witness
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Business associate |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. Leopold
|
Client |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Herman
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Trzaskoma
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Association |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. SCAROLA
|
Client |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Russ Adler
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
dad
|
Family |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
ken
|
Business associate |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
ALAN DERSHOWITZ
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Dr. Rocchio
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Edelstein
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
BRAD EDWARDS
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Minor Victim-2
|
Alleged interaction |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Mr. Epstein
|
Interaction |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Haley
|
Acquaintance |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
University of Utah
|
Professional pro bono |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JANE
|
Acquaintance |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
him
|
Service provider victim |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
None argued |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Legal deposition/testimony | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Testimony regarding sexual abuse | New Mexico | View |
| N/A | N/A | Grand Jury Testimony | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Symposium on cleaning homes. | Santa Fe, New Mexico | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell | SDNY | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness brought to Epstein by traffickers | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness raped by Jeffery Epstein | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness trafficked to other men by Epstein | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Encounter on plane | Airplane | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial/GJ Prep Meeting | SDNY (at 1 p.m.) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness met Ghislaine Maxwell about 10 times at Epstein's house. | Epstein Palm Beach residence | View |
| N/A | N/A | Alleged travel by witness with Epstein and Maxwell at age 14/15. | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Car ride | Car | View |
| N/A | N/A | Events at Mr. Epstein's house | Mr. Epstein's house | View |
| N/A | N/A | Massage | The House (upstairs room wi... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Missing person incident | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Baseball game | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Current testimony/deposition taking place in Florida. | Florida | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness provided massages to JE; JE showered/steamed and invited witness to join | JE's residence (implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition testimony regarding procedural rules for answering questions. | Legal setting | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness taken to underground location, kept in stall, judged by Epstein and other men, and raped ... | Underground location (implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Deposition/Interview recording | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Violent outburst where Zack punched a wall next to the witness's face. | Unspecified | View |
| N/A | N/A | Witness visited Jeff's house with Haley. | Jeff's house | View |
| N/A | N/A | Meeting with Investors | Unknown | View |
EFTA00038726.pdf
A screenshot of an iMessage exchange from August 2020/2021 regarding a witness in a legal case. The sender provides an email address (B@bdg100.com) for a witness and mentions that several friends of a redacted female figure (likely Ghislaine Maxwell given the context/date) are 'turning on her' because of the case.
EFTA00022646.pdf
Handwritten notes from an October 2021 interview with a female witness who was recruited by Ghislaine Maxwell from the Palm Beach Atlantic University campus around 2001. The witness describes being paid $200/hr for 'secretary work' (specifically shredding bound 'black books' of contacts) and massages, during which Jeffrey Epstein molested her ('handsy', touching breasts/thighs). She also reveals that she was interviewed by the Vice Squad regarding a prostitution ring as early as 2001/2002 but declined to cooperate at the time.
EFTA00021076.pdf
This document contains handwritten FBI/law enforcement interview notes from a witness (likely a former assistant/scheduler) and photocopies of phone message pads found at Epstein's properties. The witness describes the daily routine of scheduling massages, recruiting girls (including a specific code '2x8' for teenage girls from Jean-Luc), travel logistics to various properties (NY, Palm Beach, Virgin Islands), and specific interactions with high-profile individuals like Prince Andrew and Alan Dershowitz. The notes detail the witness's observations of sexual acts, payment procedures involving cash, the presence of guns, and Ghislaine Maxwell's role in managing the household and recruiting.
EFTA00009622.pdf
These are handwritten law enforcement notes, dated July 19, 2006, documenting an interview with a 16-year-old witness regarding her interactions with Jeffrey Epstein in 2005. The notes detail how she was recruited by a friend/acquaintance with the promise of $200 for a massage, taken to Epstein's Palm Beach home, and greeted by an assistant who instructed her to undress. The document describes Epstein offering an 'extra $300' for sexual acts, the payment process, and a subsequent 'control call' regarding scheduling.
DOJ-OGR-00018341.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, in which a judge instructs a jury about an upcoming witness's testimony. The judge clarifies that because the witness was over the age of consent, her alleged sexual conduct with Mr. Epstein was not illegal under the indictment, and she is not considered a victim in this case. The jury is strictly forbidden from using this testimony to convict the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, or to infer anything about the character or criminal propensity of either Epstein or Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00008599.jpg
This document is Jury Instruction No. 42, titled "Direct and Circumstantial Evidence," filed on December 18, 2021. It explains the two types of evidence, providing a hypothetical example to illustrate circumstantial evidence. The instruction emphasizes that both direct and circumstantial evidence hold equal value, and the jury must be satisfied of Ms. Maxwell's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt based on all evidence presented.
DOJ-OGR-00008549.jpg
This document is a legal instruction (Instruction No. 4) from a court case, filed on December 18, 2021. The judge directs the jury that they must decide the case based solely on their own recollection of the evidence, not on the arguments, objections, or statements made by the attorneys for the Government or the Defendant. The instruction explicitly states that statements from counsel and the court are not evidence and that the jury's memory of the facts is the ultimate authority.
DOJ-OGR-00008519.jpg
This document is a page of jury instructions from a legal case filed on December 17, 2021. The text directs the jury on how to assess witness testimony, emphasizing that they should use their own common sense and experience, and are not required to accept unchallenged testimony. The judge also instructs the jury not to be influenced by the fact that some witnesses are using pseudonyms to protect their privacy from media attention.
DOJ-OGR-00008321.jpg
This document is page 11 of a court transcript from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330) dated December 10, 2021. The dialogue is between Ms. Moe (Prosecution) and the Court regarding the logistics of presenting evidence; specifically, they agree that while electronic display is standard, sensitive documents containing identifying information of victims should be provided to jurors in paper binders to prevent them from being seen on public courtroom screens.
DOJ-OGR-00001699.jpg
This document is page 10 of a court order filed on July 30, 2020, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. It details strict regulations for the handling of confidential discovery materials by the Defendant and their legal team, prohibiting dissemination, copying, and public filing unless authorized in writing by the Government or by a specific Order of the Court. The order also specifies that information identifying victims or witnesses is an exception and should not be disclosed.
DOJ-OGR-00001680.jpg
This document is a page from a court order filed on July 28, 2020, detailing the strict rules and procedures for the handling of confidential and highly confidential information by the defendant and their legal team. It prohibits the public filing of discovery materials unless explicitly authorized by the Government or by a court order, and specifies that materials must be reviewed under controlled conditions. The order aims to protect sensitive information, including victim and witness identities, during legal proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00018882.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a court proceeding dated August 10, 2022, discussing legal arguments related to factual records, employer practices, and the admissibility of evidence. Key points include an objection to Government Exhibit 761, a Professional Children's School application for Jane, due to unverified financial guarantor information, and the Court's ruling on the relevance of Mr. Epstein's alleged financial assistance to a witness's family. The discussion also touches upon legal precedents for adoptive business records.
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.
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.
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.
DOJ-OGR-00018461.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Ms. Sternheim and prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz discuss the admissibility and origin of two exhibits: a visa application bearing the name 'Kate' (Exhibit K-9) and emails between a witness and Mr. Epstein (Exhibit K-7). Ms. Pomerantz clarifies that the visa form was provided by the witness's counsel during a previous meeting to discuss visa status.
DOJ-OGR-00016119.jpg
This page is a transcript from the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). Prosecutor Ms. Moe argues against the defense's use of screens to highlight documents because the government cannot see the witness's screen without it being mirrored to the public gallery, which poses security/privacy risks. The Court rules that highlighting text on a screen for a witness is permissible provided the action is fully described for the record, similar to reading from paper.
DOJ-OGR-00021867.jpg
This page is from a legal opinion (likely the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, given the citations) affirming a District Court's denial of Ghislaine Maxwell's motion. Maxwell argued that testimony regarding sexual abuse in New Mexico constituted a 'constructive amendment' or 'prejudicial variance' from the original indictment, violating the Fifth Amendment. The court reviews the denial *de novo* and rejects Maxwell's argument.
DOJ-OGR-00021619.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (dated June 29, 2023) containing the testimony of a victim. The witness describes working as a salesperson at Henri Bendel while attending FIT and meeting Ghislaine Maxwell. Maxwell mentioned her boss, Jeffrey Epstein, was close friends with Lex Wexner (owner of The Limited/Henri Bendel). The witness recounts delivering purchases to a hotel where they were introduced to Epstein and sexually assaulted by both Maxwell and Epstein. The testimony also notes the professional and academic fallout, including a job offer at Henri Bendel that would have required the witness to drop out of college.
DOJ-OGR-00021450.jpg
This legal document is a page from a court filing that cites the Victims’ Rights and Restitution Act of 1990 (VRRA). It details the legal obligations of a 'responsible official' to crime victims, including identifying them, informing them of their rights and available services, and providing timely updates on the status of the criminal case. These updates cover the investigation, the arrest of a suspect, filing of charges, court proceedings, and the final disposition including sentencing and parole eligibility.
DOJ-OGR-00013217.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, discussing inconsistencies in dates provided in testimony versus an indictment. Mr. Pagliuca and The Court discuss a witness's (likely Carolyn) direct testimony and cross-examination regarding the dates of alleged incidents, specifically contrasting July 2002, 2001, and 2002-2003/2004. The discussion focuses on impeachment based on these chronological discrepancies in the alleged events.
DOJ-OGR-00017209.jpg
This document is a page from a judge's charge to the jury in a criminal case, filed on August 10, 2022. The judge instructs the jury not to be swayed by lawyers' objections or the judge's own rulings and comments, emphasizing that these are matters of legal procedure. The judge stresses that the jury's own recollection of the facts is what governs their decision-making and that statements from counsel are not evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00013878.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It records a discussion during a hearing concerning the relevance of Dr. Loftus's opinions, Agent Young's testimony, and a motion to preclude Alexander Hamilton's testimony. The court also addresses a defense response regarding a witness and references a legal precedent from 'Hamilton in Federal '78'.
DOJ-OGR-00013587.jpg
A court transcript page filed on August 10, 2022, documenting a procedural pause in a trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Attorneys Ms. Moe and Ms. Comey request a private discussion in the robing room with the defense's consent, leading the judge to excuse the jury. The transcript notes that the subsequent pages (2020-2024) regarding this discussion are sealed.
DOJ-OGR-00013556.jpg
This document is a partial transcript from a court proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, Document 757, filed 2022-08-10). The discussion primarily revolves around the nature of closing arguments, the proper method for presenting evidence (specifically regarding a witness's personal experience), and an 'Exhibit 52 issue.' The Court, Ms. Moe, Mr. Pagliuca (representing the defense), and Ms. Comey participate in the dialogue, clarifying procedural matters related to the trial.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | Jeffrey Epstein/S... | witness | $1,000.00 | Petty cash given, required to type up report to... | View |
| N/A | Received | He (subject) | witness | $0.00 | Cash payment given immediately after the massag... | View |
| N/A | Paid | witness | Marshall's | $0.00 | Witness denies spending money at Marshall's, th... | View |
| N/A | Received | Henri Bendel | witness | $0.00 | Offer of a full-time position shortly after mee... | View |
| N/A | Received | Unknown | witness | $0.00 | Offer of money to refuse cooperation with polic... | View |
| N/A | Received | JE | witness | $300.00 | Received approximately $300 the first time she ... | View |
| N/A | Received | JE | witness | $0.00 | Money for sex with the 'fat bald man' at JE's h... | View |
| N/A | Received | Former associate ... | witness | $0.00 | Woman offered compensation if she didn't cooper... | View |
| 2021-08-19 | Paid | witness | Hotel/Food Service | $0.00 | Discussion regarding reimbursement for room ser... | View |
| 2005-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | witness | $300.00 | Extra payment for sexual acts ('extra 300.00').... | View |
| 2005-01-01 | Received | Private Investiga... | witness | $0.00 | Investigator asked if witness wanted money; wit... | View |
| 2005-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | witness | $200.00 | Initial offer for 45 minute massage | View |
| 2002-01-01 | Paid | witness | Recruiter [Redacted] | $100.00 | Shared referral fee for bringing her in | View |
| 2002-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | witness | $200.00 | Payment for first two massage sessions | View |
| 2002-01-01 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | witness | $300.00 | Payment for subsequent massage sessions | View |
| 2001-01-01 | Received | GM/JE | witness | $200.00 | Hourly rate for 'secretary work' and massages. ... | View |
| 2001-01-01 | Received | GM | witness | $0.00 | Cash for movie tickets at City Place Theater. | View |
Social media posts
Friends commented on posts or texted the witness, apparently unaware the trial was happening.
Juror experience
Witness gave an interview ('press interviews') about their experience.
Ongoing investigation
A witness stated she had several telephone conversations with Epstein's assistants regarding the ongoing investigation.
Unknown prior statement
The transcript discusses a prior statement a witness made to an FBI agent, which the witness now claims not to recall.
Jane's interactions with Jeffrey Epstein.
Jane told the witness that the presence of a woman at Jeffrey Epstein's house made her feel more comfortable. This conversation occurred around 2009.
Juror experience and sexual abuse history
Witness spoke publicly about their experience as a juror and their history of sexual abuse.
Unknown
Mr. Simpson asks if the witness refuses to answer questions about communications with Miss Roberts.
Visit to house
Two ladies and two guys visited the witness's house.
Legal representation
Conversations regarding potential financial advances (subject to privilege objection).
Investment in settlements
Witness showed investors legitimate Epstein case files to prove the case existed, then left the room to let them look at privileged info.
Sexual activity with Epstein
Question asks if Hayley said anything on the phone about sexual activity; Witness answers 'No'
Sexual activity with Epstein
Question asks if Hayley sent a message over the internet about sexual activity; Witness answers 'No'
Inducement to engage in sexual activity
Question asks if anyone called or emailed to induce sexual activity; Witness answers 'No'
Cooperation
Jenne told witness someone in the office was acting as a confidential informant.
Flight Manifest
Adler told witness about the flight manifest.
Jury Questionnaire
Witness filled out a questionnaire where they allegedly failed to disclose a history of sexual abuse.
Interview regarding the case
An interview given by the witness where sexual abuse was discussed.
Epstein case
Discussion regarding the Epstein case and likely the hiring of Brad.
Debrief
Haley asked 'how did it go, what did you do' and the witness explained the massage.
Fifth Amendment Invocation
A witness wrote to the Court stating they planned to invoke their Fifth Amendment rights.
Current situation
Witness informed boss about what was going on; boss offered help.
Deposition Preparation
Preparation for the deposition testimony.
College Applications
Discussion across a desk regarding witness's college applications.
Abuse Claim
Claimed that Epstein holding her hand constituted sexual abuse.
General correspondence
Question asked: 'Have you ever e-mailed with any FBI agent or any federal prosecutor?' (Answer cut off).
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity