Trove
Sign In Sign Up

Markham

Person
Mentions
8
Relationships
0
Events
0
Documents
4
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.
No relationships found for this entity.
No events found for this entity.

DOJ-OGR-00021027.jpg

This document is page 44 of a court order (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on April 29, 2022, denying the Defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) Rule 29 motion to vacate convictions. The court rejects arguments regarding prejudice due to absent deceased witnesses (including Jeffrey Epstein, his mother, Michael Casey, and Detective Joseph Recarey) and claims of pre-indictment delay. The text references evidence establishing the Defendant's close work with an individual named Markham on a manual and checklists.

Legal court filing / order denying motion
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00013071.jpg

This document is page 58 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. Witness Mr. Flatley is being questioned by Ms. Pomerantz regarding an email sent by 'gmax' (gmax1@mindspring.com) to 'MarkhamCPM@earthlink.net'. The email discusses the creation of a 'household manual,' specifically detailing where to buy cleaning supplies (Publix and Sam's Club in Palm Beach Gardens) and specific brands of laundry products to use.

Court transcript (direct examination)
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00010410.jpg

This document is page 44 of a court order denying Ghislaine Maxwell's Rule 29 motion and motion to vacate convictions. The court rejects arguments regarding prejudice due to deceased witnesses (including Jeffrey Epstein, his mother, Michael Casey, and Joseph Recarey) and pre-indictment delay. The text references evidence GX-424, an email chain showing Maxwell worked closely with an individual named Markham to create a household manual.

Court opinion/order
2025-11-20
Analysis Source

DOJ-OGR-00009601.jpg

This legal document is a portion of a court filing arguing against a defendant's claim of prejudice due to the unavailability of certain witnesses (Pinto, Salhi, Markham, and Fontanilla). The author cites multiple legal precedents, including States v. Long and United States v. Scala, to assert that the defendant's claims are speculative and lack the definite proof of actual prejudice required by law to dismiss an indictment or vacate a conviction. The document concludes that the defense's unsworn assertions about what these witnesses might have testified to are insufficient legal grounds for their motion.

Legal document
2025-11-20
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
0
As Recipient
1
Total
1

Unknown

From: Defendant (Ghislaine M...
To: Markham

Indicates Defendant worked closely with Markham to create a manual and provided specific content like checklists.

Email
N/A
Communication Source

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search