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-00018536.jpg

This document is a transcript of a court proceeding filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the direct examination of FBI Special Agent Maguire by an attorney, Ms. Moe. Maguire testifies about their four years of experience with the FBI, their assignment to the C20 child exploitation and human trafficking task force, and confirms their participation in an FBI operation on July 6, 2019.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018535.jpg

This document is a page from the court transcript of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It details a discussion between the defense (Mr. Everdell), the prosecution (Ms. Moe), and the Court regarding Exhibit 913, which contains photos of children and other individuals found on a desk; the parties agree to file it under seal due to privacy interests. Following this discussion, the jury enters, and the government calls Special Agent Kelly Maguire as a witness.

Court transcript (united states v. ghislaine maxwell)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018534.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It records a dialogue between The Court and counsel Ms. Moe regarding the redaction of Exhibit 911, specifically debating whether to redact a painting over a mantel or a small photograph of an individual on a table. Ms. Moe agrees to unredact the painting and instead redact the photograph to protect potential privacy interests or witness identity.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018532.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument over the admissibility of a schoolgirl outfit as evidence. The prosecution argues the outfit corroborates a witness's testimony about Epstein's 'practice' of asking people to wear such costumes. The defense, represented by Mr. Everdell, contends the evidence is highly prejudicial, based on a single witness, and insufficient to establish a pattern, a position with which the judge seems to agree.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018531.jpg

This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecutor, Ms. Moe, explains why they did not show certain evidence to victims 'Jane' and 'Kate' during interviews to preserve the integrity of their memories against defense challenges. The Judge challenges the relevance of introducing photos taken in 2019 of 'movable objects' (specifically schoolgirl outfits) to prove a conspiracy that ended 15 years earlier.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018529.jpg

This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving a legal argument over the admissibility of photo exhibits dated from 2019. The prosecution (Ms. Moe) argues the photos demonstrate Jeffrey Epstein's sexual preference for schoolgirls, while the defense (Mr. Everdell) and the Judge question the relevance given the time gap and location discrepancies (New York vs. Palm Beach) relative to the charged conspiracy. The text mentions testimony from a witness named 'Kate' regarding schoolgirl outfits.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018527.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell raises an objection regarding the admissibility of exhibits 919 and 920 (photographs of schoolgirl outfits) intended to be introduced by the next witness, Kelly Maguire. Everdell argues that although 'Witness 3' (Kate) described wearing such outfits, she did not identify these specific photos during her testimony, lacking the proper legal foundation required for admission, similar to a previous situation with a witness named Jane.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018525.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. Witness McHugh testifies regarding the authenticity of Government Exhibit 507, identified as a JP Morgan account signature card. The witness confirms comparing the exhibit against internal bank records, and the Court admits the exhibit into evidence without objection before excusing the witness.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018521.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named McHugh. The questioning focuses on Ghislaine Maxwell's bank account, specifically on checks that appear to be signed by Harry Beller rather than Maxwell herself. The line of questioning aims to establish that Harry Beller had signatory authority over Maxwell's finances.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018511.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a portion of the cross-examination of a witness named McHugh. The questioning focuses on Government Exhibit 506, which is identified as a signature card for a bank account ending in 4324. The questioner establishes a link between this account and the company Air Ghislaine Inc., while attorneys Ms. Moe and Mr. Everdell interject to clarify details about the exhibit for the court.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018510.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Mr. McHugh, a banker with 30 years of experience. The questioning focuses on Government Exhibit 501, a financial statement for 'Air Ghislaine Inc.' from June 2007, specifically highlighting a transaction on June 18th involving the purchase of a green helicopter from Sikorsky. The defense attorney, Ms. Moe, objects to questions regarding the general practice of purchasing assets through companies.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018507.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures the cross-examination of a witness named McHugh regarding the authorization required for someone running a 'family office' to control financial accounts. The questioning focuses on the concept of signatory authority over money market and checking accounts, with objections from an attorney, Ms. Moe, and rulings from the court.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018506.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named McHugh. An attorney questions McHugh about whether transactions in accounts managed by 'family offices' are typically handled by someone other than the account holder. Another attorney, Ms. Moe, objects to the questions, but is overruled by the court, and the witness ultimately states the question is too general to answer.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018505.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a legal case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a portion of the cross-examination of a witness named McHugh by an attorney, Mr. Everdell, regarding the typical functions of a 'family office' in managing the finances of wealthy individuals. Another attorney, Ms. Moe, repeatedly objects to the questions, which probe whether wealthy clients personally control their accounts or cede that control to the family office.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018504.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. McHugh, by an attorney, Mr. Everdell. The questioning focuses on Mr. McHugh's familiarity with the concept of a 'family office'. Another attorney, Ms. Moe, repeatedly objects to the line of questioning, with the court sustaining at least one of her objections.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018503.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a legal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the cross-examination of a witness, Mr. McHugh, about the typical assets of high-net-worth individuals, such as multiple bank accounts, brokerage accounts, homes, and planes. An attorney, Ms. Moe, objects to a question about planes, and the court sustains the objection.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018500.jpg

This document is an excerpt from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing a cross-examination concerning Jeffrey Epstein's financial accounts at JP Morgan. The testimony confirms that Epstein, like other high net worth individuals, held millions of dollars in his bank accounts, and references Government Exhibit 504 as evidence discussed during the proceedings.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018483.jpg

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of witness Mr. McHugh by Ms. Moe. The testimony focuses on the admission of several government exhibits and specifically examines Exhibit 509, a 'Morgan account corporate partnership information application page' for an entity named 'Financial Trust Company, Inc.' The witness confirms that the contact person listed for this account is Jeffrey Epstein.

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

DOJ-OGR-00018479.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing the direct examination of a witness, Mr. McHugh, by an attorney, Ms. Moe. Mr. McHugh testifies that he has worked at the bank JPMorgan for thirty years, currently holds the title of Executive Director, and works within the client service group.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018478.jpg

This document is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It captures the final cross-examination questions by defense attorney Ms. Sternheim to a witness named Kate regarding potential fraud in an application to a compensation fund. Following Kate's dismissal, prosecutor Ms. Moe calls the next government witness, Patrick McHugh, who is sworn in.

Court transcript / trial testimony
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018477.jpg

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a portion of a cross-examination of a witness named Kate regarding her U visa status. During the proceeding, attorney Ms. Sternheim moves to admit Exhibits K-8 and K-10, which the court accepts under seal to protect the witness's identity.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018475.jpg

This document is page 138 of a court transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim cross-examines a witness named Kate regarding her memory of being asked to wear a uniform and an alleged conversation with Ghislaine about 'St. Trinian's,' which the witness does not recall. The prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz) successfully objects to questions about costumes as being 'beyond the scope' of redirect.

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

DOJ-OGR-00018474.jpg

This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the testimony of a witness named Kate. Under questioning by Ms. Pomerantz, Kate explains that money received from the Epstein Victim Compensation Fund represented recognition of her pain and truth, rather than just financial gain, and she explicitly denies having a financial stake in the outcome of the current trial. The page concludes with Ms. Sternheim beginning recross-examination.

Court transcript
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018469.jpg

This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a dialogue between the judge (THE COURT) and three attorneys (Mr. Everdell, Mr. Rohrbach, and Ms. Pomerantz) regarding an objection to having an agent testify about exhibits. The discussion clarifies that the agent in question is the one who conducted a search, not the current witness, after which the judge concludes the matter and calls for the witness and jury to enter.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00018468.jpg

Excerpt from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, US v. Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Rohrbach seeks clarification from the Judge regarding testimony about a search of the New York residence. The discussion confirms that while the government will not introduce physical exhibits of nude photos or photos of Epstein with celebrities, the witness is permitted to testify about observing these items and 'nude artwork' in the house.

Court transcript (case 1:20-cr-00330-pae)
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

Unknown question regarding instructions

From: Jury
To: THE COURT

Jury sent a note; Judge is responding by referring them to instruction number 21.

Note
N/A
Communication Source

Response to Note

From: THE COURT
To: Jury

So I received your note. I refer you to instruction number 21 on page 28. Please consider the entirety of the instruction.

Court instruction
N/A
Communication Source

Impartiality

From: THE COURT
To: Juror No. 50

Asked if he had any doubt about ability to be fair; Juror 50 said 'no'.

Court examination
N/A
Communication Source

Clarification on charges

From: Jury
To: THE COURT

Indicated confusion regarding Count Four and jurisdiction.

Jury note
N/A
Communication Source

Supplemental Instruction for Count Four

From: the defense
To: THE COURT

Proposed language clarifying that intent must relate to activity within New York state.

Proposed instruction
N/A
Communication Source

Dkt. No. 270

From: Government officials
To: THE COURT

States that MDC staff conduct flashlight checks of all inmates as a matter of course.

Response
N/A
Communication Source

Dkt. No. 191

From: Boies Schiller Flexner...
To: THE COURT

Regarding the subpoena served on BSF.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Question regarding liability and facts

From: The jury
To: THE COURT

A note posing a question that led to debate over accomplice liability and flight arrangements.

Jury note
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Instructions

From: Defense counsel
To: THE COURT

Requesting instruction on 'purpose of travel' and arguing lack of evidence for return flight arrangement.

Legal argument/request
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection / Voir Dire

From: THE COURT
To: juror

The Court questions a juror about their exposure to case information, availability for a six-week trial starting Nov 29, and familiarity with lists of names and entities involved in the case.

Meeting
N/A
Communication Source

Juror Screening

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Document Juror 50 is seeking a copy of.

Jury questionnaire
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Note

From: Jury Foreperson
To: THE COURT

A note signed by the foreperson that attorneys are discussing; requires redaction of signature.

Note
N/A
Communication Source

Dkt. No. 46

From: Government officials
To: THE COURT

Publicly available letter discussing the issue.

Docketed letter
N/A
Communication Source

Regarding subpoena

From: Boies Schiller Flexner...
To: THE COURT

Referenced as Dkt. No. 191, mentioning the request for a victim's diary.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Selection

From: Juror No. 50
To: THE COURT

False denials regarding victim status and social media usage.

Questionnaire/testimony
N/A
Communication Source

Motion to Unseal

From: Dag
To: THE COURT

A 3.5 page motion to unseal grand jury materials filed without supporting docs.

Legal motion
N/A
Communication Source

Maxwell Post-Hearing Br. / Maxwell Br.

From: Defense counsel
To: THE COURT

Arguments regarding Juror 50's bias.

Legal brief
N/A
Communication Source

Format inquiry

From: Ms. Sternheim
To: THE COURT

Inquiring if a specific format was satisfactory.

Courtroom dialogue
N/A
Communication Source

Missing Jurors

From: Ms. Comey
To: THE COURT

Asking if the Court has attempted to call the missing jurors.

Courtroom dialogue
N/A
Communication Source

Argument on the merits of Juror 50's motion to intervene

From: the defendant
To: THE COURT

Previews argument regarding Juror 50's motion, claiming it is a discovery request.

Letter
N/A
Communication Source

Initial Bail Hearing

From: the government
To: THE COURT

Proffer that testimony would be corroborated by 'significant contemporaneous documentary evidence'.

Transcript
N/A
Communication Source

Request for Evidence

From: Jury/Foreperson
To: THE COURT

"We would like the FBI deposition 3505-005 referred to by the defense during the cross-examination of Carolyn."

Jury note/request
N/A
Communication Source

Juror Screening

From: THE COURT
To: Juror No. 50

Written questionnaire and in-person questioning.

Questionnaire/interview
N/A
Communication Source

Sentencing Guidelines / Supervisory Role

From: Ms. Moe
To: THE COURT

Ms. Moe argues that trial evidence proves Maxwell supervised Sarah Kellen, satisfying the requirement for an organizer/leader enhancement.

Meeting
N/A
Communication Source

Jury Questionnaire

From: Juror 50
To: THE COURT

Documents containing answers regarding prior experience with sexual assault.

Questionnaire
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