THE COURT
PersonRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00018120.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a trial on August 10, 2022, identified as Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. An attorney, Ms. Comey, informs the judge that the witness order for the day has been changed due to travel issues, with the new sequence being Parkinson, Dawson, Maguire, Meder, and Flatley. The parties also discuss that witness Shelling's testimony has been stipulated to and that witness Maguire will likely testify after lunch.
DOJ-OGR-00018119.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a procedural discussion between the judge and counsel. The parties discuss how to present sensitive video evidence, containing nude images of a minor, to the jury while protecting the third party's privacy by using only the jurors' screens. The transcript concludes with counsel confirming the order of the next three witnesses: Parkinson (whose testimony is finished), Mr. Dawson, and Kelly Maguire.
DOJ-OGR-00018118.jpg
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a dialogue between attorneys and the judge regarding the admissibility of testimony about massages given by Jeffrey Epstein, with the judge ultimately sustaining an objection due to the timeframe. The transcript also details a logistical discussion about submitting a sensitive video under seal that contains images of witnesses testifying under pseudonyms.
DOJ-OGR-00018116.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecution (Ms. Comey) and defense (Mr. Everdell) argue over the admissibility and context of photos found on a bookshelf, which include images of 'Jane' and nude females. There is a specific dispute over Jane's age at the time (15 vs 19), after which the discussion shifts to the introduction of evidence (video, photos) through a witness named Mr. Parkinson.
DOJ-OGR-00018112.jpg
This document is page 11 of a court transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Comey argues for the admission of a photograph (Exhibit 250) found in the 'lake room' of Epstein's home, which depicts Epstein with a young girl across his lap, appearing to pull down her underwear. The prosecution argues this is probative because it was prominently displayed in the house that Maxwell 'ran' as the 'lady of the house,' while Defense attorney Mr. Everdell objects, calling it prejudicial and an attempt to backdoor evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00018111.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues against the admissibility or weight of photographs taken during a 2005 walk-through of an Epstein residence, noting that witness Juan Alessi left in 2002 and witness 'Jane' only gave general descriptions of art, not specific identifications of the photos in question. The defense contends there is no testimony placing specific photos on the wall during the time relevant to the case.
DOJ-OGR-00018110.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument about the admissibility of video evidence. An attorney, Ms. Comey, argues that a video showing a photograph in the context of a master bedroom shared by the defendant and Jeffrey Epstein should be admitted. The Court overrules an objection, agreeing that the video's context makes it different from the photograph in isolation and that it corroborates other testimony.
DOJ-OGR-00018108.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing an argument by Ms. Comey to the Court. Ms. Comey asserts that a 'disturbing photograph' displayed outside Jeffrey Epstein's master bedroom contradicts the defense's claim that the defendant was unaware of Epstein's attraction to underage girls. The defense's argument, as described by Comey, relies on a 'halo effect' from Epstein's association with prominent people, which she argues the photograph directly refutes by serving as evidence of Epstein's lifestyle.
DOJ-OGR-00018106.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, in which an attorney, Mr. Everdell, argues for the exclusion of a portion of a video walk-through (Exhibit 296). The basis for the argument is that the video shows a photograph on a wall that the judge has already ruled inadmissible as a separate exhibit (Exhibit 288). The dialogue serves to clarify the distinction between multiple pieces of related evidence for the court record.
DOJ-OGR-00018105.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument over the admissibility of evidence. An attorney, Ms. Comey, contends that a 40-minute walk-through video (Gov. Exhibit 296) is relevant because it shows a previously excluded photograph (Gov. Exhibit 270) prominently displayed outside a master bedroom shared by the defendant and Mr. Epstein. The defense expresses concern that such evidence would be prejudicial to the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00018099.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing the end of testimony from a witness, Mr. Alessi. Alessi testifies that he never saw Mr. Epstein again after an unspecified incident. Following this, the attorneys and the judge agree to adjourn for the day, with the court scheduled to resume at 9:30 the next morning.
DOJ-OGR-00018098.jpg
A court transcript page from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) featuring the direct examination of witness John Alessi. Alessi testifies that following an incident involving a picture, he reached an agreement with Jeffrey Epstein where Epstein would not press criminal charges but would instead treat the incident as a loan. Alessi confirms he repaid Epstein $6,300 via money order and was interviewed by the police at Epstein's request.
DOJ-OGR-00018097.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Alessi. Alessi testifies about being contacted by Mr. Epstein, meeting with him, and being confronted by Epstein about stealing money. The confrontation involved Epstein showing Alessi a small picture of his face that appeared inside a house.
DOJ-OGR-00018089.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Alessi. Alessi testifies about their duties cleaning Mr. Epstein's massage room and explicitly mentions finding a 'large dildo' during the years 1995 through 1998. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca objects during the questioning to request specific time frames.
DOJ-OGR-00018088.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness named Mr. Alessi. He is being questioned by an attorney, Ms. Comey, about his experiences cleaning up after Mr. Epstein's massages between 1994 and 2002. Alessi states that he did not clean up towels after every massage, explaining that repeat massage therapists would bring the towels to the laundry room themselves, unlike new ones.
DOJ-OGR-00018085.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, from the case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a dialogue between an attorney, Ms. Comey, the Court, and another attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, regarding the admission of evidence. The Court admits exhibit 2A unsealed and exhibits 2C through 2W under seal to protect the identities of witnesses and third parties, a measure to which Mr. Pagliuca has no objection.
DOJ-OGR-00018084.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, covering the direct examination of a witness named Alessi. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca objects to the admission of exhibits 2C through 2W, arguing they were not written by Mr. Alessi or his wife and lack authentication. The Court (Judge) asks to see 'the book' containing the exhibits and subsequently overrules the objection.
DOJ-OGR-00018081.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring a voir dire examination of witness Mr. Alessi. Prosecutor Ms. Comey attempts to introduce Government Exhibits 2A through 2W, requesting most be filed under seal. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca questions Mr. Alessi to establish that he left his position at the end of 2002 and therefore would not have taken messages or had personal knowledge of events occurring after that date.
DOJ-OGR-00018078.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Alessi by Ms. Comey regarding 'Government Exhibit 2,' which is identified as a booklet containing carbon copies of messages. Alessi identifies his own handwriting and his wife's handwriting on specific pages of the booklet.
DOJ-OGR-00018077.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Alessi, likely Juan Alessi. The testimony details the procedure for handling incoming phone calls for Mr. Epstein; specifically, if Epstein was unavailable, Alessi, his wife, or a staff member named Taylor would record the caller's name and number in a message book. Alessi confirms that these message books, both new and old, were stored in a utility closet within his office located off the staff room. The page concludes with prosecutor Ms. Comey introducing Government Exhibit 2.
DOJ-OGR-00018076.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Alessi. The testimony details the protocol for taking phone messages for Jeffrey Epstein, specifically using a message book with carbon copies and placing the messages on his desk or kitchen table. The document also records a brief administrative interruption by the Court regarding the collection of exhibit '52'.
DOJ-OGR-00018073.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from a case involving 'Alessi - Direct.' It records a legal proceeding where Mr. Pagliuca questions Mr. Alessi, who testifies that he has no personal knowledge regarding whether Exhibit 52 was touched by Mr. Epstein or Ms. Maxwell. The Court makes rulings on objections and reserves on a matter pending additional testimony, with Ms. Comey also participating in the discussion.
DOJ-OGR-00018068.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca questions witness Mr. Alessi regarding 'Exhibit 52' (a book/directory), establishing that Alessi had not seen the object for 19 years since leaving Epstein's employment and could not account for its chain of custody during that time. The Judge also sustains an objection regarding the foundation of the evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00018067.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a legal argument by an attorney, Ms. Moe, regarding the authentication of an exhibit related to 'Maxwell and Epstein'. The Court sustains an objection made by Ms. Comey, instructs the jury to disregard certain testimony, and reserves its final decision on admitting the exhibit until after hearing from a witness referred to as 'employee one'.
DOJ-OGR-00018066.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022, during the direct examination of a witness named Alessi. The Court and counsel (Ms. Comey and Mr. Pagliuca) discuss the admissibility of testimony regarding an exhibit, specifically a 'book' (likely an address book) where the witness noted his and his wife's names were missing, leading him to believe it was a later version. The judge sustains a foundation objection and orders the jury to disregard the witness's belief about the book's version.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $750,000.00 | Total fine imposed. | View |
| N/A | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $250,000.00 | Fine imposed on each count. | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $9,500,000.00 | Value of real property offered as collateral. | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | security company | THE COURT | $1,000,000.00 | Bond co-signed by a security company. | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $550,000.00 | Cash offered as collateral. | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | THE COURT | $28,500,000.00 | Proposed total bond amount. | View |
| 2020-12-14 | Received | Sureties (Family/... | THE COURT | $0.00 | Meaningful pledges of cash or property in amoun... | View |
| 2020-07-13 | Received | Unidentified co-s... | THE COURT | $5,000,000.00 | Proposed bond amount by the defense, which the ... | View |
| 2020-07-10 | Received | Co-signers (Sibli... | THE COURT | $5,000,000.00 | Proposed bond amount to secure Maxwell's appear... | View |
| 2020-07-10 | Received | Defense/Co-signers | THE COURT | $3,750,000.00 | Value of real property in the United Kingdom of... | View |
| 2020-07-10 | Received | Co-signers (Sibli... | THE COURT | $5,000,000.00 | Proposed bond amount to secure appearance. | View |
| 2020-07-10 | Received | Ms. Maxwell / Ass... | THE COURT | $3,750,000.00 | Value of real property in the United Kingdom us... | View |
| 2020-01-01 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $22,500,000.00 | Proposed bond amount representing all of the co... | View |
| 2019-07-18 | Received | MR. EPSTEIN | THE COURT | $0.00 | Defense offer to put up 'any amount' of collate... | View |
| 2019-07-11 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | THE COURT | $77,000,000.00 | Valuation of Manhattan residence to be mortgage... | View |
| 2010-07-01 | Received | Epstein's counsel | THE COURT | $5,000.00 | Proposed sanction fine for discovery violations. | View |
Support for David
A letter cited to show David understands that sports can teach valuable life lessons.
Support for David
A letter cited as an example of David supporting friends in their time of need, specifically during the author's pregnancy.
Ambiguous question regarding flights and sexual activity.
A note from the jury during trial that is described as 'entirely ambiguous'. The defendant argues it refers to a specific flight, but the document contends it is unclear which flight, where the sexual activity was to occur, or what question was being posed.
Adjournment of court
The judge asks counsel if there are any further matters to discuss. Both counsel respond in the negative. The judge then adjourns the court until the following day.
Scheduling of charging conference and conclusion of defen...
A verbal discussion in court between the judge and counsel for the government (Ms. Moe) and another party (Mr. Everdell) regarding the scheduling of a charging conference and estimating when the defense will rest its case.
Prohibition on Case Discussion and Media Consumption
Question 17 instructs the prospective juror to avoid all media coverage, internet searches, and discussions about the case with anyone (including family, friends, and colleagues) outside of the courtroom until their jury service is complete.
Evidence in a hearing
An affidavit from Susan Brune was put forth as evidence at a hearing.
No Subject
A note from Juror No. 1 was received, which caused Theresa Trzskoma to have doubts and start an investigation.
Ready to leave at 5:30
The judge acknowledges receiving a note from the jury stating they were ready to leave for the day at 5:30.
Adjournment of court proceedings
The document transcribes the final moments of a court session where the judge adjourns the hearing until the following morning, December 22, 2021.
Protective Order
The document references 'the Government's letter notes, see Dkt. No. 33 at 4,' which outlines the Government's position on the protective order.
Objection to recapitulation of charges
The Defendant objects to the detailed summary of the six counts, arguing it places unfair emphasis on the charges and requests that if summarized, each count be followed by a statement of Ms. Maxwell's denial and presumption of innocence.
Objection to 'Legal Principles' questions
The Government objects to the questions proposed by the defendant in the 'Legal Principles' section, claiming they are overly broad, argumentative, vague, confusing, and redundant.
Response to Government objections
The defense incorporates by reference their previous responses and objections to the Government's proposed Introduction and Charges section.
Confidentiality for Ms. Conrad's testimony
A letter submitted by Ms. Sternheim regarding Ms. Conrad's confidentiality, medical conditions, disciplinary proceedings, and intention to assert her Fifth Amendment right.
Ms. Maxwell's finances
A report by The Macalvins is mentioned as giving the Court a clear picture of Ms. Maxwell's finances.
Ms. Maxwell's finances
A redacted report is mentioned alongside the Macalvins' report as providing a clear picture of Ms. Maxwell's finances.
Unspecified question regarding the charge
A note from the jury that prompted legal arguments between the defense and the Court about proper jury instructions. The defendant argues the note shows the jury was mistaken about an element of the charge.
Basis for conviction on Count Four
Mr. Everdell refers to a note from the jury which he believes indicates they are considering convicting Ms. Maxwell based solely on travel to and from New Mexico.
Adjournment of proceedings
The court asks if counsel has any further matters. Both Ms. Moe (for the government) and Ms. Sternheim state they do not. The court then adjourns the session until the following morning.
Summary of Ms. Maxwell's conditions
An unsworn letter to the court summarizing information passed from prison guards to a prison lawyer to the prosecutor.
Schedule for sentencing and resolution of the severed per...
A joint letter from the prosecution and defense to the court regarding scheduling, referenced as Dkt. No. 574.
Limiting disclosure of identifying information
The Government filed motions (Gov't Mot. at 4-9) arguing for the protection of minor victims' identities.
Basis for a guilty verdict
The jurors sent a note asking if a defendant could be found guilty solely for aiding and abetting the flight from New Mexico, separate from the flight to New Mexico.
Request for transcripts and schedule clarification
A note from the jury requesting transcripts for five individuals (Shawn, Cimberly Espinosa, an unreadable name, Amanda Young, and Jason Richards) and asking for clarification on the deliberation schedule around the dates 12/31 and 1/1.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity