| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
The Court
|
Legal representative |
16
Very Strong
|
35 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Opposing counsel |
15
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Opposing counsel |
15
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Opposing counsel |
13
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Co counsel |
13
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Client |
12
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
11
Very Strong
|
196 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Professional adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Professional adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
22 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
38 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
28 | |
|
person
the Judge
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
your Honor
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Co counsel |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Ms. Chapell
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Professional adversarial |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Mr. Visoski
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Espinosa
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
2 | |
|
person
MS. POMERANTZ
|
Opposing counsel |
8
Strong
|
4 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A court hearing where counsel provides updates on an investigation and discusses the witness list... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Mr. Visoski, during which Government Exhibits 334 and 335 were admi... | Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion was held regarding a courthouse mask mandate and the fulfillment of requests for evi... | courthouse | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A legal argument is presented by Mr. Everdell to the court regarding the evidence for conviction ... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness McHugh regarding Government Exhibit 506, a signature card for an acc... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Testimony of Special Agent Maguire regarding Government Exhibit 926, which was admitted into evid... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion between the judge and counsel regarding how to answer a jury's question about the in... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Cross-examination | A witness named Parkinson is being cross-examined about the layout of a floor plan, specifically ... | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Espinosa regarding a prior interview with prosecutors. | Courtroom (unspecified) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion on the record between the judge and attorneys about how to answer a question from th... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Legal proceeding | Cross-examination of a witness named Chapell regarding the sender and recipient information on a ... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Admission of evidence | Government Exhibits 801 and 801-R were received in evidence. GX-801 was admitted under seal, and ... | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A court hearing where exhibits were admitted into evidence and a witness, Ms. Chapell, was questi... | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion between the Court and Mr. Everdell regarding jury instructions in case 1:20-cr-00330... | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court hearing/Cross-examination of witness Visoski regarding flight logs and Sarah Kellen. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion in court regarding the mechanics of presenting evidence (costumes in a bag) to the j... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Rodgers regarding the travel habits of Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Direct examination of witness Parkinson regarding Government Exhibits 201-222. | Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness Ms. Chapell by attorney Mr. Everdell in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion between the court and attorneys regarding the specific wording of jury instructions ... | Southern District Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A court hearing where attorneys discuss the evidence related to a 2019 search. | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | A legal argument took place regarding the necessity and content of a limiting instruction for the... | Courtroom in the Southern D... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court hearing | Cross-examination of witness Rodgers regarding the production of his flight logs in a past civil ... | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | A discussion in court about the logistical handling of trial exhibits and transcripts for the jury. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court proceeding | Direct examination of witness Mr. Visoski regarding photographs (Government Exhibits 308 and 326)... | Courtroom | View |
This document is a partial court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a segment of a legal proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It records the beginning of the direct examination of Elizabeth Loftus, a professor and scientist, who was called as a witness by the defense. The transcript includes exchanges between Ms. Sternheim (defense counsel), Mr. Everdell, and the presiding Judge, as Professor Loftus starts to explain her role to the jury.
This document is a transcript page from the cross-examination of a witness named Mr. Sud during the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). Under questioning by Ms. Moe, Sud confirms that he began booking travel for Jeffrey Epstein's office in 1999 and that the records in exhibit 'RS-1' cover the period from 1999 through 2006. Following this confirmation, the witness is excused, and defense attorney Mr. Everdell is instructed to call the next witness.
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022. In it, a witness is questioned about the meaning of fields in financial records belonging to Epstein, which span from January 1999 to December 2006. After confirming the scope of the records, the attorney, Mr. Everdell, concludes his questioning.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details the direct examination of a witness named Sud, during which defense attorney Mr. Everdell introduces 'Exhibit RS-1' into evidence. The prosecution (Ms. Moe) agrees to the admission provided the document is kept under seal due to the presence of personally identifying information of third parties. The Court admits the exhibit under seal but allows the jury to view it immediately.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing the direct examination of Mr. Sud by Mr. Everdell. Mr. Sud testifies that he lives in East Windsor, New Jersey, and is the Vice President of Shoppers Travel, a company he has worked for since its founding in 1988.
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022. It shows the conclusion of the cross-examination of a witness, Espinosa, who confirms working at Jeffrey Epstein's Manhattan office but not his homes. Following this, the defense attorney, Mr. Everdell, calls the next witness, Raghu Sud, to the stand.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the testimony of a witness named Espinosa, who states under questioning by Mr. Everdell that during her six years working for Ghislaine Maxwell, she never saw Maxwell or Jeffrey Epstein engage in inappropriate activity with underage girls. Following this testimony, Mr. Everdell concludes his questioning, and Ms. Pomerantz begins her cross-examination.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. The witness, identified as 'Espinosa', is being questioned by Mr. Everdell about a prior videoconference interview with prosecutors that took place during the summer. The attorney introduces a document (3501.063-002) to refresh the witness's recollection regarding the specific date of that interview.
This document is an excerpt from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of Ms. Espinosa. The questioning by Mr. Everdell focuses on Ms. Espinosa's past employment, the departure of Ghislaine, and the management of Epstein's properties by Sarah Kellen. An objection raised by Ms. Pomerantz regarding Sarah Kellen's marital status is sustained by the Court.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Espinosa. Espinosa identifies Sarah Kellen from a photograph (Government's Exhibit 327) and testifies that Kellen was hired by Jeffrey Epstein between 2000 and 2002. While uncertain of Kellen's specific job title, Espinosa states that Kellen frequently accompanied Epstein.
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 Espinosa by attorney Mr. Everdell. The witness identifies 'Sarah Kellen' as the person who sat in the office where Ghislaine Maxwell used to sit. The remainder of the page concerns procedural discussions between the defense, prosecution (Ms. Pomerantz), and the Judge regarding the publication of 'Government's Exhibit 327' to the jury.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Espinosa by attorney Mr. Everdell. The testimony confirms that an individual referred to as 'Jane,' along with her mother and brothers, regularly used apartments in New York during the late 1990s and early 2000s. The questioning then shifts to the witness's observations of the relationship and interactions between Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell while working in their office.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. The witness, Espinosa (referred to as 'Cimberly' in the exhibits), is testifying about photographs and inscriptions received from an individual referred to as 'Jane.' The exhibits (CE4-CE8) include a signed note thanking Cimberly for her help and photos of a soap opera cast where 'Jane' was employed.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Espinosa. The questioning focuses on two pieces of evidence: an envelope labeled CE3 and a photograph labeled CE4. The witness identifies the person in the photograph as 'Jane' and confirms the presence of an inscription on it before being interrupted by Mr. Everdell.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. Witness Ms. Espinosa is being questioned by Mr. Everdell regarding Exhibit CE3, which is identified as a manila envelope sent by 'Jane' to 'Ms. Cimberly' at 'Epstein & Co., 457 Madison Avenue.' The testimony discusses the physical state of the exhibit and the inability to read the postage date.
A page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330, US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell questions witness Ms. Espinosa regarding exhibits CE3 through CE8, which the witness identifies as headshots of cast members and a group shot she had held onto for many years.
This document is a partial court transcript from the direct examination of Ms. Espinosa on August 10, 2022. The testimony focuses on an individual named Jane, her relationship as Jeffrey's goddaughter, and how this status influenced her treatment in 'the office' where her mother also worked. The examination also inquires about Jane's siblings and the extent of contact between Jane's mother and Epstein.
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Ms. Espinosa. The witness identifies a person (referred to by the pseudonym 'Jane') from a document and testifies that Jane visited the office approximately five times, appearing to be around 18 years old, and was accompanied by her mother. Attorney Mr. Everdell is also present.
This document is a page from the court transcript of the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. The witness, Espinosa, testifies about Epstein giving 'Lion King' tickets to almost all employees and confirms that Epstein received female visitors at his office. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell requests to display Government Exhibit 12, which is under seal, only to the Court, the deputy, and the witness.
This document is an excerpt from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, detailing testimony from Espinosa. The testimony covers her trip to Europe three years prior, where she stayed at a residence after contacting Ghislaine, and questions about the residence's features. It also includes questions and answers regarding Epstein's charitable donations.
This document is page 40 of a court transcript from the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). A witness named Espinosa identifies Ghislaine Maxwell in the courtroom and testifies about her six-year employment with Jeffrey Epstein's company. Espinosa states she primarily worked at the office located at 457 Madison in Manhattan, but occasionally worked at Ghislaine Maxwell's residence toward the end of her employment, totaling about one or two weeks over six years. She explicitly denies ever working out of Epstein's Manhattan residence.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a Ms. Espinosa. She describes her current role as a senior executive assistant to a CEO and recounts her past employment history, specifically moving to New York around October 1996. Upon arriving, she was hired by J. Epstein & Co. as a legal assistant for the legal team, which included counsels Jeff Schantz and Darren Indyke.
This document is page 33 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness named Ms. Espinosa by an attorney named Mr. Everdell. Espinosa testifies that she is currently 55, lives in California, works as an executive assistant to a CEO, and establishes that she was 28 years old and living in Midtown in October 1996.
This document is a court transcript from a case dated August 10, 2022. It captures the beginning of the defense's case, where defense counsel Mr. Everdell calls the first witness, Cimberly Espinosa. The transcript details the witness being sworn in, stating and spelling her name for the record, and the commencement of her direct examination.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a procedural discussion between attorneys Ms. Sternheim, Mr. Everdell, and the judge. The conversation focuses on whether to mark an exhibit for identification and the provision of a large volume of paper documents to an upcoming witness. The discussion concludes with the judge deciding to bring in the jury and Mr. Everdell confirming he will call the first witness.
Mr. Everdell states he has no objection to the exhibits.
Mr. Everdell requests a preview of the witness order in light of the day's developments.
Mr. Everdell argues that a 'conscious avoidance' charge would invite the jury to convict on an improper basis. The Court responds by asking for a specific response to the argument about the defendant's lack of knowledge.
Mr. Everdell questions Mr. Rodgers about the location of Epstein's residence at 358 El Brillo Way and a time when Epstein temporarily moved to a rental property during renovations.
Confirmation that Aznaran ran three traveler reports in the TECS system for Jane, Kate, and Annie Farmer.
Discussion regarding photos of Epstein's desk and bookcase.
Request to put folders with exhibits under jurors' chairs.
Discussion regarding the handling of paper evidence binders and maintaining witness anonymity during cross-examination.
Argument regarding the admissibility of property ownership records to impeach witness testimony.
Everdell calls Raghu Sud to the stand.
Argument regarding the relevance of Maxwell's father's death and her housing history.
Discussion regarding how to answer a jury question about conspiracy in Counts One and Three.
Inquiry about trial mark for the 1996 London home sale agreement.
Discussion of Government Exhibit 296 showing a property search.
Questioning regarding flight rules, mingling with passengers, and cockpit procedures.
Discussion regarding the specific wording of sex trafficking charges and conspiracy counts.
Argument that specific sexual activity was not illegal under New Mexico law because it lacked force or coercion, and the jury instruction should reflect this.
Discussion regarding the admission of exhibits DH1-DH4, J2, A5, and stipulations regarding UK property records.
Discussion regarding the use of the word 'dominant' in jury instructions for 18 U.S.C. 2421, citing United States v. An Soon Kim.
Argument regarding Government Exhibits 919, 920, and 53, specifically requesting they not be described as 'schoolgirl outfits' to the jury.
Argument regarding the elimination of a jury charge concerning investigative techniques.
Everdell argues that highlighting the 25-year age of the allegations is fair because records get destroyed over time, explaining the absence of corroborating evidence like geo-location data.
Requesting privacy interests for photos on a desk.
Everdell raises a concern about the government referring to passengers as 'and others' without naming them during direct examination.
Mr. Everdell informs the court of a small issue regarding the fourth witness (Mr. Rogers) and requests time to confer with the government.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity