) and Ms. Maxwell, which are the basis for a question from the attorney.

Conversation
N/A

Request to stay unseal proceedings

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Judge Preska

Ms. Maxwell asked Judge Preska to stay the unseal proceedings to allow her to get permission to share confidential information from a criminal case.

Legal request
N/A

Request for permission to share information

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Judge Nathan

Ms. Maxwell asked Judge Nathan for permission to share information under seal with Judge Preska.

Legal request
N/A

Denial of request

From: Judge Nathan
To: Ms. Maxwell

Judge Nathan denied Ms. Maxwell's request to share information with Judge Preska.

Legal ruling
N/A

Denial of stay

From: Judge Preska
To: Ms. Maxwell

Judge Preska denied Ms. Maxwell's request for a stay, stating there was no factual basis.

Legal ruling
N/A

Events in Ms. Maxwell's life, including her father's deat...

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Rodgers

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.

Conversation
N/A

Setting up massage appointments

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: CAROLYN

Carolyn testified that Ms. Maxwell would call her to arrange massage appointments, which was considered important evidence for sex trafficking charges.

Phone call
N/A

Upcoming flight on one of Mr. Epstein's planes

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Rodgers

After beepers were no longer used, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via cell phone to provide information about an upcoming flight.

Cell phone
N/A

Upcoming flight information

From: Ms. Maxwell
To: Rodgers

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.

Cell phone
N/A

CorrLinks emails

From: Unknown
To: Ms. Maxwell

Receipt of CorrLinks emails was significantly delayed and the emails were prematurely deleted by the MDC.

Email
N/A

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity