Ms. Maxwell
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Lawyers
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Annie Farmer
|
Adversarial defendant accuser |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Alleged co conspirators |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Kate
|
Adversarial defendant accuser |
6
|
1 | |
|
location
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Identity |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Adversarial defendant accuser |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Adversarial defendant accuser |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Balde
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jane
|
Perpetrator victim |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
potential witnesses
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Martin
|
Indirect |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Annie
|
Accused alleged victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Farmer
|
Accused accuser |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
friends and family
|
Friend |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Criminal conspiracy alleged |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Accomplices |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
sureties
|
Financial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed Judge
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Virginia Roberts
|
Hierarchical professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
attorneys
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Juan
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Juror 50
|
Adversarial |
5
|
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 |
DOJ-OGR-00008724.jpg
This legal document, filed on December 19, 2021, contains jury instructions for a criminal trial involving Ms. Maxwell. Specifically, Instruction No. 11 directs the jury on how to handle the six-count indictment, mandating that they consider each count independently and return a separate verdict for each. It reinforces the legal standard that a guilty verdict can only be reached if the Government proves every element of a specific charge beyond a reasonable doubt.
DOJ-OGR-00008720.jpg
This document is Page 14 of a court filing (Document 565) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 19, 2021. It contains 'Instruction No. 8: Reasonable Doubt' for the trial of Ms. Maxwell (Ghislaine Maxwell). The text defines reasonable doubt for the jury, explaining that it is not sympathy or speculation, and instructs them on their duty to convict if guilt is established beyond reasonable doubt, or to acquit if it is not.
DOJ-OGR-00008717.jpg
This document is page 11 of 83 from a court filing dated December 19, 2021, containing Jury Instruction No. 5 regarding 'Improper Considerations.' The instruction explicitly directs the jury to ignore biases related to race, gender, sexual orientation, or the nature of the crimes charged when deciding the verdict for Ms. Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00008700.jpg
This document is a page of concluding remarks from a judge to a jury, filed on December 18, 2021, in the criminal case against Ms. Maxwell. The judge instructs the jurors on their duty to deliberate based solely on the evidence and law, to determine if the Government has met its burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and to avoid being swayed by sympathy. The instructions also guide the jurors on how to interact during deliberations, encouraging open discussion while also urging them to hold fast to their own conscientious beliefs.
DOJ-OGR-00008689.jpg
This legal document is a jury instruction, numbered 49, from a court case filed on December 18, 2021. It explicitly informs the jury about the defendant's constitutional right not to testify. The instruction directs the jury that they must not draw any negative or adverse inference from Ms. Maxwell's decision not to take the witness stand, as the burden of proof rests solely with the Government.
DOJ-OGR-00008688.jpg
This legal document is a jury instruction, specifically "Instruction No. 48," from the trial of Ms. Maxwell, filed on December 18, 2021. It directs the jury on the proper use of "similar act evidence" introduced by the Government, stating it cannot be used to prove bad character or a propensity to commit crimes. The instruction clarifies that this evidence may only be considered for the limited purpose of determining if Ms. Maxwell acted knowingly, intentionally, or as part of a common scheme or plan.
DOJ-OGR-00008681.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing, specifically jury instructions in the case against Ms. Maxwell, dated December 18, 2021. The judge instructs the jury that they cannot infer Ms. Maxwell's guilt simply from her association with or knowledge of other guilty parties. The jury is reminded that they must be satisfied of her guilt on each individual count based on the evidence presented before they can convict.
DOJ-OGR-00008680.jpg
This document is a jury instruction, specifically Instruction No. 43, from a legal case filed on December 18, 2021. It defines the concept of an "inference" for the jury, explaining it as a logical conclusion based on facts, not guesswork. The instruction clarifies that while both the Government and the defense will ask the jury to draw different inferences, it is solely the jury's decision, and it specifically prohibits the jury from inferring Ms. Maxwell's guilt based merely on her presence at and knowledge of a crime being committed.
DOJ-OGR-00008679.jpg
This document is Jury Instruction No. 42 from a legal case, filed on December 18, 2021. It explains the definitions of direct and circumstantial evidence to the jury, stating that both types of evidence hold equal legal value. The instruction concludes by reminding the jury that they must be convinced of Ms. Maxwell's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt based on all evidence before reaching a conviction.
DOJ-OGR-00008672.jpg
This document is page 51 (electronic page 134) of jury instructions filed on December 18, 2021, in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The text instructs the jury that to convict Maxwell on Counts One and Three, they must find that an overt act of conspiracy involved a witness other than 'Kate,' meaning Kate's testimony alone is insufficient for these specific counts.
DOJ-OGR-00008671.jpg
This legal document, part of an indictment, outlines several overt acts allegedly committed by Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein in furtherance of a conspiracy. The acts include the recruitment and sexual exploitation of a minor named Carolyn between 2001 and 2004, involving payments, encouragement to recruit others, and arranging appointments. The document also mentions a separate 1996 incident involving another victim, Annie, and clarifies the legal standard for proving an overt act in a conspiracy case.
DOJ-OGR-00008668.jpg
This legal document, likely a page of jury instructions from a court filing dated December 18, 2021, outlines the legal standards for finding Ms. Maxwell guilty of participating in a conspiracy. It clarifies that the government does not need to prove she knew all the details or participants of the conspiracy, nor that she was involved from its inception. The document states that she can be held responsible for all acts of the conspiracy during its existence if she knowingly joined at any point, and that even a single act or a limited role could be sufficient to establish her membership.
DOJ-OGR-00008667.jpg
This document is a jury instruction (No. 35) from a federal criminal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 18, 2021. It explains the second element of a conspiracy charge: 'Membership in the Conspiracy.' The instruction defines the terms 'willfully' and 'knowingly' for the jury, clarifying that the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, deliberately and consciously joined a conspiracy to further its unlawful goals, rather than through mistake or negligence.
DOJ-OGR-00008666.jpg
This document is a page from court filings (specifically jury instructions or transcript) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 18, 2021. The text outlines the legal standard for proving the objective of the conspiracy charged in Count Five, specifically regarding sex trafficking of minors. It instructs that if Maxwell agreed with another person to commit these acts beyond a reasonable doubt, the objective is proved.
DOJ-OGR-00008665.jpg
This document represents page 127 (labeled 44 internally) of a court filing in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines Instruction No. 34 regarding the objects of the conspiracy for Counts One, Three, and Five. Count One alleges conspiracy to entice minors (1994-2004), Count Three alleges conspiracy to transport minors (1994-2004), and Count Five begins to describe conspiracy to commit sex trafficking (2001-2004).
DOJ-OGR-00008659.jpg
This is a page from a legal document, likely jury instructions, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 18, 2021. The text defines the legal standard for 'aiding and abetting,' explaining that for the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, to be found guilty, the Government must prove she knowingly and willfully participated in a crime to help it succeed, not merely that she was present or aware of it.
DOJ-OGR-00008658.jpg
This document is a jury instruction (Instruction No. 30) from a federal criminal case, filed on December 18, 2021. It explains the legal concept of "aiding and abetting" as it applies to Counts Two, Four, and Six against the defendant, Ms. Maxwell. The instruction clarifies that the jury can find her guilty if she knowingly assisted another person in committing the crimes, even if she did not physically commit the acts herself.
DOJ-OGR-00008655.jpg
This legal document is a jury instruction (Instruction No. 27) from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 18, 2021. It specifies the second element of Count Six, 'Sex Trafficking of an Individual Under the Age of 18,' requiring the Government to prove that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, knew the victim, Carolyn, was under eighteen years old.
DOJ-OGR-00002707.jpg
This document is page 14 of a defense filing (Document 148) in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated February 4, 2021. The defense argues that the government is using a specific diary as 'contemporaneous documentary corroboration' against Maxwell to oppose bail, yet refuses to provide the full diary or the author's name to the defense. The filing requests the Court order the government to either produce the complete diary or identify the author so the defense can issue a subpoena before trial.
DOJ-OGR-00002699.jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated February 4, 2021, filed by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense. The defense argues that despite receiving millions of pages of discovery in November 2020, there is almost no information regarding the specific allegations from the 1994-1997 indictment period. Consequently, the defense requests a 'bill of particulars,' early access to the government's witness list (Jencks Act material), and 404(b) evidence to adequately prepare for trial given the 25-year age of the case and COVID-19 delays.
DOJ-OGR-00020357.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim, details the allegedly abusive and overly restrictive detention conditions of Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. It claims she is subjected to constant, invasive surveillance, has been physically abused by guards, had property damaged, and had private information leaked to the press. The filing argues that these conditions are unwarranted and that her monitored communications with family demonstrate strong ties to the U.S., contradicting claims that she is a flight risk.
DOJ-OGR-00017491.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski, filed on August 10, 2022. The testimony establishes that Ghislaine Maxwell had a significant managerial and supervisory role over household staff, including the house manager, and was the primary person responsible for resolving problems. The witness also confirms Maxwell's role in overseeing repairs, renovations, decorating, and acting as a shopper for Epstein's residences.
DOJ-OGR-00017450.jpg
This page is a transcript from the cross-examination of a pilot named Visoski during the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The testimony establishes that Visoski flew Jeffrey Epstein multiple times to Columbus, Ohio, the home of billionaire Les Wexner. The witness confirms Wexner's ownership of The Limited (parent company of Victoria's Secret and Abercrombie & Fitch) and states that Epstein considered Wexner both a friend and a client.
DOJ-OGR-00014523.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript where a lawyer, Ms. Menninger, is delivering a summation. She attempts to discredit a witness named Kate by highlighting inconsistencies in her background and motives, such as her immediate application to the Epstein Victims' Compensation Fund. Menninger also reminds the jury of the judge's instruction not to convict Ms. Maxwell based on Kate's testimony about non-illegal sexual conduct with Mr. Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00014514.jpg
This document is a transcript of a legal summation by Ms. Menninger, likely for the defense. The speaker attempts to discredit two individuals: an unnamed woman by questioning her claims of secret flights and a $5 million payment from the government, and Annie Farmer by highlighting a court instruction that her alleged encounter with Epstein and Maxwell was not illegal as charged, and by noting that she was introduced to Epstein by her sister, Maria, who worked for him.
| 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 |
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'.
Sniper threat
A high-ranking prison guard told Ms. Maxwell that there was concern she would be shot by a sniper.
Upcoming flight information
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness (Rodgers) via beeper to convey information about upcoming flights on Mr. Epstein's planes.
Upcoming flight on one of Mr. Epstein's planes
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via beeper to provide information about an upcoming flight.
Legal and non-legal mail
Delivery of her mail was significantly delayed.
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.
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 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.
Needing something
Early on, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness by beeper if she needed something.
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.
CorrLinks emails
Ms. Maxwell's CorrLinks emails were allegedly erased by guards.
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.
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.
Legal matters
The document alleges that all of Ms. Maxwell's legal emails were erased from the CorrLinks system.
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