SOUTHERN DISTRICT
LocationRelationship Network
EFTA00025388.pdf
An email chain from September 18, 2019, involving an Assistant United States Attorney requesting evidence from an unnamed recipient (likely FBI). The AUSA asks for photos of the SHU and specific measurements of the distance (number of steps) between Jeffrey Epstein's cell and the guard desk. The email also offers a hard drive related to 'Thomas' phone' (likely referring to guard Michael Thomas).
EFTA00025147.pdf
This document is an email dated October 28, 2021, from Nicole Simmons of Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. to Judge Nathan's chambers in the Southern District of New York. It serves as a transmittal for the filing of 'Ms. Maxwell's Reply In Support of Her Motions in Limine' in the case U.S. v. Maxwell (Case No. 20 Cr. 330). The email was sent at the request of attorney Jeffrey Pagliuca.
EFTA00023460.pdf
This document is an email from the Chambers of Judge Alison J. Nathan dated October 29, 2021, regarding the case US v. Maxwell (20cr330). It is addressed to counsel, including Laura Menninger and Jeff Pagliuca, distributing an attached Order issued by the Judge and noting it will be filed publicly the following Monday.
EFTA00023356.pdf
This document is an email thread from November 19, 2021, regarding the case US v. Maxwell (20cr330). It originates from the Chambers of Judge Alison J. Nathan, distributing a sealed Memorandum Opinion & Order (Dkt. No. 477) to defense counsel (including Jeff Pagliuca and Laura Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office (USANYS). The top email forwards this order with the comment 'Sealed opinion on MV-3.'
EFTA00022324.pdf
This document is an email thread from August 5, 2019, between officials at the U.S. Attorney's Office (Public Corruption Unit). One official notifies another that the 'Epstein team' has arrived at the office. The recipient replies that they have 'just walked out.' This occurred days before Jeffrey Epstein's death.
EFTA00019056.pdf
This document is an email from the Chambers of Judge Alison J. Nathan dated November 1, 2021, addressed to defense counsel (Pagliuca, Menninger, Sternheim, Everdell) and prosecutors (USANYS) in the case US v. Maxwell. The email serves to distribute an attached Order issued by the Judge which was scheduled to be docketed the following morning.
EFTA00016588.pdf
This document is an email from the Chambers of Judge Alison J. Nathan dated December 1, 2021, regarding the case US v. Maxwell (20cr330). The email informs counsel of an attached court order and schedules a discussion for the following day to determine if there is a basis to seal the order.
EFTA00016303.pdf
This document is an email sent on September 5, 2020, to Judge Freeman's chambers regarding the civil case 'Doe v. Indyke, et al.' The email submits an attached letter from the Government supporting a stay in the proceedings. The sender and other recipients are redacted.
EFTA00014175.pdf
An Assistant U.S. Attorney emails colleagues to report rumors that Epstein is falsely claiming cooperation in the Bernie Madoff case to secure a reduced sentence from the State Attorney's Office. The email also flags a suspicious court docket change removing 'Special Conditions' from Epstein's sentence and discusses the potential to investigate new allegations involving New York victims, noting interest from Madoff prosecutors in using evidence against Epstein.
EFTA00009930.pdf
This document is an email chain from September 18, 2019, involving an Assistant United States Attorney (SDNY) and other redacted officials. The correspondence concerns the collection of evidence related to Jeffrey Epstein's death, specifically requesting FBI photos of the Special Housing Unit (SHU) and measurements of the distance (number of steps) from Epstein's cell to the guard desk. The emails also coordinate the logistical provision of a 100GB hard drive for the FBI CART team to download materials and discuss a hard drive for a specific phone.
DOJ-OGR-00000210.tif
This document excerpt details various legal agreements and plea agreements across different U.S. judicial districts, outlining the scope and binding nature of these agreements between defendants and specific United States Attorney offices or divisions of the Department of Justice. It emphasizes which entities are bound by each agreement and which are not. The document includes specific case citations with dates, defendants, and ECF numbers.
DOJ-OGR-00018221.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of Mr. Parkinson, a member of the Palm Beach Police Department. Parkinson testifies regarding his participation in a search warrant execution at 358 El Brillo Way on October 20, 2005, identifying other officers present including Detective Joseph Recarey (deceased), Sergeant Mike Dawson, and Detective Sandman. The testimony covers his specific duties during the search, which included recording the warrant reading and conducting a protective sweep for officer safety.
DOJ-OGR-00018095.jpg
This document is a court transcript page (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of Mr. Alessi. Alessi testifies about leaving Jeffrey Epstein's employment due to illness and fatigue, and signing a separation agreement that prohibited him from discussing the lives of Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell. He further states that he did not see Maxwell again after leaving, but he did return to Epstein's house one time in 2004 while dealing with marital issues.
DOJ-OGR-00017904.jpg
This document is page 31 of 228 from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). It features the direct examination of a clinical psychologist named Rocchio. The witness testifies to having 30 years of experience specializing in traumatic stress and interpersonal violence, specifically treating 'hundreds upon hundreds' of victims of childhood sexual abuse, including teenagers and adolescents aged 12 and up.
DOJ-OGR-00001901.jpg
This document is page 24 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on December 10, 2020. The text captures a prosecutor's argument regarding the seriousness of charges against a defendant accused of grooming minors for sexual abuse by Jeffrey Epstein and participating in the abuse herself.
DOJ-OGR-00001775.jpg
This document is a UPS Express Envelope used to deliver a legal filing to the US District Court for the Southern District of New York. The envelope is identified as page 7 of Document 55 in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, which was filed on September 4, 2020, and stamped as received by the court on September 8, 2020.
DOJ-OGR-00020393.jpg
This document is a court docket log from July 6-7, 2020, detailing proceedings in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York. It records the transfer of documents from New Hampshire and contains orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan scheduling an arraignment and bail hearing for July 14, 2020. The orders heavily reference COVID-19 protocols, including the use of remote video conferencing for the defendant (held at the Metropolitan Detention Center) and strict entry requirements for the Daniel Patrick Moynihan Courthouse.
DOJ-OGR-00018679.jpg
This is a transcript page from the trial USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Pomerantz questions witness Mr. Flatley confirming that all emails in 'Government Exhibit 54' came from the account 'gmax1@mindspring.com'. Subsequently, Defense attorney Ms. Menninger begins recross-examination, asking technical questions about how email clients (like Outlook) automatically refresh data from servers when connected to the internet.
DOJ-OGR-00019450.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court order (likely from the Southern District of New York) dated July 31, 2020. The court is analyzing Ghislaine Maxwell's request to stay a civil case due to her pending criminal indictment. The judge finds that there is significant factual overlap between the civil and criminal matters, which weighs in favor of granting the stay to protect her Fifth Amendment rights.
DOJ-OGR-00019289.jpg
This legal document is a motion filed by Defendant-Appellant Ghislaine Maxwell on September 10, 2020, requesting the consolidation of two appeals. The first is from her criminal case (United States v. Maxwell) and the second is from a civil case (Giuffre v. Maxwell). Maxwell argues the cases are intertwined because new information from the criminal case is relevant to the court's decision to unseal deposition material in the civil case.
DOJ-OGR-00019130.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The text captures a legal debate regarding witness testimony: first, confirming a female witness will testify only to facts and not offer opinions on 'grooming' (Rule 702), and second, a defense objection by Mr. Pagliuca regarding the government's use of Mr. Buscemi as a 'summary witness' under Rule 1006. The defense argues Buscemi should not analyze complex business or phone records.
DOJ-OGR-00016996.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a legal argument regarding jury instructions in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court rules that a 'conscious avoidance instruction' is appropriate because the government argues Maxwell either knew or consciously avoided knowing that the purpose of her travel with Jeffrey Epstein and minors was sexual abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00016954.jpg
Page 28 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The excerpt details a legal debate between prosecutor Mr. Rohrbach and defense attorney Mr. Everdell before the Judge ('The Court') regarding specific jury instructions concerning 'persuasion and inducement or enticement to travel' and 'significant or motivating purpose.' The Judge overrules a request regarding causation definitions.
DOJ-OGR-00017217.jpg
This page contains a transcript of jury instructions from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The judge explains the legal distinction between conspiracy charges and substantive charges. The text specifically details Instruction No. 13 regarding Count Two, citing Title 18, United States Code, Section 2422, which defines the federal crime of enticement to engage in illegal sexual activity involving interstate travel.
DOJ-OGR-00013449.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of the cross-examination of pilot David Rodgers (filed Aug 10, 2022). Defense attorney Mr. Everdell questions Rodgers about flight protocols on Epstein's Gulfstream and Boeing aircraft, specifically confirming that while cockpit doors were closed, Epstein never explicitly instructed Rodgers that he could not leave the cockpit or mingle with passengers.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity