The Agent
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Search where items (costumes) were found by an agent. | Unknown | View |
EFTA00018615.pdf
An email chain from October 27, 2020, involving an Assistant United States Attorney (SDNY) submitting an application for a search warrant to Judge Wang. The correspondence includes a request from the court to flatten PDF attachments and a correction by the AUSA regarding an error where Judge Nathan was named instead of Judge Wang in the initial documents. An agent is noted as being available to swear out the warrant.
DOJ-OGR-00018128.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The dialogue involves defense attorney Mr. Everdell and prosecutor Ms. Moe debating the admissibility and description of 'costumes' (Government Exhibit 53) and photographs of them (Exhibits 919 and 920). The defense argues specifically that these items must not be described to the jury as 'schoolgirl outfits' to avoid prejudice.
DOJ-OGR-00001910.jpg
This document is page 33 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 10, 2020. The discussion between the Court and prosecutor Ms. Moe concerns the details of the defendant's arrest, specifically confirming that the defendant ignored law enforcement commands to open the door and retreated to a separate room. The Court also notes an allegation that the defendant attempted to block location monitoring by wrapping a cell phone in foil.
DOJ-OGR-00016763.jpg
This document is a transcript page from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues to the Judge that he should be allowed to question an agent to explain the absence of modern evidence (like geo-location and phone records) due to the age of the allegations. Prosecutor Mr. Rohrbach questions the necessity of this, noting that a custodian has already testified regarding recordkeeping.
DOJ-OGR-00016761.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 10, 2022. Attorney Mr. Everdell argues to the Court that the lack of corroborating documentary evidence, specifically phone records and emails, is due to the age of the allegations (dating back to the 1990s) when such technology was not widely used. The discussion focuses on formulating questions to an agent regarding this absence of evidence.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity