| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
CAROLYN
|
Origin |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Maria
|
Resident |
1
|
1 |
This document is a court transcript of a legal summation. The speaker first attempts to discredit an unnamed witness by claiming she was paid $5 million by the government and that her stories of flying are uncorroborated. The speaker then discusses the testimony of Annie Farmer, a psychologist, stating the court has instructed that the alleged incident with Mr. Epstein and Ms. Maxwell in New Mexico was not illegal as charged, and that it was Annie's sister, Maria, who worked for Epstein and introduced them.
This document is a transcript of a legal summation by Ms. Menninger, arguing that a witness named Jane has an unreliable and deliberately altered memory concerning her time with Epstein. The speaker highlights inconsistencies in Jane's testimony about a property in Santa Fe, contrasting her account with testimony from other witnesses (Annie, Larry Visoski) and a flight log entry. The summation posits that Jane's memory was contaminated by news reports and conversations with family, and that she intentionally falsified her timeline to appear younger.
This document is a page from the closing arguments (summation) of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), delivered by defense attorney Ms. Menninger. The text focuses on attacking the credibility of a witness by highlighting a major inconsistency between her court testimony (claiming abuse started in a Florida pool house) and a December 2019 FBI interview (claiming abuse started at age 14 in New York during a headshot session). Menninger references expert testimony from Dr. Loftus regarding memory and trauma to suggest the witness's story is unreliable.
This document is a partial transcript from a legal proceeding, likely a summation, dated August 10, 2022. The speaker, 'I', questions the credibility of 'Jane' regarding alleged sexual abuse, lawsuits, and travel dates, noting inconsistencies in her accounts and her mother's absence from testifying. The document also mentions Jane receiving 'wads of cash' from Jeffrey Epstein and details several of Jane's trips, including one from New Jersey to New Mexico in May '97 and to Europe in January '98.
This document is page 92 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) representing the defense summation by Ms. Menninger on August 10, 2022. The attorney argues that the government failed to provide promised evidence linking Epstein's properties to abuse, specifically refuting the existence of 'massage rooms' filled with nude photos in Palm Beach, New York, and New Mexico. The defense also highlights conflicting testimony between witnesses Kate and Cim Espinosa regarding a massage room in Ghislaine Maxwell's London home and cites FedEx records to claim Maxwell did not send items to underage girls.
This document is a single page from a court transcript (summation by Ms. Moe) filed on August 10, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The text argues that crimes took place within the jurisdiction of the Southern District of New York, citing trips to Manhattan by victims 'Jane' and 'Annie,' packages sent from Manhattan, and phone calls made by Maxwell to 'Carolyn' to schedule sexualized massages.
This document is a transcript of a prosecutor's (Ms. Moe) summation in a criminal trial, filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecutor outlines the evidence for Count Five, a sex trafficking conspiracy charge spanning 2000-2004, detailing how the defendant (identified as Maxwell) and co-conspirator Epstein recruited and trafficked victims Carolyn and Virginia Roberts. The prosecutor explains to the jury that they only need to find one instance of agreement and one step taken to carry out the conspiracy to find the defendant guilty.
This document is a page from a court transcript of a summation given by Ms. Moe in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecutor argues that the defendant, Maxwell, knowingly engaged an underage victim named Carolyn in commercial sex acts, paying her hundreds of dollars for what were termed "so-called massages." The summation also addresses the legal element of interstate commerce, referencing packages Carolyn received from New York.
This document is a page from the summation (closing argument) by prosecutor Ms. Moe in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The prosecutor argues that Maxwell knowingly transported a minor ('Jane') across state lines to New York to be sexually abused by Jeffrey Epstein, emphasizing that Maxwell knew Jane was under 17 because they met at a summer camp. The text also references testimony from 'Kate' regarding Maxwell instructing her to wear a schoolgirl outfit for Epstein, establishing Maxwell's knowledge of Epstein's specific sexual preferences.
This document is a page from a court summation in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. The speaker argues that the defendant, Maxwell, is guilty of enticing a minor named Jane to travel interstate to New York with the explicit intent for her to be sexually abused by Epstein. The argument cites testimony from Jane and Juan Alessi, as well as flight records, to establish the elements of inducement, travel, and criminal intent.
This document is a court transcript of a prosecutor's (Ms. Moe) summation in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecutor argues that Maxwell was an essential accomplice to Jeffrey Epstein, specifically detailing how she induced a victim named 'Jane' to travel across state lines to New York for sexual abuse. The testimony of a witness, Juan Alessi, is cited as evidence confirming Maxwell's role in arranging and participating in Jane's travel.
This document is a legal summation from a court case, outlining Ghislaine Maxwell's role in Jeffrey Epstein's sex trafficking operation from 1995 to 2004. It details how Maxwell recruited, groomed, and abused multiple young women, including Jane, Annie Farmer, Virginia Roberts, and Carolyn, across various locations like New Mexico and Palm Beach. The text also highlights significant financial payments from Epstein to Maxwell, totaling over $23 million, and describes the evolution of the abuse into a 'pyramid scheme' where victims were incentivized to recruit others.
This document is a transcript of a court summation by Ms. Moe, arguing that Maxwell was integral to Epstein's operation. The argument uses evidence like FedEx records from 2002 showing Maxwell sending packages from Epstein's office, and corroborates the testimony of a witness, Carolyn, who received packages from Epstein at age 15, using phone messages she left at Epstein's Palm Beach house in 2004.
This page is a transcript of a closing argument (summation) by prosecutor Ms. Moe in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The prosecutor summarizes evidence regarding Epstein and Maxwell's abuse of minors, specifically mentioning victims Jane, Annie, Virginia Roberts, and Carolyn. The text details sexual acts, flight records, and FedEx records (Government Exhibits 801 and 803) proving Epstein sent packages to Carolyn when she was 15.
This document is page 35 of a court transcript (summation by Ms. Moe) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It details a diary entry by a victim named Annie, describing grooming behavior by Jeffrey Epstein during a trip to the movies, specifically noting how Epstein touched her and hid the action from a person named Maria. The text mentions Maxwell was not present for this specific New York trip but was involved in subsequent escalation in the spring of 1996.
This document is a transcript of a prosecutor's summation in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecutor argues for Maxwell's guilt by recounting the testimonies of two victims, 'Jane' and 'Annie Farmer'. The summary details how Jane's testimony of sexual exploitation by Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein was corroborated, and describes Epstein's initial grooming of a 16-year-old Annie Farmer in 1995, presenting these as part of a consistent 'playbook' of abuse.
This document is a page from a court transcript of a summation by prosecutor Ms. Moe (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). She details flight logs from May 1997 and April 1998 showing Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein traveling with a minor victim referred to as 'Jane' (aged 16 and 17 at the times). Ms. Moe argues against the defense's attempt to confuse the jury with photos of an adult assistant also named Jane, citing pilot and DMV testimony to clarify the victim's identity.
This document is page 27 of a court transcript from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), specifically the prosecution's summation regarding flight logs (Government Exhibit 662). The prosecutor argues that flight records confirm testimony from 'Jane' and Juan Alessi that Jane, a minor (16 years old in Nov 1996), was transported from Palm Beach to Teterboro/New York by Epstein and Maxwell. The text highlights how Epstein and Maxwell avoided listing minors' names on logs but points to specific entries proving their presence.
This document is a page from a court transcript containing the summation by prosecutor Ms. Moe in the trial against Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecutor argues that Maxwell and Epstein were not charitable figures but targeted 'pretty, young, vulnerable' girls, specifically citing the testimony of a victim named 'Jane' who was abused in New York at ages 14 through 16. The text includes graphic descriptions of sexual abuse Jane endured at Epstein's New York residence, specifically in the massage room located off the master bathroom.
This document is a transcript of a court summation, likely from a prosecutor named Ms. Moe, detailing the sexual abuse of a 14-year-old victim named Jane by Maxwell and Epstein. The summary recounts Jane's testimony about various forms of abuse, including forced touching and group encounters, and highlights trips the trio took from Florida to Epstein's house in New York via commercial and private flights. The speaker argues to the jury that these actions were predatory and not normal.
This document is page 2843 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) containing the closing summation by prosecutor Ms. Moe. The text focuses on an essay written by Ghislaine Maxwell where she describes her close, 11-year relationship with Jeffrey Epstein as partners and a couple. The prosecutor argues this evidence proves Maxwell was not a mere assistant but a crucial participant in the scheme, using her respectable appearance to legitimize Epstein's predatory behavior toward underage girls.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between a judge and an attorney, Mr. Everdell. They are discussing specific edits to jury instructions, focusing on the wording related to a person named Jane being under the age of 17. Mr. Everdell also raises an objection to the jury being allowed to consider another person's (Annie's) testimony as an overt act in a conspiracy charge that violates New York law.
This document is page 40 of a court transcript from the trial US v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). Defense attorney Everdell and the Judge discuss specific wording amendments to jury instructions or the verdict form, specifically requesting that Count Four be specified as relating 'solely to Jane.' They also discuss a discrepancy between the federal statute age definition (under 18) and New York law (under 17) regarding the transport of minors.
This court transcript page, filed on August 10, 2022, documents a discussion between an attorney, Mr. Rohrbach, and the judge. The conversation centers on the testimony of a witness named Jane regarding a single incident of sexual abuse in New Mexico and whether a specific limiting instruction should be added to the jury charge. The judge ultimately denies the request, stating that the defense failed to ask for it at the appropriate time and that the charge is based on a violation of New York law.
This document is a transcript from a legal case, likely a hearing or trial. It involves discussion about jury instructions, testimony regarding sexual contact between Jane and Epstein in New Mexico, and the testimony of Kate and Annie. The attorneys, Mr. Rohrbach and Mr. Everdell, are arguing about the relevance of certain evidence and instructions.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity