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-00017517.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the redirect examination of a witness named Visoski. The witness confirms meeting an individual known by the pseudonym 'Jane' in the 1990s and another person, depicted in defense exhibits, in the 2000s. The witness's memory of the second person is specifically linked to seeing them on a Boeing aircraft.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017515.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the testimony of a witness named Visoski. Under questioning by defense attorney Mr. Everdell, Visoski denies seeing any hint of inappropriate sexual activity or underage girls during roughly 30 years of working for Jeffrey Epstein, stating he would have reported it and quit if he had. The cross-examination concludes, and prosecutor Ms. Comey begins her redirect examination.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017501.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. An attorney, Mr. Everdell, suggests a break during the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski, and the judge agrees, announcing a 45-minute lunch break for the jury and witness.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017489.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski by attorney Mr. Everdell. Visoski testifies about a renovation in the mid-90s and confirms he flew on numerous flights with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, interacting with them regularly throughout the 1990s and 2000s. The questioning is pivoting to Visoski's perception of the relationship between Epstein and Maxwell.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017465.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell introduces exhibits LV4 and LV5 under seal to protect witness identities (pseudonyms), which is accepted by Prosecutor Ms. Comey and the Judge. The jury is instructed to view the documents in their folders without showing them to the gallery.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017462.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski by an attorney, Mr. Everdell. During the questioning, Visoski confirms that he knew an unnamed woman shown in photographs, had spoken with her frequently enough to have her phone number, and that she frequently traveled on Mr. Epstein's planes. The proceeding involves handling sealed evidence (photos marked LV3A and LV3B) carefully to prevent its display to the gallery.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017461.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski. The defense attorney, Mr. Everdell, questions the witness about two photographs (Exhibits LV3A and LV3B) depicting a woman who shares a first name with 'Jane's true first name.' The exhibits are admitted into evidence under seal to protect the privacy of the individual, consistent with a prior court ruling regarding pseudonyms.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017460.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 named Visoski by attorney Mr. Everdell. The testimony focuses on identifying that there was an assistant in 'Epstein's world' who shared the same first name and spelling as a person referred to as 'Jane,' and that the witness had met this assistant. Exhibits LV3A and LV3B are introduced for display.

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

DOJ-OGR-00017458.jpg

This is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a procedural discussion between the judge, Mr. Everdell, and Ms. Comey. They agree on a method for presenting exhibits to the jury using paper copies to protect the anonymity of witnesses who may testify under pseudonyms. The exhibits in question are to be offered under seal by the defense.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017457.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between the judge (THE COURT) and two attorneys, Ms. Comey and Mr. Everdell. They discuss the scheduling of the proceedings, including the timing for a lunch break set for 12:30 and the decision to take an immediate five-minute recess for the jury. The judge instructs a Ms. Williams to escort the jury during the break.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017456.jpg

This is page 94 of a court transcript (Document 743, Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. The witness, Visoski, confirms during cross-examination that Epstein had an assistant with a specific name and that he had met her. The proceedings are interrupted by attorneys Everdell and Comey to discuss a 'choreography issue' regarding an exhibit that must be submitted under seal rather than displayed on screens.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00017450.jpg

This page is a transcript from the cross-examination of a pilot named Visoski during the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The testimony establishes that Visoski flew Jeffrey Epstein multiple times to Columbus, Ohio, the home of billionaire Les Wexner. The witness confirms Wexner's ownership of The Limited (parent company of Victoria's Secret and Abercrombie & Fitch) and states that Epstein considered Wexner both a friend and a client.

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

DOJ-OGR-00017448.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski. The testimony focuses on flight logs showing trips to Interlochen in August and confirms that Epstein owned a cabin there. Visoski mentions a rumor that the cabin was originally bought or built for violinist Itzhak Perlman, or possibly donated to the Interlochen School.

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

DOJ-OGR-00017410.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving the direct examination of a witness named Visoski. The proceedings cover the stipulation and admission of Government Exhibits 11 through 16 and 1004, which includes a birth certificate from England and Wales. Ms. Comey notes that these exhibits are sealed to protect witnesses testifying under pseudonyms, and the Court grants permission for jurors to view these sealed binders.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011722.jpg

A transcript page from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca argues to the Judge that they should be allowed to suggest witnesses were manipulated by civil attorneys, citing a witness named 'Carolyn' whose detailed 2008 legal filings and depositions did not mention Ms. Maxwell, implying her involvement was fabricated later. The Court overrules the objection to this line of argumentation at the opening stage but asks for evidence that attorneys explicitly told witnesses what to say.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011720.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) where attorney Mr. Pagliuca discusses the admissibility of evidence regarding communications between witnesses' lawyers and the government. Specifically, Pagliuca mentions an email from attorney Mr. Scarola to the government suggesting ten topics for an interview with a woman named Carolyn. The discussion centers on whether these communications (proffers and emails) are privileged and how they will be introduced without calling the lawyers as witnesses.

Court transcript / legal proceeding
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011718.jpg

This is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a sidebar conference during a trial. The defense counsel, Ms. Sternheim, claims in her opening statement that witnesses' memories were manipulated by their civil lawyers, prompting an objection from the prosecution, Ms. Comey and Ms. Moe. Ms. Moe argues to the judge that introducing evidence about lawyer-client conversations is inappropriate and that the issue of subpoenaing these lawyers had already been raised.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011716.jpg

This document is a transcript page from the opening statement of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim argues that the accusers' memories are unreliable due to media influence and monetary incentives (False Memory Syndrome defense strategy). An objection by prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding Sternheim's characterization of investigators is sustained by the Court.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011710.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) recording a sidebar conference during the opening statements of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. Prosecutor Ms. Comey objects that the defense is improperly arguing the government is targeting the defendant, violating a pretrial ruling. The Court rules that while the defense cannot attack the prosecution's motives, they are permitted to argue that witnesses are using the defendant as a scapegoat or stand-in.

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

DOJ-OGR-00011709.jpg

This document is page 44 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the opening statement by defense attorney Ms. Sternheim, who argues that Ghislaine Maxwell is being used as a 'scapegoat,' 'target,' and 'stand-in' for the deceased Jeffrey Epstein to satisfy the anger of his victims. Prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz objects repeatedly during the statement.

Court transcript (opening statement)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011692.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing the beginning of an opening statement by Ms. Pomerantz for the government. Ms. Pomerantz begins to narrate the story of a girl named Jane, who, at age 14 in 1994, met an older man and woman at a summer camp. This meeting is framed as the start of a long-term, nightmarish relationship for Jane with the couple, who were more than double her age.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011690.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. The judge announces a 45-minute lunch break, stating that the court will resume with opening statements and adjourn at 5 p.m. After the jury is excused, the judge confirms with counsel, Ms. Comey and Ms. Sternheim, that there are no further matters to discuss before the recess.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011680.jpg

This document is page 15 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It records the swearing-in of a jury consisting of 12 members and six alternates by a court clerk named Ms. Williams. The Judge (The Court) then begins providing preliminary instructions regarding the trial proceedings, specifically explaining the process of opening statements by the government and the defense.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011679.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a logistical delay in open court involving defense attorney Ms. Sternheim, prosecutor Ms. Comey, and the Judge regarding three jurors who are missing or delayed at the security line. The Judge discusses moving jurors between the first and fifth floors to manage the situation.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00011678.jpg

This is page 13 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The Court discusses procedural logistics for questioning jurors using a handheld mic and then moves to a sidebar conference to discuss a sealed issue regarding a witness testifying under a pseudonym. The transcript notes that pages 14 through 17 are sealed.

Court transcript page
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

Fairness and impartiality

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Replied by rote in the affirmative regarding fairness; provided explanations for incorrect questionnaire answers.

Testimony/inquiry
N/A
Communication Source

Briefing Schedule

From: Defense counsel
To: THE COURT

Proposal to write a letter proposing a schedule after conferring.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Clarification on Count Four

From: The jury
To: THE COURT

Question regarding Count Four and the second element.

Jury note
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Juror 50 completed a questionnaire regarding his background.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Defendant's primary sentencing submission

From: defense
To: THE COURT

Submission reviewed by the court

Submission
N/A
Communication Source

Cross-examination procedure

From: Mr. Everdell
To: THE COURT

Objection/point regarding the government referring to passengers as 'and others' without naming them.

Procedural discussion
N/A
Communication Source

Argument regarding travel purpose

From: Mr. Everdell
To: THE COURT

Discussing whether travel back to a place without illicit activity counts as significant purpose.

Meeting
N/A
Communication Source

Jury instructions query

From: THE COURT
To: Mr. Everdell

Asking if the jury must conclude she aided in transportation of Jane's flight to New Mexico to find guilt.

Meeting
N/A
Communication Source

Clarification of legal standard

From: MS. MENNINGER
To: THE COURT

Explaining the punctuation in a hypothetical question and clarifying that the flight must be for the purpose of illegal sexual activity.

Meeting
N/A
Communication Source

Schedule

From: Jury
To: THE COURT

Note stating the jury is ready to leave at 5:30.

Note
N/A
Communication Source

Deliberation Instructions

From: THE COURT
To: Jury

Verbal instructions regarding adjournment, prohibition on outside communication, and schedule for the following morning.

Instruction
N/A
Communication Source

State of Arizona's argument

From: Attorney General
To: THE COURT

Argued presence at the scene was essential but conceded lack of proof of intent to kill.

Oral argument
N/A
Communication Source

Defense Rebuttal

From: Narrator
To: THE COURT

Argued brothers were not present, sent to get water, and lacked intent.

Oral argument (rebuttal)
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Juror 50's responses during jury selection, specifically regarding prior experience with sexual assault.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Juror 50 Mem.

From: Juror 50's counsel
To: THE COURT

States Juror 50 does not recall answering questions regarding sexual assault.

Legal memorandum
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Juror 50 rushed through the questionnaire and provided inaccurate answers regarding prior experiences.

Questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Assessment of Bias

From: THE COURT
To: Juror 50

The Court asked Juror 50 questions regarding prior sexual abuse and ability to be impartial.

Hearing
N/A
Communication Source

Dkt. No. 568

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Regarding press outlets and Juror 50's interviews; requested a hearing.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Dkt. No. 569

From: the defendant
To: THE COURT

Informing the Court about the juror's interviews.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Dkt. No. 570

From: the defendant
To: THE COURT

Opposing the Government's request for a hearing and arguing for a new trial.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Schedule

From: Defense counsel
To: THE COURT

Counsel expresses concern that the jury might rush to judgment to avoid returning in January if the schedule bumps up against the Christmas holiday.

Meeting
N/A
Communication Source

Response to Scheduling Concerns

From: Ms. Moe
To: THE COURT

Ms. Moe argues the request is premature but states that if the defense rests the week of the 20th, the jury should be permitted to deliberate.

Meeting
N/A
Communication Source

Open issues

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Court expects to hear from government by letter by 2:00.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Objection/Questions

From: Defense counsel
To: THE COURT

Questions posed by defense counsel regarding Juror 50.

Letter submission
N/A
Communication Source

Request for items and definitions

From: Jury
To: THE COURT

Request for Post-Its, paperboard, highlighters, 'Matt's transcript', and a definition of 'enticement'.

Note
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