Mr. Everdell
PersonRelationship Network
| 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Jury Deliberations and Court Response to Note | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Introduction of Government Exhibit 1004 (Stipulation) | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross Examination of Tracy Chapell | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding the admissibility of photographic exhibits and the timing of defense obj... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding sentencing or appeal arguments (Case 22-1426). | Courtroom (likely SDNY) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of Lawrence Visoski | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding upcoming sentencing and review of the presentence report. | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Rule 29 Argument | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding jury instructions and a question asked by the jury. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing Hearing / Pre-sentencing argument | Southern District of New Yo... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of witness Patrick McHugh | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of witness Kelly Maguire | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross-examination of witness Dawson regarding a residence and inconsistent statements. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding supplemental jury instructions | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Examination of David Rodgers | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court ruling on the 'attorney witness issue' regarding the defense case-in-chief. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court hearing regarding Maxwell's sentencing or appeal points concerning her role in the conspiracy. | Courtroom (likely SDNY) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Admission of Government's Exhibit 296R | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Extension of Jury Deliberations | New York City Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Admission of Defendant's Exhibit MA1 into evidence under seal. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Conference between Defense and Government | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding jury questions and instructions for Count Four. | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial Resumption | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Cross-examination of Michael Dawson | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Legal argument regarding jury instructions and admissibility of testimony for conspiracy counts. | Courtroom | View |
DOJ-OGR-00017427.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, during a break in proceedings where the jury and witness are not present. The dialogue covers procedural and environmental matters, including a counsel's request to raise the courtroom temperature and the judge asking another counsel for a time estimate for questioning before announcing a 10-minute recess.
DOJ-OGR-00017424.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a pilot named Mr. Visoski by attorney Mr. Everdell. Visoski testifies that despite flying hundreds of times for Epstein, he never witnessed sexual activity or acts with underage girls on the planes. While he confirms cockpit doors were closed during flights limiting his view, he states he was never instructed that he could not leave the cockpit.
DOJ-OGR-00017419.jpg
This document is a transcript of a court proceeding from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Visoski by an attorney, Mr. Everdell. The testimony focuses on the timeline of aircraft Visoski flew for Mr. Epstein, establishing that Epstein sold a Hawker jet around 1994 and acquired a Boeing 727 around 2000. In the period between these events, Visoski primarily flew a Gulfstream for Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00017417.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) documenting the cross-examination of a pilot named Visoski. The testimony confirms that Visoski worked as a pilot for Jeffrey Epstein for nearly 30 years (1991-2019), initially as co-captain under his friend David Rogers, before swapping roles to become chief pilot around 2000. The page concludes with attorney Mr. Everdell requesting to display Government's Exhibit 311.
DOJ-OGR-00017416.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) filed on August 10, 2022. It details the beginning of the cross-examination of Mr. Visoski by defense attorney Mr. Everdell. The text establishes that Visoski testified on direct examination that he began working as a pilot for Jeffrey Epstein around 1991.
DOJ-OGR-00017413.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. Witness Visoski is questioned by Ms. Comey about a 'female singer' identified on a document, whom the court refers to by the pseudonym 'Jane.' Visoski confirms this person was a passenger on Jeffrey Epstein's plane and recalls meeting her in the mid-to-late 1990s.
DOJ-OGR-00017408.jpg
A page from the court transcript of the US v. Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Witness Visoski testifies about traveling to Traverse City, Michigan, in the 1990s and picking up Jeffrey Epstein's luggage from the lobby of the Interlochen School of Music, which he describes as a school for gifted children. The prosecution (Ms. Comey) then moves to read a stipulation (Government Exhibit 1004) into the record without objection from the defense (Mr. Everdell).
DOJ-OGR-00017403.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness, Mr. Visoski. Under questioning by Ms. Comey, Visoski describes the interior of Jeffrey Epstein's Boeing 727 and identifies a photograph, Government Exhibit 303, as an accurate depiction of the plane's 'round room' and office area. The court, with no objection from Mr. Everdell, admits the exhibit into evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00017401.jpg
This document is a transcript page from a court case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a pilot named Visoski by prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding his employment flying Jeffrey Epstein's aircraft (specifically a Boeing 727 and a G2B) between 2001 and 2004. The page also records the admission of Government Exhibits 301 and 302, which are photos of the Boeing 727, into evidence without objection from the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00017399.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Visoski. Visoski testifies that between 1994 and 2000, he frequently flew a Gulfstream G2B aircraft for Mr. Epstein. He identifies photographs of the aircraft, including one that shows Mr. Epstein standing in front of it, which are then admitted as evidence by the court.
DOJ-OGR-00017398.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Visoski. Visoski testifies that Mr. Epstein used a helicopter to travel between St. Thomas and Little St. James to avoid taking a boat. He also states that he, Ms. Maxwell, and other contract pilots flew the helicopter, and that Ms. Maxwell flew it "many times."
DOJ-OGR-00017397.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the testimony of a witness named Visoski. Under questioning by government attorney Ms. Comey, Visoski states that Mr. Epstein owned one helicopter between 1994 and 2004, which he purchased around 1999-2000. Visoski identifies photos of this specific helicopter, which were entered as government exhibits.
DOJ-OGR-00017392.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. A witness named Mr. Visoski is under direct examination by Ms. Comey. Visoski identifies a photo of Little St. James Island (admitted as Government's Exhibit 703), confirms Mr. Epstein owned the entire island, and begins describing specific structures, including a library that famously had a gold dome.
DOJ-OGR-00017390.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Visoski. An attorney, Ms. Comey, questions Visoski, who identifies photographs entered as government exhibits as depicting the main house and an aerial view of Jeffrey Epstein's private property on Little St. James Island. The evidence is admitted by the court without objection.
DOJ-OGR-00017386.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. Witness Visoski testifies under direct examination by Ms. Comey about working at Mr. Epstein's Paris apartment, specifically handling luggage and performing audio work on a home theater. Government Exhibit 705, identified as a photo of the exterior of the Paris apartment, is admitted into evidence without objection from defense attorney Mr. Everdell.
DOJ-OGR-00017382.jpg
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 Visoski by prosecutor Ms. Comey. The testimony focuses on identifying exterior photos of the main house at Jeffrey Epstein's Zorro Ranch (Exhibits 323 and 706) and describing the interior layout of the residence, specifically noting it is a square house with a central open courtyard.
DOJ-OGR-00017377.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness named Visoski by Ms. Comey. Visoski testifies about accompanying Mr. Epstein to his property in New Mexico, identified as 'Zorro Ranch,' approximately five or six times a year. Government Exhibit 328, a photo of the entrance driveway to the ranch, is introduced and admitted into evidence without objection from defense attorney Mr. Everdell.
DOJ-OGR-00017376.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case dated August 10, 2022, featuring the direct examination of a witness named Mr. Visoski. Mr. Visoski identifies Ms. Maxwell and Ms. Kellen in two photographs (Government Exhibits 334 and 335) which are then admitted into evidence. He also testifies that he first visited Mr. Epstein's ranch in New Mexico in the mid-1990s, around the time it was purchased in approximately 1994.
DOJ-OGR-00017375.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022. In it, a witness, Mr. Visoski, is questioned by an attorney, Ms. Comey, about a photograph (Government Exhibit 310). Visoski identifies the photo as being taken at Mr. Epstein's ranch in the mid-to-late 1990s and states it shows himself, Mr. Epstein, Ms. Kellen, and a twin-engine Cessna 421 aircraft that Epstein had purchased.
DOJ-OGR-00017364.jpg
This document is page 121 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The text records a discussion between the Judge ('The Court'), prosecutor Ms. Comey, and defense attorney Mr. Everdell while the jury is not present. They discuss the placement of folders containing documents under chairs and the Judge's intention to interview a juror regarding a planned trip to ensure it does not conflict with the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00017361.jpg
This document is a transcript page from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. It depicts the moment the judge thanks and discharges the jury following the verdict. Defense counsel Ms. Sternheim requests the court wait on the presentence report and explicitly asks for a court order to ensure Ms. Maxwell receives a COVID-19 booster shot.
DOJ-OGR-00014363.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a discussion about jury instructions. Counsel argues that the jury should be instructed not to convict based solely on the testimony of a witness named Kate, a point with which the Court agrees. Following a brief request between counsel members, the judge calls for a 10-minute recess.
DOJ-OGR-00017608.jpg
This document is an index page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It outlines the examination of witnesses Lawrence Visoski (Epstein's pilot) and a witness identified only as 'Jane', along with a list of government exhibits received into evidence.
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.
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.
Sentencing Guidelines Argument
Argument regarding the interpretation of 'dangerous sex offenders' guidelines and background commentary.
Jury Question regarding Count Four
Argument regarding how to answer a jury question about whether a return flight alone can sustain a conviction.
Submission regarding jury instructions
Mr. Everdell mentions he raised the issue in a letter submission or orally.
Presentation of Photos
Everdell explains they only have single copies of certain photos received that morning and proposes walking them to the jury row rather than distributing copies.
Sidebar Request
Requesting a sidebar to discuss proving an inconsistent statement of a prior witness.
Jury Folders
Asking permission to place folders under jury chairs for cross-examination.
Witness Anonymity
Requesting anonymity or name protection for defense witnesses.
Cross-examination procedure
Objection/point regarding the government referring to passengers as 'and others' without naming them.
Argument regarding travel purpose
Discussing whether travel back to a place without illicit activity counts as significant purpose.
Jury instructions query
Asking if the jury must conclude she aided in transportation of Jane's flight to New Mexico to find guilt.
Jury Instructions
Request regarding instructions for jurors opening binders.
Sentencing Objections
Discussion regarding the scheduling of arguments concerning offense level calculations and financial penalties.
Admissibility of evidence via notary Keith Rooney
Discussion on calling Keith Rooney to authenticate land registry and Grumbridge documents.
Opportunity for additional arguments
The judge indicates they have read the written arguments and offers Mr. Everdell an opportunity to add anything new before asking questions.
Argument on sentencing guidelines and the Ex Post Facto C...
Mr. Everdell argues that the determination of which sentencing guidelines (2003 or 2004) apply should have been made by a jury, not the court, because the issue involves a factual determination about when the offense ended and implicates the Ex Post Facto Clause.
Clarification of paragraph number
Mr. Everdell interrupts the court to clarify that the court meant to refer to paragraph 9.
Jury instruction on aiding and abetting
Mr. Everdell argues to the court about the specifics of a jury instruction concerning aiding and abetting, particularly in relation to flights to New Mexico and Ms. Maxwell's involvement.
Interpretation of a sentencing guideline
Mr. Everdell argues that the commentary for a sentencing guideline concerning 'dangerous sex offenders' is authoritative and interpretative, not merely a recitation of Congressional thought, and should be considered by the court.
Objection to Presentence Report (PSR) regarding defendant...
The Court overrules an objection to including a specific asset in Ms. Maxwell's PSR for the purpose of determining a fine, discussing her financial affidavit and ability to pay.
Resting on the papers
Mr. Everdell informs the court that they are resting on the papers.
Objections to paragraphs in a legal document
Mr. Everdell confirms his objections to paragraphs 22 and 3. The Court overrules these objections, citing trial evidence related to witness testimony, metadata, and financial records.
Sentencing guidelines and Ex Post Facto Clause
Mr. Everdell argues that the jury, not the court, should determine which sentencing guidelines (2003 or 2004) apply, due to implications of the Ex Post Facto Clause.
Sentencing guidelines and leadership enhancement
The Court asks Mr. Everdell if he has any other points to raise from his papers, specifically mentioning a question about a leadership enhancement.
Sentencing guidelines and government arguments
Mr. Everdell argues that the Court has discretion to use the 2003 sentencing guidelines and disputes a government argument that the defendant received $7 million into 2007, calling it an 'extreme stretch'.
Correction of paragraph number
Correcting the judge saying Paragraph 9 instead of Paragraph 29.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity