THE COURT
PersonRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00017857.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. Besselsen regarding the verification of a camper's file and application photo from the institution 'Interlochen.' During the testimony, Government Exhibit 743 is admitted under seal to protect the identity of a student testifying under a pseudonym.
DOJ-OGR-00017855.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. It details the admission of Government Exhibit 741 (GX-741), an eight-page document, into evidence without objection. Following this, attorney Mr. Rohrbach questions witness Mr. Besselsen about record-keeping practices at Interlochen, specifically establishing that student files are kept in manila folders in a locked room in the Maddy Administration Building.
DOJ-OGR-00017850.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding on August 10, 2022. It records the conclusion of testimony from a witness named Matt, who is excused by the court. Immediately following, counsel for the government, Mr. Rohrbach, calls the next witness, Daniel Alan Besselsen, who is then sworn in to testify.
DOJ-OGR-00017849.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Matt regarding his past relationship with a victim referred to as 'Jane.' The testimony covers Jane's reaction to Ghislaine Maxwell's 2020 arrest, where Jane confirmed to Matt that Maxwell was the woman at Jeffrey Epstein's house who had made her feel comfortable. The witness also relays a conversation where Jane told her mother that money she received 'was not free.'
DOJ-OGR-00017848.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness named Matt. Matt recounts a conversation from 2011 where he witnessed a person named Jane confront her mother about money connected to Jeffrey Epstein. Jane accused her mother of knowing the money was not 'free' and questioned how her mother thought she had received it.
DOJ-OGR-00017846.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a sidebar on August 10, 2022. Attorneys Ms. Moe and Ms. Sternheim debate with the judge about the admissibility of a witness's testimony regarding a confrontation between 'Jane' and her mother, where Jane allegedly questioned her mother about money and implicitly acknowledged being abused. The discussion focuses on whether this testimony constitutes a prior consistent statement and its presence in the '3500 material'.
DOJ-OGR-00017845.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness named Matt. Matt describes his former girlfriend, Jane, and her 'brutal' relationship with her mother. He recounts witnessing an event around 2011 where Jane confronted her mother about Jeffrey Epstein, which prompts an objection from an attorney, Ms. Sternheim.
DOJ-OGR-00017844.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Matt. Matt testifies about conversations he had with a woman named Jane regarding her interactions with Jeffrey Epstein. He describes Jane's demeanor during these conversations as 'Ashamed, embarrassed, horrified,' but confirms that she did not provide specific details about what happened.
DOJ-OGR-00017843.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness. The witness testifies about conversations with a person named 'Jane' that took place around 2009, in which Jane revealed that the presence of another woman at Jeffrey Epstein's house made her feel more comfortable. The transcript includes a sustained objection by an attorney, Ms. Sternheim, and instructions from the court.
DOJ-OGR-00017842.jpg
This document is a page of a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Matt. The witness testifies about conversations he had with a person named Jane, who allegedly told him that her involvement with Jeffrey Epstein began when she was 14 years old after meeting him at a camp.
DOJ-OGR-00017841.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed Aug 10, 2022) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Matt. Matt testifies about conversations with a woman referred to as 'Jane,' specifically asking her if she was involved with Jeffrey Epstein for money. The testimony reveals that Jane admitted she had to do things with Epstein she didn't want to do, noting 'it wasn't free,' and the prosecution introduces the term 'massage' into the line of questioning over a defense objection.
DOJ-OGR-00017840.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Matt by an attorney, Ms. Moe. The questioning focuses on what a person named Jane told the witness about receiving financial help from Jeffrey Epstein. A key part of the witness's testimony is objected to by opposing counsel, Ms. Sternheim, and the objection is sustained by the court.
DOJ-OGR-00017839.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, Ghislaine Maxwell trial) featuring the direct testimony of a witness named Matt. He recounts a conversation with 'Jane' in which she revealed that the 'godfather' helping pay her and her family's bills was Jeffrey Epstein. The testimony is interrupted by an objection from the Court requiring a more specific question regarding when Jane met Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00017837.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the direct examination of a witness named Matt by prosecutor Ms. Moe. Matt testifies about conversations he had with 'Jane' regarding her childhood financial hardship, specifically detailing how her family went broke paying for her father's medical treatments before he died. The testimony highlights extreme poverty, noting that Jane, her mother, and two brothers lived in a small place where the three children shared a single bed.
DOJ-OGR-00017836.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a dialogue between Ms. Sternheim and the Court regarding the testimony of a witness about a woman he was in a relationship with. The Court rules to limit the testimony, allowing only topics from cross-examination that serve to attack the woman's credibility.
DOJ-OGR-00017835.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a legal argument between an attorney, Ms. Sternheim, and the judge regarding an evidentiary objection. The core of the debate is whether testimony supporting a witness's claims about her difficult home life is admissible after her credibility on that very topic was attacked by Ms. Sternheim's side.
DOJ-OGR-00017834.jpg
A sidebar transcript page from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim and the Court discuss the admissibility of testimony from a witness named Matt, specifically regarding whether a female accuser had revealed abuse allegations to him prior to meeting with the government. The Judge challenges the defense's objection, noting they had previously attacked the accuser's credibility regarding her financial background (living in a pool house, losing her home), making this testimony relevant as a 'prior consistent statement.'
DOJ-OGR-00017833.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. A witness named Matt is being questioned about his past dating relationship with a woman named Jane and what she told him about her difficult home life as a child. The testimony is interrupted by a hearsay objection from an attorney, Ms. Sternheim, which is then argued by another attorney, Ms. Moe, before the judge makes a preliminary ruling.
DOJ-OGR-00017829.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a portion of a trial. The prosecution, represented by Ms. Moe, successfully moves to enter Government Exhibit 17 into evidence under seal to protect the identity of a witness, Matt, who is testifying under a pseudonym. After the jury is directed to view the exhibit, Ms. Moe begins her direct examination of the witness.
DOJ-OGR-00017827.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecution (Ms. Moe) and the Judge discuss sealing exhibits and the use of a pseudonym for the next witness, 'Matt,' to protect the identity of the prior witness ('Jane'). The jury enters, and 'Matt' is sworn in to testify for the Government.
DOJ-OGR-00017824.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a dialogue between the judge and several attorneys (Ms. Moe, Ms. Sternheim, Mr. Rohrbach) regarding trial procedures. Key topics include clarifying testimony about Ms. Maxwell, the status of contacts with a witness named 'Jane', and confirming an agreement that victim-witnesses will not observe the trial until after both the prosecution and defense have rested their cases.
DOJ-OGR-00017822.jpg
This document is a transcript page from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a sidebar or legal argument where the defense objects to a witness named Matt using the term 'girls' when recounting what 'Jane' told him, as it implies underage status without proof. The Court sustains the objection, and Prosecutor Ms. Moe agrees to lead the witness to use neutral terms like 'females' or 'people' to avoid unfounded implications of age.
DOJ-OGR-00017821.jpg
This court transcript page from August 10, 2022, documents a legal argument between attorney Ms. Sternheim and the judge during the redirect examination of a witness named Jane. The core of the dispute is whether the use of the term 'girls' versus 'women' is a significant distinction, with Ms. Sternheim arguing that 'girls' improperly implies the subjects are minors, which supports the government's theory of the case in a way that is inconsistent with the witness's testimony.
DOJ-OGR-00017819.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between the judge and two attorneys, Ms. Sternheim and Ms. Moe, during a recess. Ms. Sternheim raises a potential issue with the government's next witness, Matt, noting that his prior statements regarding a conversation with another individual, Jane, do not fully align with the direct examination. This suggests a potential challenge to the witness's credibility or the consistency of his testimony.
DOJ-OGR-00017818.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022. After a witness named Jane is excused, the court calls for a break. An attorney, Ms. Sternheim, then raises a procedural issue, requesting a proffer from the government regarding the testimony of the next witness, Matt, to ensure it complies with evidence rules and avoids improper statements.
| 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 |
Response to July 22, 2025 order
Represented notice given to victims; sought leave to file supplemental submission.
Unsealing of grand jury transcripts
Suggested seeking to unseal exhibits put before the grand jury
Production of grand jury transcripts
The Court ordered the Government to produce the grand jury transcripts for an in camera review by Monday, July 28, 2025.
Motion to unseal transcripts (Dkt. 785)
Pending motion to unseal transcripts.
Direction to file memorandum and materials
Court directed Government to file a memorandum of law addressing factors for unsealing and to submit indices and transcripts.
Investigation into uncharged third parties
A memorandum from the Government which reportedly concluded that no evidence could predicate an investigation into uncharged third parties associated with Epstein's and Maxwell's criminal scheme.
Basis and error rate of expert opinions
Mr. Pagliuca questions the witness, Rocchio, about the specific studies and known potential rate of error for the opinions they have provided. The witness explains that there is no single study and that defining a 'pure error rate' is complex in the social sciences, discussing concepts like statistical significance and inter-rater reliability as measures of agreement.
Clarification of expert opinion
The Court asks the witness to clarify their expert opinion, stating it as 'the presence of another individual can facilitate the sexual abuse of minors' and asking if that is correct.
Role of a third party in facilitating sexual abuse of minors
The document is a transcript of a dialogue between a judge (THE COURT) and a witness. The judge questions the witness about whether the presence of a third party can facilitate the sexual abuse of minors and asks for specific literature to support the witness's claims about how perpetrators build trust.
Role of a third party in facilitating sexual abuse of minors
The document is a transcript of a dialogue between a judge (THE COURT) and a witness. The judge questions the witness about whether the presence of a third party can facilitate the sexual abuse of minors and asks for specific literature to support the witness's claims about how perpetrators build trust.
Exhibit management
Discussion regarding providing binders and locating Tab 6 for the witness and judge.
Audio volume
Instruction to speak into the microphone.
Grooming and Trauma Bonding
Discussion regarding the definition of grooming, trauma bonding, and how these concepts apply to pimp/sex-worker relationships versus direct sexual abuse.
Procedural Logistics and Sealing
Discussion regarding sealing proceedings related to Rule 412, Daubert hearing logistics, and jury questionnaire returns.
Conclusion of Petition
Request to vacate Panel decision, overrule Annabi, and dismiss indictment or remand for hearing.
Appearance / Argument Information
Identification of attorney presenting argument and acknowledgment of court rules regarding recordings and reporters.
Appearance/Argument Information
Attorney confirming representation of Appellee-Respondent and verifying contact details.
Sentencing, supervised release, and restitution
A dialogue during a court proceeding where the judge confirms with defense counsel about objections to supervised release conditions and discusses the government's position that no restitution is required because victims have been compensated.
Ruling on objections
The Court overrules objections to paragraphs 9, and 30 through 38, concerning the inclusion of Kate's name and the characterization of the defendant grooming Jane.
Sentencing Guideline Calculation
A transcript of a dialogue during a court hearing where the judge finalizes factual objections, adopts the Pre-Sentence Report (PSR), and begins to address the disputed sentencing guideline calculations.
Confirmation of hearing
The Court confirms to Ms. Sternheim that they can hear her.
Sentencing Arguments
Argument regarding sentencing guidelines, probation recommendations, and culpability comparison between Maxwell and Epstein.
Sentencing and Fines
Discussion regarding the imposition of a fine, the status of a bequest in a will, and the formal imposition of the sentence.
Certificate of Compliance
Certification that the brief complies with type-volume limitations (19,291 words).
Victim Impact Statement
Statement regarding the impact of Ghislaine Maxwell's actions on her life and request for imprisonment.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity