Trove
Sign In Sign Up

THE COURT

Person
Mentions
4828
Relationships
0
Events
0
Documents
2363
Also known as:
THE COURT, MR. DONALDSON
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.
No relationships found for this entity.
No events found for this entity.

DOJ-OGR-00018173.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on confirming Alessi's prior sworn testimony about his chain of command, where he identified Mr. Epstein as his direct supervisor and Ms. Maxwell as the secondary contact.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018167.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It features the cross-examination of Mr. Alessi, who testifies that he, Jeffrey Epstein, and Ghislaine Maxwell all lived at the residence on El Brillo Way during major construction in 1994. Alessi confirms he had complete access to the house during this time.

Court transcript (cross-examination)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018163.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It features the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. Alessi, regarding a 2020 declaration where he stated he was instructed by Jeffrey Epstein to pick up a woman referred to as 'Ms. Jane' in West Palm Beach and drive her to Epstein's home. Alessi expresses confusion about the 'declaration' terminology but confirms that the signature on the document dated July 9 is definitely his.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018162.jpg

This document is page 61 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a legal argument during the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. Ms. Comey objects to the defense using a prior declaration, arguing it isn't inconsistent, but the Court overrules the objection, allowing Mr. Pagliuca to question the witness about the discrepancy between 'multiple occasions' (testimony) and 'one' (declaration).

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018161.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument between attorneys Ms. Comey and Mr. Pagliuca regarding the consistency of a witness's (Alessi) testimony. The discussion focuses on impeaching the witness over the specific years (between 1993-1996) and the number of occasions he observed events involving Mr. Epstein, Ms. Maxwell, and a person named Jane in West Palm Beach. The attorneys quote prior statements to challenge the witness's current testimony during cross-examination.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018160.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed Aug 10, 2022) detailing a sidebar conversation between the Judge and defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca during the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. The discussion focuses on a semantic argument regarding whether the witness's prior testimony of 'multiple occasions' is inconsistent with a specific statement of observing a person named 'Jane' exactly 'three' times at Epstein's Palm Beach home. The defense argues that 'three' contradicts 'multiple,' while the Court questions this logic.

Court transcript (sidebar conference)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018159.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330 (USA v. Maxwell). It depicts a brief exchange during the cross-examination of witness Alessi, where attorney Mr. Pagliuca argues about inconsistencies in specific paragraphs, but the Court sustains objections against them.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018158.jpg

This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of witness Juan Alessi (likely in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca questions Alessi about his signature on a document labeled 'JA-1' dated July 9, 2020. Prosecutor Ms. Comey objects to the reading of the document, claiming it is not inconsistent testimony, while Pagliuca moves to introduce the entire exhibit.

Court transcript (cross-examination)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018156.jpg

This document is page 55 of a court transcript from the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. It depicts a procedural discussion during the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi (likely Juan Alessi). Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca and the Judge discuss referencing specific lines from 'yesterday's testimony' and a deposition to establish context for the witness.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018155.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. Alessi, by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on prior deposition testimony from exhibit 3504-22. Another attorney, Ms. Comey, objects, arguing that the testimony is not inconsistent with what has already been presented, leading to a procedural discussion with the judge.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018153.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi (likely Juan Alessi) by Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on Alessi's previous testimony in 2016, conducted in Fort Lauderdale by Brad Edwards (Virginia Roberts' lawyer), regarding a person named 'Jane' and events in 1994 or 1995. Alessi claims in the current testimony that he may have confused 'two girls' during that previous deposition.

Court transcript (cross-examination)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018151.jpg

This document is a transcript page from a court sidebar conference in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca apologizes for an unintentional error during the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. Prosecutor Ms. Comey criticizes his preparation and suggests a protocol for reading prior inconsistent statements, while the Judge accepts the apology as an accident but warns that a different approach will be needed if the error repeats.

Court transcript (sidebar conference)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018149.jpg

Page 48 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi. Attorney Mr. Pagliuca asks if Alessi met a person identified as 'Jane' in 1998 or 2000, which the witness denies. The Court intervenes to ensure 'Jane's' real name is not mentioned, and Pagliuca confirms he has redacted the name from his copies.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018147.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Alessi by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. The questioning focuses on Alessi's purchase of a $590,000 property with his wife in West Palm Beach in September 2002, which is linked chronologically to a break-in at Mr. Epstein's house. Another attorney, Ms. Comey, objects to the line of questioning, and the court sustains the objection.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018143.jpg

This document is a page from the court transcript of the cross-examination of Mr. Alessi, filed on August 10, 2022. The testimony references a previous deposition from September 8, 2009, where Alessi admitted to stealing a total of $6,300 on two separate occasions at night. The questioning attorney attributes the theft to Alessi's 'financial problems,' which Alessi appears to confirm.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018141.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. Alessi, by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca. Mr. Pagliuca questions Mr. Alessi about his prior deposition testimony concerning an incident where he went to a house at night to get money while no one was home. The court is also present, facilitating the proceeding.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018134.jpg

This document is page 33 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The text captures a moment where Ms. Comey addresses the court regarding display screens, followed by the Judge instructing Ms. Williams to bring in the jury. A witness, Mr. Alessi (likely Juan Alessi, Epstein's former house manager), is then greeted and told to take his seat.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018133.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a logistical discussion between a judge and counsel (Ms. Comey and Mr. Pagliuca). The main topic is how to display video evidence to the jury without it being visible at the counsel's tables. The timing of this technical arrangement is coordinated around a planned 10:30 morning break and the upcoming cross-examination of a witness, Mr. Alessi.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018132.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The dialogue involves attorneys (Moe, Everdell, Comey) and the Judge discussing the testimony of a witness named 'Jane,' specifically her detailed description of the interior and artwork of a house. Additionally, Ms. Comey raises a privacy concern regarding ensuring that a video shown to jurors does not simultaneously appear on public screens in overflow rooms, which is relevant for the witness following Mr. Alessi.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018129.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. Attorneys Ms. Moe and Mr. Everdell are discussing with the judge the proper way to present evidence, including items in a bag and photographs of a residence. Mr. Everdell raises a concern about the relevance of photographs taken during a 2019 search, as they depict the residence's interior 15 years after the alleged conspiracy ended in 2004.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018128.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. The dialogue involves defense attorney Mr. Everdell and prosecutor Ms. Moe debating the admissibility and description of 'costumes' (Government Exhibit 53) and photographs of them (Exhibits 919 and 920). The defense argues specifically that these items must not be described to the jury as 'schoolgirl outfits' to avoid prejudice.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018127.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument about the presentation of evidence. An attorney, Mr. Everdell, objects to the prosecution's proposal to show the jury a bag of costumes and related photographs, arguing that this should not happen until 'witness 3' testifies to establish the items' relevance. Everdell expresses concern that showing the items prematurely could unfairly prejudice the jury if the witness's testimony is delayed or does not occur.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018126.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a trial on August 10, 2022, identified as Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a dialogue between an attorney, Ms. Moe, and the judge regarding the admission of evidence, which is revealed to be photographs of costumes. The judge rules the evidence is relevant but reserves a final decision on its admission pending connecting testimony from a future witness.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018123.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from a case involving Jeffrey Epstein. An unidentified speaker, likely from the defense, argues against admitting costumes as evidence, claiming they are irrelevant and would prejudice the jury. In response, Ms. Moe, for the prosecution, argues the evidence is highly relevant to counter the defense's repeated claims that Epstein had no interest in underage girls, citing his possession of "schoolgirl outfits" near his massage room.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018122.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a discussion between attorneys Ms. Moe and Mr. Everdell and the judge regarding the admissibility of evidence. The key points are the government's intent to use photographs of a massage room rather than the physical table, and Mr. Everdell's argument that costumes found in a 2019 search are irrelevant as they were discovered 15 years after the alleged conspiracy.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source
Total Received
$162,555,000.00
16 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$162,555,000.00
16 total transactions
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
As Sender
409
As Recipient
1009
Total
1418

Juror Bias / Sexual Abuse History

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Juror 50 testified that his history of sexual abuse would not affect his impartiality.

Hearing testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Post-Hearing Brief

From: Maxwell Defense Team
To: THE COURT

Dismissed Juror 50's responses as 'self-serving'.

Legal brief
N/A
Communication Source

Second Motion for Bail

From: . MAXWELL
To: THE COURT

Addressed concerns regarding flight risk and corroboration of evidence.

Legal filing
N/A
Communication Source

Response to Second Bail Motion

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Opposition to bail.

Legal filing
N/A
Communication Source

Third Motion for Bail

From: . MAXWELL
To: THE COURT

Offer to renounce foreign citizenship.

Legal filing
N/A
Communication Source

Admissibility of Photographs

From: Ms. Moe
To: THE COURT

Discussion regarding whether photographs corroborate a witness's blind description of a residence interior given the time lapse.

Meeting
N/A
Communication Source

Victim Impact Statements

From: Ms. Bryant, Ms. Maria ...
To: THE COURT

Written submissions submitted in accordance with the Court's order.

Written submissions
N/A
Communication Source

Order de-designating documents

From: Defense counsel
To: THE COURT

Motion to remove Highly Confidential status from materials.

Motion
N/A
Communication Source

Clarification on Count Four

From: The jury
To: THE COURT

Asked if defendant can be found guilty if she aided the return flight but not the flight to New Mexico where intent for sexual activity existed.

Jury note
N/A
Communication Source

Maxwell Br. at 14-15

From: Maxwell Defense Team
To: THE COURT

Speculated that the jury was focused on a 1997 flight.

Legal brief
N/A
Communication Source

Juror Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Responses regarding impartiality, burden of proof, and media consumption (CNN).

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Additional proposed redactions

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Submission of additional redactions under seal

Email
N/A
Communication Source

Maxwell Reply at 23

From: Defense counsel
To: THE COURT

Argues that Rule 606 violates Maxwell's constitutional rights.

Legal brief
N/A
Communication Source

Juror misconduct inquiry

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Statements about a second juror.

Testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Presentation of Photos

From: Mr. Everdell
To: THE COURT

Everdell explains they only have single copies of certain photos received that morning and proposes walking them to the jury row rather than distributing copies.

Court proceeding
N/A
Communication Source

Withdrawal of arrest warrant request

From: defense (implied)
To: THE COURT

Withdrawal of the request to issue an arrest warrant for witness Kelly.

Note
N/A
Communication Source

Disclosure of Maxwell grand jury materials

From: Victims (via represent...
To: THE COURT

Letters urging broad disclosure of investigative records regarding Epstein and Maxwell, provided identities are redacted.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Motion to [Unseal/Redact]

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Government proposes to redact names and personally identifying information of victims and third parties.

Legal filing
N/A
Communication Source

Answering Brief (Ans.Br.)

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Government claims Maxwell is attempting to have the Court weigh in on investigative methods.

Brief
N/A
Communication Source

Briefing Schedule

From: Defense Counsel (Mr. E...
To: THE COURT

Proposal for a briefing schedule after counsel confers.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Question on Count Four

From: Jury
To: THE COURT

Under Count Four, if the defendant aided in the transportation of Jane's return flight, but not the flight to New Mexico, where/if the intent was for Jane to engage in sexual activity, can she be found guilty under the second element?

Jury note
N/A
Communication Source

Opposition to release

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Cited two pages of cases regarding health risks and dangerousness.

Legal brief/reply
N/A
Communication Source

Sidebar Request

From: Mr. Everdell
To: THE COURT

Requesting a sidebar to discuss proving an inconsistent statement of a prior witness.

Courtroom dialogue
N/A
Communication Source

Sentencing Arguments

From: the defendant
To: THE COURT

Defendant's brief cited at page 12 regarding legislative history.

Legal brief
N/A
Communication Source

Page 32 note 13

From: Brune/Defense Team
To: THE COURT

Stated defendants had no basis to inquire whether Conrad was lying.

Memorandum
N/A
Communication Source

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search