THE COURT
PersonRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00011552.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, where attorneys debate whether Maxwell had a supervisory or leadership role over Sarah Kellen. One attorney argues against this, citing testimony from Larry Visoski and Cimberly Espinosa that Kellen was Epstein's assistant, not Maxwell's. In response, another attorney, Ms. Moe, references testimony from a witness named Carolyn who recalled Kellen scheduling massages while Maxwell was present at the Palm Beach residence, implying a connection.
DOJ-OGR-00011549.jpg
This court transcript excerpt from July 22, 2022, details an argument by a prosecutor, Ms. Moe, to the Court. Ms. Moe is establishing that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, held a leadership and supervisory role over Sarah Kellen within a criminal conspiracy, positioning Maxwell higher in the scheme's hierarchy than Kellen, who was an assistant to both Maxwell and Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00011547.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell sentencing) dated July 22, 2022. The defense argues that money transfers for a helicopter and Larry Visoski holding car assets for Epstein do not prove the defendant's continued involvement in the conspiracy. Prosecutor Ms. Moe counters that the financial evidence was offered to refute the claim that the defendant had 'moved on' from her association with Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00011546.jpg
This document is page 27 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on July 22, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues against a sentencing enhancement, disputing the reliability of a 'message pad' and arguing that the conspiracy effectively ended in 2004, meaning 2003 guidelines should apply. The defense also contests a government claim that the defendant received $7 million into the 2007 time period.
DOJ-OGR-00011545.jpg
This is page 26 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on July 22, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues that the conspiracy charge cannot extend to 2005 because the individual named Carolyn was no longer a minor at that time (her birthday being in early January). Everdell also challenges the reliability and admissibility of an undated 'message pad' used as evidence, arguing it cannot be properly authenticated or dated.
DOJ-OGR-00011544.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, detailing a discussion about the date of a specific message, believed to be from November 2004. An attorney, Ms. Moe, argues that surrounding dates on message pads, flight records, and the defendant's travel with Epstein during that time support this date. The testimony of a crime victim named Carolyn is also cited as evidence of an ongoing conspiracy, which the defendant has the burden to prove withdrawal from.
DOJ-OGR-00011543.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on July 22, 2022. It details a legal argument between Ms. Moe and the Court regarding the timeline of a conspiracy, specifically whether it extended into 2005. Ms. Moe cites 'message pads' and a specific November 2004 message from an individual named Carolyn contacting 'the house' for an appointment as evidence that the conspiracy was still live during that period.
DOJ-OGR-00011542.jpg
This court transcript excerpt details a legal argument between counsel (MS. MOE) and the judge (THE COURT) about the end date of a criminal conspiracy. MS. MOE argues the conspiracy continued through the end of 2004, citing testimony from a witness named Carolyn who stated she was continually at Epstein's house during 2004 and 2005. The Court questions this line of reasoning, suggesting the actions described may constitute 'non-conspiracy conduct'.
DOJ-OGR-00011541.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, capturing a dialogue between a judge (THE COURT) and a government attorney (MS. MOE). The discussion centers on the legal end date of a conspiracy, with the government arguing it extended through 2004 and into 2005. The judge expresses concern that the evidence cited by the government is 'post conspiracy' because it falls after the date in the indictment and, crucially, after a person named Carolyn turned 18, an event upon which the conspiracy's continuation was legally dependent.
DOJ-OGR-00011537.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a court hearing on July 22, 2022, discussing factual objections and the calculation of sentencing guidelines. The Court, Mr. Everdell, and Ms. Moe participate in the discussion, with the Court adopting PSR recitations and outlining the process for guideline calculation. The defense contends a guideline calculation of 51 to 63 months' imprisonment, while the government's contention is cut off.
DOJ-OGR-00011526.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a court hearing dated July 22, 2022, involving the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court overrules defense objections regarding factual assertions, specifically crediting testimony that Maxwell targeted Virginia Giuffre at Mar-a-Lago and confirming via bank statements that Epstein transferred approximately $23 million to Maxwell during their conspiracy. The Judge also confirms Maxwell's authorship of a specific essay based on computer metadata linking the file to user 'Ghislaine' and computer 'GMax'.
DOJ-OGR-00011523.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated July 22, 2022, involving Ms. Sternheim (defense) and Ms. Moe (government). The proceedings cover administrative confirmations of filings on ECF and a substantive discussion regarding the government's compliance with the 'Justice For All Act.' Specifically, Ms. Moe confirms that the government has notified six victims, proven at trial to be impacted, about the upcoming sentencing and their right to be heard.
DOJ-OGR-00002751.jpg
This document is Page 4 of a court filing (Document 165) in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on March 9, 2021. The text is the Government's argument opposing the defendant's third request for bail, citing her extreme flight risk, substantial foreign ties (including citizenship in a non-extradition country), and lack of candor regarding finances. The Government argues that the defendant's offer to renounce citizenship and place assets in monitorship is insufficient to assure her appearance in court.
| 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