Ms. Maxwell
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
15
Very Strong
|
68 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Business associate |
15
Very Strong
|
20 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Business associate |
13
Very Strong
|
23 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Client |
13
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
35 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Business associate |
12
Very Strong
|
17 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Client |
12
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
person
Juror No. 50
|
Juror defendant |
12
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Adversarial |
12
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
Bobbi C. Sternheim
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
Judge Nathan
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Alleged perpetrator victim |
11
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Co conspirators |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
55 | |
|
person
Judge Preska
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Defendant victim |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Mr. Everdell
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Financial |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
GOVERNMENT
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Association |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Friend |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
Epstein
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Ms. Maxwell's Sentencing Proceeding | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Charge/Instructions regarding circumstantial evidence and inferences. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Selection (Voir Dire) | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Detention Hearing Decision | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Narrator arrives at Jeffrey's, goes to massage room where Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell are waiting... | Jeffrey's residence, massag... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Request by Daily News to unseal documents related to Ms. Maxwell's new trial effort. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Took Minor Victim-2 to a movie | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing hearing regarding fines, restitution, and guideline calculations. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Period when alleged events took place (described as 'over 25 years ago') | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding sentencing enhancements for Ghislaine Maxwell. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Alleged massages of Epstein by Accuser-3 | England | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness duties regarding household preparation | Epstein Residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | Flight to New Mexico | New Mexico | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding upcoming sentencing and review of the presentence report. | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Last bail hearing where the Court expressed concern about lack of ties. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony of Mr. Alessi regarding Ms. Maxwell's use of the telephone directory. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Ms. Maxwell's forthcoming motion before Judge Nathan. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Charge/Instructions regarding Count Four | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Ms. Maxwell visited Mar-a-Lago for potential treatment. | Mar-a-Lago | View |
| N/A | N/A | Acts alleged in Count Four of the Indictment (Transportation of a Minor to Engage in Illegal Sexu... | Not specified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Criminal Trial | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Transportation of Jane in interstate or foreign commerce. | Interstate/International | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sighting of Virginia Roberts | Mar-a-Lago | View |
| N/A | N/A | Spa Check | Mar-a-Lago (Spa) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Three bail renewal hearings | Court | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001883.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on December 10, 2020. It records a dialogue between defense attorney Mr. Cohen, the Judge ('The Court'), and the defendant, Ms. Maxwell. The discussion concerns Maxwell waiving her right to be physically present for the proceeding and agreeing to proceed via videoconference, with the judge confirming the waiver is knowing and voluntary.
DOJ-OGR-00001880.jpg
This document is a court transcript from December 10, 2020, for case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. The judge begins by confirming that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, and counsel, Mr. Cohen, have a working audio connection. Another individual, Ms. Moe, interrupts to report that the public call-in line is full and proposes an alternative for her colleagues to listen, which the court questions due to concerns about speakerphone feedback.
DOJ-OGR-00001875.jpg
This document is the final page of a legal letter dated December 7, 2020, from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim. The letter requests the immediate elimination of 'onerous' and 'restrictive' detention conditions for her client, Ms. Maxwell. Copies of the letter were sent via email to four other attorneys involved in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00001873.jpg
This legal document, filed on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, details her alleged mistreatment while in custody at the MDC. The filing outlines several issues, including invasive physical searches that increase her COVID-19 risk, severe deprivation of adequate and nutritious food leading to significant weight loss and health problems, and sleep deprivation due to constant checks with flashlights. These conditions are presented as negatively impacting her health and her ability to prepare for her legal defense.
DOJ-OGR-00001867.jpg
This legal document, filed by the law office of Bobbi C. Sternheim on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, argues against the restrictive conditions of her confinement at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The filing contends that these measures, including constant surveillance and repeated searches, are an overreaction to the BOP's failure to prevent Jeffrey Epstein's death, rather than being based on any specific risk posed by Maxwell. The document also raises concerns about Ms. Maxwell's exposure to COVID-19 and the erasure of her legal emails, quoting then-Attorney General William Barr's stated interest in ensuring she makes it to trial.
DOJ-OGR-00001864.jpg
This legal document, dated November 25, 2020, is a letter to Judge Alison J. Nathan arguing for the sealing of information related to Ms. Maxwell's bail application. The author contends that the privacy of Ms. Maxwell's sureties (co-signers) and other third parties outweighs the public's right to access, citing fears of harassment and legal precedent from cases like U.S. v. Amodeo and U.S. v. Nejad. The filing requests an in-camera conference to discuss the redaction of the sureties' names and other confidential materials.
DOJ-OGR-00001863.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated November 25, 2020, arguing for the sealing of certain court documents. The filing cites extreme harassment and violent threats against Ms. Maxwell on social media as a reason to protect the identities of sureties. It also mentions a confidential financial report on Ms. Maxwell prepared by Macalvins Limited and discusses legal precedents regarding the presumption of public access to court records.
DOJ-OGR-00001860.jpg
This legal document, filed by BOP Staff Attorneys from MDC Brooklyn, addresses concerns regarding the confinement conditions of inmate Ms. Maxwell. It details her compliance with search procedures, meal schedules, health status (including weight and COVID-19 safety), and access to social and legal communications.
DOJ-OGR-00001856.jpg
This legal document is a letter to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated November 30, 2020, arguing for the redaction of the identities of individuals supporting Ms. Maxwell's bail application. The letter contends that public disclosure would violate their privacy and expose them to significant personal and physical danger, citing stalking by the tabloid press, physical threats, and the intense public opprobrium surrounding the case. It references legal precedent from United States v. Amodeo to support the court's power to protect innocent third parties from public scandal.
DOJ-OGR-00001845.jpg
This court order, dated December 2, 2020, addresses the individualized detention conditions of Ms. Maxwell, noting concerns about the lack of redress for serious conditions. It directs Warden Tellez to provide a first-hand accounting to the Court and counsel regarding these conditions. Additionally, MDC legal counsel is ordered to submit a letter to the Court by December 4, 2020, for review to determine if further information is needed.
DOJ-OGR-00001808.jpg
This legal document, dated October 23, 2020, is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell arguing that the U.S. Government is improperly withholding critical information. The defense claims the government has not provided details about Jeffrey Epstein's 2007 Non-Prosecution Agreement or meetings held in 2016 to investigate Maxwell. The filing accuses the government of contradicting its earlier court assurances by now disclaiming responsibility for investigative files from Florida that were transferred to the New York F.B.I. office.
DOJ-OGR-00001799.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated October 14, 2020, from attorney Christian R. Everdell to Judge Alison J. Nathan. Everdell argues against the government's request to delay the disclosure of evidence to his client, Ms. Maxwell, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. He asserts the government has not provided sufficient legal justification, such as risks to an ongoing investigation or witness safety, and asks the court to order the immediate production of the materials to the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00001768.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated August 24, 2020, from Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan. Pagliuca argues on behalf of his client, Ms. Maxwell, for a limited request to present sealed materials to other judicial officers, asserting that the materials are judicial documents and that disclosure would not compromise grand jury secrecy. The letter contends that the government has failed to provide a sufficient reason to prevent this limited disclosure.
DOJ-OGR-00001766.jpg
This legal document, dated August 24, 2020, is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The filing argues against the government's opposition to sharing sealed materials with two arbiters, dismissing the government's concerns about dissemination as 'hyperbole'. It also criticizes a government suggestion for unsealing materials in other courts as 'baffling' and improper, citing American Bar Association standards against ex parte communications.
DOJ-OGR-00001759.jpg
This document is the final page of a letter motion dated August 17, 2020, from Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The motion, filed on September 2, 2020, formally requests on behalf of Ms. Maxwell that the court modify an existing Protective Order. The modification would permit Ms. Maxwell to refer to and file specific, redacted material under seal.
DOJ-OGR-00001758.jpg
This legal document, dated August 17, 2020, is a filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan on behalf of Ms. Maxwell. It argues for the court's discretion in handling certain materials, citing legal precedent from the Second Circuit for staying civil proceedings during a related criminal case to protect Fifth Amendment rights. The filing also discusses the proper jurisdiction for interpreting a protective order from a separate civil case, suggesting the government has previously agreed that the civil court, not this criminal court, is the appropriate forum.
DOJ-OGR-00001757.jpg
This is page 6 of a legal document dated August 17, 2020, filed in a case before Judge Alison J. Nathan. The filing argues on behalf of Ms. Maxwell for the modification of a Protective Order, claiming that secrecy surrounding a government investigation and grand jury subpoena has undermined the fairness of the adversarial process and unfairly disadvantaged her.
DOJ-OGR-00001756.jpg
This legal document is page 5 of a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated August 17, 2020. The filing argues that the government has violated the spirit of a Protective Order by its handling of discovery materials, particularly in relation to their potential use in civil litigation and a grand jury investigation. The defense cites previous assurances from the government and a letter from Alex Rossmiller, which the Court relied upon, to argue that a new request should be granted by the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00001754.jpg
Page 3 of a legal letter addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated August 17, 2020, filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The majority of the page is heavily redacted. The visible text under the heading 'The Material' discusses the government contacting an unnamed party prior to February 2019 and serving a subpoena to produce materials, noting that Ms. Maxwell was not served with something specific.
DOJ-OGR-00001753.jpg
This is page 2 of a legal filing from August 17, 2020, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The document concerns a dispute over materials designated as 'Confidential' by the government, arguing that under Second Circuit precedent, they are 'judicial documents' with a right to public access. It states that Ms. Maxwell has objected to the designation and seeks to provide the materials under seal to judicial officers to resolve pending issues.
DOJ-OGR-00001746.jpg
This is the final page (4 of 4) of a court order from United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The judge denied the defendant's requests (Dkt. No. 38) without prejudice and ordered the Government to submit status updates every 90 days regarding Maxwell's confinement conditions, specifically focusing on her ability to access legal materials and communicate with counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00001745.jpg
This is page 3 of a court order (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 25, 2020, concerning Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court denies Maxwell's request for an order against the BOP regarding her surveillance and confinement conditions, citing security concerns and deference to prison administrators. However, the Court orders the Government to provide written status updates every 90 days regarding any changes to her conditions to ensure she can participate in her defense.
DOJ-OGR-00001744.jpg
This document is page 2 of a court order filed on August 25, 2020, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Court addresses the Defendant's request regarding pretrial disclosure schedules (denied without prejudice) and conditions of confinement. Specifically, the Court denies Maxwell's request for a court order mandating her release to the general population and specific discovery access, noting that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has already modified conditions to allow her 13 hours of access to discovery materials daily.
DOJ-OGR-00001725.jpg
This legal document, dated August 17, 2020, is a filing from Ms. Maxwell's defense team to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The defense argues for court intervention regarding Ms. Maxwell's conditions of confinement under the BOP and requests an order compelling the government to disclose the identities of three core alleged victims. The defense contends that withholding these identities until just before trial is prejudicial and prevents them from adequately preparing a defense for alleged conduct that occurred 25 years ago.
DOJ-OGR-00001710.jpg
This document is the final page of a legal motion filed on August 10, 2020, by attorney Christian R. Everdell on behalf of his client, Ms. Maxwell. The motion requests that the court, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan, grant Maxwell's request to be released into the general population of the MDC and be given increased computer access to review discovery materials for her defense.
| 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 |
Setting up massage appointments
Carolyn testified that Ms. Maxwell would call her to arrange massage appointments, which was considered important evidence for sex trafficking charges.
Legal matters
The document alleges that all of Ms. Maxwell's legal emails were erased from the CorrLinks system.
Denial of request
Judge Nathan denied Ms. Maxwell's request to share information with Judge Preska.
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.
Denial of stay
Judge Preska denied Ms. Maxwell's request for a stay, stating there was no factual basis.
Request for permission to share information
Ms. Maxwell asked Judge Nathan for permission to share information under seal with Judge Preska.
Legal Emails
Legal emails prematurely deleted by MDC in violation of policy.
Video conference
Monitor repositioned further away, impacting document review.
Upcoming flight on one of Mr. Epstein's planes
Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via beeper to provide information about an upcoming flight.
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.
Video conference
Session reduced by 90 minutes; severe audio/video technical issues impacting confidentiality and visibility.
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 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.
Discovery Disc
Federal Express envelope containing an unreadable discovery disc, delayed by two weeks.
CorrLinks emails
Ms. Maxwell's CorrLinks emails were allegedly erased by guards.
Non-legal personal matters
Her non-legal phone calls are monitored in real time, and information from them was used by staff to confront her about a personal matter (the death of someone close to her).
Legal consultation
Guards are described as feverishly writing while observing Ms. Maxwell during videoconferencing with her counsel.
Performance of duties at the residence
Ms. Maxwell provided instructions to Alessi regarding his duties at the residence, which involved tasks in various rooms and areas of the property.
Upcoming flight on one of Mr. Epstein's planes
After beepers were no longer used, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness via cell phone to provide information about an upcoming flight.
Household duties
Ms. Maxwell gave the witness, Juan, many instructions on how to perform his duties, including cleaning the house, serving, managing the kitchen, preparing shopping lists, and maintaining cleanliness.
Detention conditions
Ms. Maxwell filed written complaints through internal prison procedures to her unit counselor, the warden, and the regional office to seek remediation for her conditions, but to no avail.
In-person legal conference
Four-hour legal conference marked by restrictions on water, earbuds, and privacy.
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.
Needing something
Early on, Ms. Maxwell would contact the witness by beeper if she needed something.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity