TED
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
organization
INS
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Bank of America Merrill Lynch
|
Analyst subject company |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Debbie Nichols
|
Professional contact |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Congress
|
Legislative judicial interaction |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Control ownership |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Epstein
|
Control ownership |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal action (subpoena) | Subpoenas were issued to multiple entities connected to J. Epstein and Jeffrey Epstein, including... | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00022573.tif
This document is a page from a transcript of an interview or deposition involving Ghislaine Maxwell and Todd Blanche. Maxwell discusses her memory of seeing pages from a book and letters, and confirms meeting Bill Gates at a TED conference where she also spoke. The interviewer also probes her relationship with 'Mr. Epstein'.
DOJ-OGR-00001295.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing, likely a motion or a judicial opinion, dated February 5, 2016. It outlines the legal standards for a 'motion to reconsider' in federal court, citing various precedents. The text explains that while not formally recognized by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, district courts have inherent discretionary authority to reconsider non-final orders, but the scope for doing so is narrow and limited to specific grounds such as new law, new evidence, or correcting clear error.
DOJ-OGR-00001236.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated December 28, 2020, arguing for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. Her defense proposes two additional conditions to assure the court she is not a flight risk, specifically offering to formally renounce her citizenships in France and the United Kingdom and surrender all passports. The defense argues that giving up citizenship, described as a 'precious and priceless asset,' demonstrates her commitment to appearing in court.
DOJ-OGR-00001223.jpg
This document is page 14 of a court order regarding a bail motion for a Defendant (identified by case number as Ghislaine Maxwell). The text analyzes the Defendant's flight risk in relation to her family ties, specifically discussing a letter of support from her spouse whose identity was initially withheld. The Court notes that while the spouse describes a 'quiet family life,' the Defendant was not living with him at the time of arrest, claimed to be getting divorced, and does not propose living with him if released, which undermines her argument that the marriage prevents flight.
DOJ-OGR-00020395.jpg
This document is a page from the court docket for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering proceedings from July 9 to July 15, 2020. It details the arraignment held on July 14, 2020, where Maxwell pleaded Not Guilty via video conference due to COVID-19 protocols, and Judge Alison J. Nathan denied bail, remanding Maxwell to custody. The docket also records attorney appearances for the defense (Cohen, Everdell, Pagliuca) and sets the trial date for July 12, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00019053.jpg
This document is page 191 of a court transcript from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Rodgers. The testimony confirms that while Jeffrey Epstein controlled the aircraft, the Boeing 727 was legally owned by 'JEGE, Incorporated' and the Gulfstream by 'Hyperion Air.' The witness also estimates that Epstein purchased a Bell helicopter in November 2002.
DOJ-OGR-00015315.jpg
This document is a confidential FedEx invoice dated November 4, 2002, detailing three international express shipments sent by Jeffrey Epstein and Cecilia Steen from their 457 Madison Avenue office on October 29, 2002. The recipients were Diana Cook (destined for Rome/FCO), Natasha Milan (destined for Milan/MIL), and Eduardo Teodorani-Fabbri at CNH UK Limited. All packages were delivered on October 31, 2002, and the recipient addresses have been redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00015274.jpg
This is a U.S. Customs and Border Protection TECS Person Encounter List generated in 2021, detailing the travel history of a redacted subject between 1997 and 2006. The document logs international commercial flights involving major airlines (Virgin, United, British Airways, American) primarily between London (Heathrow/Gatwick) and US cities including Los Angeles, New York (JFK), and Raleigh-Durham. The subject's identity is concealed, but the record tracks their movements in and out of the United States over a nine-year period.
DOJ-OGR-00002368(1).jpg
This document is page 16 (filed page 21 of 23) of a defense motion in the case *United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell* (1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on February 4, 2021. The defense argues for an evidentiary hearing to investigate alleged coordination between the government and a redacted third party who provided Maxwell's 2016 civil deposition transcripts to 'stir up a criminal prosecution.' The motion requests the suppression of evidence obtained from this redacted party, specifically the April and July 2016 depositions, and the dismissal of Counts Five and Six.
DOJ-OGR-00002281(1).jpg
This document is a Table of Authorities page (Page 3 of 19) from a court filing dated January 25, 2021, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It lists twenty-one legal precedents (cases) cited in the brief, primarily from the Second Circuit and D.C. Circuit, covering dates from 1964 to 2011. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00002281.
DOJ-OGR-00002029.jpg
This document is a redacted character reference letter filed on December 14, 2020, as part of the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The anonymous author outlines Maxwell's history, including her Oxford graduation, her move to New York in the early 1990s, and her philanthropic work with The Terramar Project and the UN. The letter strongly defends her character against media portrayals and asserts her innocence regarding the criminal charges.
DOJ-OGR-00022066.jpg
This document is page 'iii' of a Table of Authorities from a legal filing dated April 24, 2020, in Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT (which corresponds to USA v. Parnas et al., though released in a DOJ OGR batch). It lists numerous legal precedents (case law citations) primarily from the Second Circuit and Southern District of New York, referencing cases such as U.S. v. Coppa, U.S. v. Ghailani, and others used to support legal arguments in the main brief.
DOJ-OGR-00021924.jpg
This document is page 17 of a federal indictment filed on November 19, 2019, against Tova Noel and Michael Thomas (guards assigned to Jeffrey Epstein). The text details 'Count Five,' charging the defendants with making false records regarding a 3 a.m. prisoner count on August 10, 2019 (the date of Epstein's death). It asserts they submitted false count slips to the MCC claiming they checked prisoners when they had not.
DOJ-OGR-00019247.jpg
This document is a screenshot of a UPS tracking page, filed as Exhibit 15-2 in Case 1:20-cv-03380-AJN on September 4, 2020. It displays the tracking interface for a 'UPS Next Day Air' shipment, though the specific status is collapsed. The URL at the bottom reveals the specific tracking number 1ZF4661F0194176904.
DOJ-OGR-00010545.jpg
This document is page 10 of a legal filing (Document 670, Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated June 22, 2022, detailing the grooming and sexual abuse tactics used by the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell) and Jeffrey Epstein. It describes how they monetarily incentivized girls to recruit others and specifically outlines the abuse of a victim named 'Jane,' whom they met at a summer camp in 1994 when she was 14. The text highlights the defendant's role in normalizing abuse, personally fondling victims, and using her social status to provide cover for Epstein's predation.
DOJ-OGR-00009160.jpg
This document is page 41 of a legal brief filed on February 24, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The text argues against granting an evidentiary hearing regarding juror misconduct allegations, citing precedents from cases involving El Chapo (Guzman Loera), Bin Laden, and Martha Stewart. The argument asserts that unsworn newspaper reports or anonymous claims are insufficient evidence to warrant a juror inquiry.
DOJ-OGR-00022380.jpg
This document is page 95 of a larger record, identified as DOJ-OGR-00022380. It appears to be a contact list for several airlines, including US Air, TWA, and United Airlines. The specific contact details for each airline have been redacted, as indicated by a note at the top of the page.
DOJ-OGR-00013469.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Rodgers. The testimony confirms that Jeffrey Epstein controlled the companies that owned his aircraft: JEGE, Incorporated owned the Boeing 727, and Hyperion Air owned the Gulfstream. The witness also estimates that Epstein purchased a Bell helicopter in November 2002.
DOJ-OGR-00010498.jpg
This document is page 2 of a character reference letter filed in court on June 15, 2022, written by a sibling of Ghislaine Maxwell. The author defends Maxwell's character, citing her qualifications as a helicopter and submersible pilot and EMT to refute labels like 'socialite.' The letter highlights her family dedication, specifically caring for their mother in France, and her philanthropic work founding The TerraMar Project in 2012 for ocean conservation.
DOJ-OGR-00010460.jpg
This legal document, filed on June 15, 2022, details the accomplishments and character of Ms. Ghislaine Maxwell. It highlights her professional achievements, including becoming an EMT and pilot, and her philanthropic work, such as founding The TerraMar Project in 2012, which was later closed after Epstein's death. The document also references letters from family, including siblings Anne Halve and Philip Maxwell, and friends that aim to counter her negative public image.
DOJ-OGR-00010283.jpg
This document is page 17 of a legal filing (likely a defense motion) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), arguing that certain counts in the indictment are multiplicitous. It details how the government incorporated the allegations of a witness named Carolyn (covering 2001-2004) into existing Mann Act conspiracies dating back to 1994, alongside victims Jane and Annie. The text highlights that Maxwell allegedly invited Carolyn to travel from Florida with Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00010272.jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal filing (Document 647, filed March 11, 2022) in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that the jury may have erroneously convicted Maxwell on Counts One, Three, and Four based on a finding that she intended sexual activity to occur in New Mexico, rather than New York as required by law. The text cites a 'Jury Note' (Court Exhibit #15) as evidence that the jury was confused about the location requirement and asserts the Court failed to correct this misunderstanding.
DOJ-OGR-00009886.jpg
This legal document, filed on March 11, 2022, is part of a brief arguing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell. The argument refutes the government's reliance on the case precedent of *United States v. Shaoul*, claiming it is inapplicable because it did not consider the specific points at issue, its key language is non-binding dictum, and it is inconsistent with earlier, controlling precedents like *Langford* and the Supreme Court's decision in *McDonough*. The document emphasizes that under the rules of precedent, the court is bound by these earlier decisions, not by *Shaoul*.
DOJ-OGR-00009603.jpg
This document is a page from a government legal filing in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated February 25, 2022. The text argues against the defense's claims regarding missing witnesses (Sally Markham, Fontanilla) and disputes the origin of the 'household manual' (Gov Ex 606), citing email evidence (Gov Ex 424) that proves Maxwell was involved in its creation alongside Markham, rather than it being solely the work of 'the Countess.' The prosecution asserts that the absence of these witnesses did not prejudice the defendant's ability to defend herself or impact the facts of the abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00003049.jpg
This document is page 115 of a legal filing (Document 204) from United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on April 16, 2021. It outlines legal arguments regarding the 'good faith exception' to the exclusionary rule, citing precedents like United States v. Leon and United States v. Moore. The text argues that suppression of evidence is not warranted because the Government acted in good faith by obtaining a grand jury subpoena and applying to the court to modify a civil protective order.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity