THE COURT
PersonRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00018322.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on August 10, 2022. It depicts a cross-examination of a witness named Dawson by defense attorney Mr. Everdell. Prosecutor Ms. Comey objects to a question about a residence, leading Mr. Everdell to request a sidebar to discuss proving an inconsistent statement by a prior witness.
DOJ-OGR-00018320.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 features the direct examination of Sergeant Dawson by Ms. Comey regarding Government Exhibits 1, 3, and 4, which the witness identifies as message books found during a search warrant. The Judge interrupts briefly to ask the witness to remove their mask and speak closer to the microphone.
DOJ-OGR-00018313.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details the conclusion of testimony by a witness named Mr. Parkinson, who is excused by the court to catch a flight. Subsequently, the government (represented by Ms. Comey) calls Sergeant Michael Dawson as a witness, who is sworn in and begins his direct examination.
DOJ-OGR-00018310.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. Attorney Mr. Everdell is cross-examining witness Mr. Parkinson regarding photographic evidence (Government Exhibits 234 and 245) which depict Jeffrey Epstein's desk and bookcase shelves. The exhibits are noted as being 'under seal'.
DOJ-OGR-00018309.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. Parkinson. An attorney questions Parkinson about Government Exhibits 235 and 292, establishing that photographs of a "windy staircase" do not show any pictures on the adjacent wall. The proceedings also involve a discussion among attorneys and the judge about another piece of evidence, Government Exhibit 234, which is confirmed to be sealed.
DOJ-OGR-00018308.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a legal proceeding, likely a cross-examination involving 'Parkinson,' dated August 10, 2022. The discussion centers on a diagram of a house, specifically its foyer and staircase. Mr. Everdell requests to display Government Exhibits 235 and 292, which the Court approves, indicating a transition in the presentation of evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00018303.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed 08/10/22) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Parkinson. The questioning focuses on the floor plan of Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach residence, specifically identifying a 'staff' room located near the kitchen, which is identified in Government Exhibit 238 as a small office. Attorneys Everdell and Comey discuss the admissibility of Exhibit 238 with the Judge.
DOJ-OGR-00018302.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing the cross-examination of a witness named Parkinson. The questioning confirms that a house Parkinson had previously searched was undergoing renovations at the time, evidenced by carpet samples, floor plans, and architectural drawings. The proceedings also involve referencing 'Government Exhibit 298' for the witness and jury to view.
DOJ-OGR-00018296.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It features the cross-examination of a witness named Parkinson (likely a police officer) by attorney Mr. Everdell. The testimony covers Parkinson's early interactions with Jeffrey Epstein, specifically a burglary investigation in October 2003 and casual encounters seeing Epstein jogging in Palm Beach. It concludes by introducing the topic of a search warrant executed on October 20, 2005.
DOJ-OGR-00018295.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Parkinson. Parkinson testifies about a visit of under four hours to a residence on October 5, 2003, to speak with Mr. Epstein, and denies knowing or seeing Ghislaine Maxwell there. An attorney, Ms. Comey, successfully objects to a question about a burglar on the grounds of relevance and hearsay.
DOJ-OGR-00018293.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Mr. Parkinson by attorney Mr. Everdell. The testimony focuses on a past meeting between Parkinson and Jeffrey Epstein at Epstein's house, specifically in his main office. They discuss a burglary incident where Epstein alleged that cash was stolen from a bag near his desk.
DOJ-OGR-00018287.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It records the admission of 'Exhibit 51' without objection from defense attorney Mr. Everdell. Prosecutor Ms. Comey subsequently requests that Detective Byrne come forward to set up and publish the exhibit for the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00018286.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness, Mr. Parkinson. Parkinson identifies Government Exhibit 51 as a massage table that he personally seized from a bathroom at 358 El Brillo Way on October 20, 2005. The government, represented by Ms. Comey, successfully offers the table into evidence without objection from Mr. Everdell.
DOJ-OGR-00018284.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. Witness Parkinson is being questioned by Ms. Comey regarding a photograph (Government Exhibit 285) showing a desktop in a bathroom anteroom at 358 El Brillo Way as it appeared on October 20, 2005. The exhibit is admitted under seal to protect a party's interests, preventing the witness from reading specific writing on the picture aloud in open court.
DOJ-OGR-00018282.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It records the direct examination of a witness named Parkinson by Ms. Comey. The proceedings involve directing jurors to view Government Exhibits 282, 286, and 287 in their binders, followed by the presentation of Exhibits 283 and 284 on a screen, which the witness identifies as photographs of a room on the second floor, north side of a property.
DOJ-OGR-00018280.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 Mr. Parkinson by prosecutor Ms. Comey. The testimony centers on the identification of photographic evidence (Government Exhibits 278, 281, 282, 286, and 287) depicting the interior of a property, specifically mentioning a 'white hassock,' 'pink three-cushioned couch,' and the 'second floor.' The Judge intervenes briefly to admit evidence and instruct the witness to speak into the microphone.
DOJ-OGR-00018279.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a trial on August 10, 2022. Attorney Ms. Comey questions a witness, Mr. Parkinson, about an exhibit, Government 278. Mr. Parkinson identifies the exhibit as a fair and accurate photograph of the shower room at 358 El Brillo Way as it looked on October 20, 2005, after which Ms. Comey offers it into evidence without objection.
DOJ-OGR-00018278.jpg
This document is page 177 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The text details a discussion between the Judge (The Court), defense attorney Mr. Everdell, and prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding the admissibility of evidence, specifically 'school costumes' and photographs thereof. The Judge rules that a foundation must be laid through a witness, suggesting Special Agent Maguire for this purpose. Following the ruling, the jury is recalled and a witness named Mr. Parkinson takes the stand.
DOJ-OGR-00018277.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a court proceeding on August 10, 2022, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a discussion between the Court, Ms. Moe, Mr. Everdell, and Ms. Comey regarding the relevance of photographs, prior testimony by Jane, and the submission of evidence binders for upcoming witnesses. The Court also provides a reminder to Ms. Comey about microphone usage.
DOJ-OGR-00018276.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument about the admissibility of photographs. The core issue is the lack of a proper foundation for the evidence, as the expected witness, Jane, did not testify, and there is a significant time gap of approximately 25 years between the events she allegedly witnessed (c. 1994-1995) and a 2019 search.
DOJ-OGR-00018275.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. It details a legal dispute where prosecutors Ms. Moe and Ms. Comey request to brief an issue regarding photographic evidence, accusing the defense of 'sandbagging' by objecting late. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell denies the accusation, while the Judge notes a 'factual disjointedness' regarding the evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00018274.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It details a legal argument between prosecutor Ms. Moe and the Judge regarding the admissibility of photographs of a 'massage room' inside a residence. The Judge sustains an objection to the photos because they were taken over 20 years after the events described by a witness, and depict 'highly mobile items' that may not accurately reflect the room's state at the relevant time.
DOJ-OGR-00018273.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed 08/10/22) featuring a legal argument between an attorney (Ms. Moe) and the Judge regarding the admissibility of photographs. The attorney argues the photos corroborate a witness's 'blind description' of a residence's interior. The Judge expresses skepticism due to the significant passage of time (15-20 years) and the fact that the photos may depict 'movable items' rather than permanent structures.
DOJ-OGR-00018272.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 a legal argument between the defense (Mr. Everdell) and the prosecution (Ms. Moe) regarding the admissibility of photographs of a 'New York house' (implied to be Epstein's). The prosecution argues the photos corroborate the testimony of a witness named 'Jane,' who described specific decor (nude artwork, animal decorations, and a red massage room) present during her visits between 1994 and her early twenties.
DOJ-OGR-00018271.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The dialogue involves the Judge, Prosecutor Ms. Moe, and Defense Attorney Mr. Everdell discussing procedural matters regarding the sealing of documents and objections to specific evidence (the '900 series' exhibits). Mr. Everdell notes that these objections relate to a search conducted in 2019 and will become relevant when Agent Maguire testifies to introduce the exhibits.
| 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 |
Bail hearing for Ms. Maxwell
Farmer addressed the court by telephone during the detention hearing, urging the judge not to grant Maxwell bail.
Superseding Indictment
Ms. Moe stated the government did not currently anticipate seeking a superseding indictment.
Arraignment, initial conference, and bail hearing for Ghi...
The court scheduled a remote video/teleconference for the hearing and provided specific phone numbers and access codes for various parties to access the live audio feed.
Arraignment, initial conference, and bail hearing for Ghi...
The Court ordered a remote hearing via video/teleconference and provided specific dial-in numbers and access codes for various parties to access the live audio feed.
Argument for release on bail
Argument stating Maxwell should be released due to COVID-19 risks and lack of flight risk.
Waiver of physical presence
Signed waiver of physical presence form received by the court.
Waiver of Physical Presence
Signed waiver form submitted to the court.
Memorandum in Opposition to Detention
Maxwell's argument for release on bail.
Scheduling and availability
Referenced as 'the defendant’s letter of July 6, 2020 (the “Defense Letter”) (Dkt. 8)' which stated the parties' availability for a remote proceeding.
Scheduling of an initial proceeding
Referenced as 'the Court’s Order dated July 6, 2020 (the “Order”) (Dkt. 7)' which prompted the parties to confer on scheduling.
Request for scheduling arraignment
Requested scheduling arraignment, initial appearance, and bail hearing for July 10.
Request to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act
Referenced as 'Government Letter dated July 5, 2020 (Dkt. 5)' which contained a request that is being renewed and amended in the current letter.
Court Proceedings Access
The court is allowing up to 500 members of the public to access proceedings via telephone conference due to COVID-19 restrictions.
Court Hearing
Hearing conducted by video and telephone conference.
Memorandum in Support of Detention
Referenced as 'the Government’s Memorandum in Support of Detention, dated July 2, 2020 (Dkt. 4)' for which a briefing schedule is being proposed.
Motion for detention (Ex.A)
Government moved for detention after arrest.
Response to detention motion (Ex.B)
Defense response to government motion.
Motion to Compel Disclosure
Denying motion to compel disclosure of IG materials because the report does not exist yet.
Plea Agreement
Letter on stationery of US Attorney's Office identified as the plea agreement.
Scheduling / Conduct
Mr. Foy attempts to raise objections regarding a June 8th date, citing co-counsel's vacation/family obligations and the nonviolent nature of the case.
Motion to dismiss and discovery request
A defense attorney informs the court of their intent to file a motion to dismiss based on selective prosecution. The attorney also requests discovery related to an Inspector General's report, arguing that this process will cause a delay in the trial.
Trial Scheduling and Discovery Scope
Discussion regarding the trial date of June 8 and arguments regarding the relevance of institutional failures at the MCC versus the specific 14-hour period of the incident.
Adjournment
Agreement to brief adjournment, opposition to six-month adjournment.
Scheduling and Motions
Discussion regarding the filing of a motion concerning the IG report and rescheduling deadlines due to personal reasons.
Trial Scheduling
Discussion regarding the trial date set for June 8 and potential conflicts with defense counsel's travel plans.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity