| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Rick Ricarey
|
Professional |
6
|
1 |
This document is the cover page for Exhibit B of a legal filing in Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021. It is a memorandum submitted on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell, arguing against the U.S. Government's motion to keep her in detention pending trial.
This document is the signature page and certificate of service for a legal filing submitted by attorney David Oscar Markus of Markus/Moss PLLC on April 1, 2021. It references a separate case, United States v. Dashawn Robertson (District of New Mexico), likely as a citation or appendix item. The page bears a DOJ-OGR bates stamp.
This legal document is a notice of a deficient filing in Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021. The filing was rejected because the submitted pages, including T-1080 and exhibits, were not text-searchable. The filer is instructed to correct this defect and resubmit the document by April 5, 2021, to avoid having the document stricken and the appeal potentially dismissed.
This document is a legal notice from April 1, 2021, pertaining to Case 21-770, addressing a defective filing. It outlines various types of defects and sets a deadline of April 5, 2021, for the appellant to cure the defect and resubmit the document. Failure to comply may lead to the document being stricken or the appeal dismissed, and a phone number is provided for inquiries.
This document is a court docket sheet for Case 21-770 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) covering proceedings from July 13, 2020, to July 27, 2020. Key events include Maxwell's arraignment where she pleaded Not Guilty, the denial of her bail, the setting of a trial date for July 12, 2021, and various orders regarding discovery scheduling and extrajudicial statements. The document records the presence of defense attorneys Mark Cohen, Jeffrey Pagliuca, and Christian Everdell, as well as government prosecutors Alison Moe, Alex Rossmiller, and Maurene Comey.
This document is a court docket sheet from March 2021 covering the denial of Ghislaine Maxwell's third motion for bail and her subsequent appeal of that decision. It also details a legal dispute regarding a defense subpoena targeting a law firm representing alleged victims, with Judge Nathan ordering the firm to formally file objections to protect victim privacy under Rule 17(c)(3). The document lists various filings including letters from prosecutors (AUSAs) and defense counsel.
This legal document, dated March 24, 2021, is a page from a court filing for Case 21-770, listing numerous pending felony counts. The charges include conspiracy to entice and transport minors for illegal sexual activity, coercion of minors, and making false declarations before a grand jury or court (perjury). The document outlines the specific statutes under which the charges are brought.
This is a Docketing Notice from the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the case United States of America v. Maxwell (Case 21-770), dated March 29, 2021. It notifies counsel that the appeal has been docketed and provides instructions regarding the Acknowledgment and Notice of Appearance Form, which must be returned within 14 days. The document references the lower court case (1:20-cr-330-1) presided over by Judge Nathan in the SDNY.
This document appears to be the second page of a legal filing or correspondence dated August 4, 2025, related to Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. It contains a quoted excerpt from a DOJ/FBI memo stating that a review confirmed Epstein harmed over 1,000 victims. The document concludes that due to the sensitive nature of victim information, the DOJ and FBI have determined that no further disclosure of evidence is appropriate or warranted.
This is the final page of a legal filing in the Epstein case (1:19-cr-00490) submitted by Kel McClanahan, counsel for MSW Media. The filing argues that the Court should not issue an opinion on the Government's redaction of non-victim PII, as this could negatively influence a separate pending FOIA case. It notes that the Government does not oppose MSW Media's intervention and that the author did not consult with the former defendant's (Epstein's) representatives. The header date appears to contain a typo (reading '25' instead of '19').
This document is page 61 of a court transcript from September 3, 2019, concerning the case against Jeffrey Epstein. Attorney Mr. Boies briefly addresses the court to express pride in the women who came forward. Following him, attorney Kimberly Lerner introduces her client, Jennifer Aroz, to the court, describing Aroz as a brave survivor who initially thought she was the only victim, and explicitly characterizes Jeffrey Epstein as a predator and pedophile.
A page from a court transcript filed on September 3, 2019, featuring a statement from a victim addressing the court. The speaker discusses the complexity of their trauma following the defendant's (Epstein's) alleged suicide, calls for an investigation into his death, and criticizes the media for treating the situation as entertainment rather than focusing on the core issues of exploitation and coercion.
This is a court order from Judge Richard M. Berman in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated July 29, 2019, in the criminal case against Jeffrey Epstein. The order directs the prosecution and defense counsel to meet before a conference scheduled for that Wednesday to create a mutually agreed-upon schedule for the remainder of the case, including discovery, motions, and the trial.
This document is page 7 of a Protective Order from a legal case (1:19-cr-00490-RMB), filed on July 25, 2019. It details the rules for handling confidential information by the Defendant and Defense Counsel, including restrictions on possession, inspection under law enforcement protection, and a prohibition on duplication. The order also specifies the procedure for sharing information with 'Designated Persons' and requires the eventual return or destruction of all discovery materials to the Government.
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) dated July 25, 2019. It defines "Confidential Information," which can include personal data and witness identities, and sets forth strict rules for how this information must be handled by the defendant and their Defense Counsel. The rules govern the use, storage, review, and disclosure of the sensitive material throughout the legal proceedings.
This document is a page from a government filing (July 18, 2019) arguing against bail for Jeffrey Epstein. It details his immense wealth, listing specific property values totaling hundreds of millions of dollars, and notes the discovery of over $70,000 in cash and loose diamonds in his safe, which the government argues indicates a flight risk. The document also asserts that Epstein previously used employees to facilitate the exploitation of minors in New York and Florida.
This document is page 3 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, filed on July 16, 2019. It records the proceedings where the prosecutor, Mr. Rossmiller, confirms Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on July 6 at 5:30 p.m. The Court then proceeds to read Epstein his Miranda rights and explains his rights regarding bail and legal representation.
This document is a signed affirmation by Jeffrey E. Epstein dated December 7, 2007, in which he re-affirms the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) and Addendum dated October 30, 2007. The document was faxed from the law firm Fowler-White Burnett and was later included as an exhibit in multiple court cases, including the 2019 criminal case against him.
This document is the signature page of an Addendum to Jeffrey Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement. It contains a certification that Epstein has read, understood, and agreed to comply with the clarifications to the agreement. The document is signed by Lilly Ann Sanchez, attorney for Epstein, on October 29, 2007, though it also lists signature blocks for U.S. Attorney R. Alexander Acosta, A. Marie Villafaña, and Gerald Lefcourt.
This document is page 18 of a legal filing (Case 22-1426) dated September 17, 2024. It discusses a Rule 33 motion regarding Juror 50's erroneous responses during voir dire in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. The text argues that under the 'McDonough' standard, a new trial is not warranted because the District Court found the juror's errors were not deliberate and would not have resulted in a strike for cause.
This document is page 8 of a legal filing from September 2024, recounting procedural history in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It details a March 2022 hearing where 'Juror 50' testified under immunity about inaccurate responses to jury questionnaire items regarding sexual abuse history; the court found the errors inadvertent and denied Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The text also notes Maxwell's sentencing to 240 months in prison.
This document is a fax sent on January 19, 2005, containing a heavily redacted copy of a financial instrument, likely a check. The visible information indicates it is from Colonial Bank in Orlando, FL, and is dated December 8, 2004, but the parties and amount of the transaction are obscured.
This document is a fax dated January 19, 2005, which contains a heavily degraded and mostly illegible image of a handwritten note. The few discernible words on the note are 'Pilots' and a string that appears to be an aircraft tail number, 'N2002541'. The page includes administrative markings from a public records request, including a Department of Justice Bates number.
This document is a Certificate of Service dated April 2, 2008, certifying that a legal document was sent via facsimile and U.S. mail to attorneys Jack A. Goldberger and Lanna Leigh Belohlavek in West Palm Beach, Florida. The document is part of a larger file (page 34 of 114) released under a Public Records Request in 2017.
This legal document, dated July 26, 2017, is a sentencing computation form for a criminal case. It calculates a total of 56.7 sentence points, which corresponds to a lowest permissible prison sentence of 21.5 months. However, due to a mitigated departure and a plea bargain, the actual sentence imposed was 12 months in county jail, followed by community control and probation.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity