Ms. Giuffre
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Annie Farmer
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Professor Dershowitz
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. [Redacted]
|
Witness corroborator |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Alan Dershowitz
|
Acquaintance |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
David Boies
|
Client |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal opposition | Attorneys for Ms. Giuffre and Annie Farmer opposed Ms. Maxwell's motion to stay discovery. | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| N/A | Legal case | Civil case cited as 'Giuffre v. Maxwell, No. 20-2413'. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Criminal investigation | A concern is mentioned that Ms. Giuffre would use documents from the civil action to support a cr... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Attorneys learned Ms. Giuffre was in the US and willing to testify. | United States | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Marra denied Ms. Giuffre's motion to join the case but allowed her participation as a witness. | Federal Court | View |
| 2021-01-01 | N/A | Judge Preska issued a ruling on unsealing the July 2016 deposition (referenced as 'Last week' in ... | Court | View |
| 2020-09-23 | N/A | Submission of legal document argument regarding motion to consolidate. | Court | View |
| 2019-08-27 | N/A | Public hearing in US v. Epstein | USDC SDNY | View |
| 2019-08-27 | N/A | Public hearing where Ms. Giuffre and Mr. Boies had a right to be heard under 18 U.S.C. § 3771. | Court | View |
| 2014-05-01 | N/A | Affiant flew to Florida for a full-day interview with Ms. Giuffre. | Fort Lauderdale, Florida | View |
| 1999-01-01 | N/A | Purported conspiracy involving Epstein and Ms. Giuffre. | Unspecified | View |
DOJ-OGR-00000728.jpg
This is page 2 of a legal document filed on September 4, 2019, in Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (United States v. Epstein). Judge Richard M. Berman addresses an unnamed recipient regarding an opinion piece they wrote, criticizing it for potentially discouraging Ms. Giuffre and her attorney David Boies from speaking at an August 27, 2019 hearing. The document copies attorneys Maurene Comey, Martin Weinberg, Reid Weingarten, and David Boies.
DOJ-OGR-00002421.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It includes a transcript excerpt where Maxwell denies giving massages to anyone, specifically including Epstein and '[Minor Victim-2],' and discusses her knowledge of Epstein's sexual activities involving a 'blond and brunette.' The document also references a ruling by Judge Preska in the civil case regarding the unsealing of Maxwell's July 2016 deposition.
DOJ-OGR-00002290(1).jpg
This document is page 12 of a defense filing (Document 120) from January 2021 in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text argues against the 'joinder' (combining) of Perjury Counts with Mann Act Counts, stating that Maxwell's alleged false statements in 2016 civil depositions were tangential to the defamation case and not part of a 'common scheme' to obstruct the Mann Act investigation. The defense distinguishes this case from legal precedent (Potamitis), emphasizing that Maxwell did not lie to the FBI or a Grand Jury to derail an investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00019409.jpg
This legal document from September 24, 2020, discusses judicial proceedings involving Ms. Maxwell. It notes that Judge Preska took over a case from the late Judge Sweet and describes how arguments by Ms. Maxwell to keep materials sealed were dismissed. The document also mentions a specific instance where Ms. Maxwell's motion to stay discovery in a related case, 'Farmer v. Indyke', was opposed by attorneys representing both Ms. Giuffre and plaintiff Annie Farmer.
DOJ-OGR-00019406.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing dated September 24, 2020, arguing procedural impropriety regarding how the government obtained Ghislaine Maxwell's confidential civil deposition transcripts. It details that a protective order in 'Giuffre v. Maxwell' specifically excluded language allowing sharing information with law enforcement, yet the government somehow obtained these sealed transcripts to indict Maxwell for perjury. The text questions the legality of the government's acquisition of these documents.
DOJ-OGR-00019397.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing dated September 23, 2020, related to Case 20-3061. It argues in favor of a motion to consolidate legal proceedings involving Ms. Maxwell and Ms. Giuffre, asserting that consolidation will not cause delay or circumvent Judge Nathan's prior orders. The text emphasizes that the Court has already scheduled oral arguments for both cases on the same day.
DOJ-OGR-00019395.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing dated September 23, 2020, arguing that the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell is directly related to the civil case involving Virginia Giuffre, specifically citing perjury allegations. It contends that the government has a strategic interest in not intervening in the civil case regarding the unsealing of an April 2016 deposition to argue that a 'Martindell' violation was harmless. The page contains significant redactions in the center.
DOJ-OGR-00019657.jpg
This legal document from October 8, 2020, discusses legal arguments concerning Ms. Maxwell's deposition testimony from a civil case, which forms the basis for criminal charges against her. It references the case 'Giuffre v. Maxwell', detailing how Giuffre's attorneys used a civil protective order to counter Maxwell's arguments about privacy and self-incrimination, leading her to testify rather than invoke her Fifth Amendment rights. The document also cites Judge Preska and the case 'Brown v. Maxwell' regarding the court's role in balancing access to legal materials.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_019298.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal letter from Alan Dershowitz's legal team (Emery Celli Brinckerhoff & Abady LLP) complaining that the plaintiff (Giuffre) leaked selective, confidential information to the Washington Post to damage Dershowitz. The letter attempts to discredit a specific redacted witness (Ms. [Redacted]) by citing her 2016 emails which contained outlandish conspiracy theories involving the CIA, 'the Russians,' and 'Special Agents Forces Men.' The document details the witness's claims of possessing compromising sexual evidence against high-profile figures including Bill Clinton, Prince Andrew, Richard Branson, and Donald Trump.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015634.jpg
This document is page 14 of a legal response filed by Edwards and Cassell in the case Edwards v. Dershowitz. The text argues that Dershowitz selectively uses parts of Virginia Giuffre's affidavit while attempting to seal the rest, preventing a fair assessment of his claims that her statements are 'preposterous.' The document includes a transcript of a BBC interview from January 2015 where Dershowitz categorically denies the allegations, claims he does not know Giuffre, and threatens the opposing lawyers with defamation suits and disbarment proceedings.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015633.jpg
This document is page 13 of a legal response in the case of Edwards vs. Dershowitz (Case No. CACE 15-000072). It contains a transcript excerpt from a deposition where Alan Dershowitz questions Ms. McCawley's standing, followed by legal commentary regarding a statement released by Ms. McCawley on behalf of David Boies concerning privileged settlement discussions. The document references depositions of Alan Dershowitz from 2015 and 2016.
Proposed Protective Order
Proposal to allow plaintiff to share confidential information with law enforcement (rejected).
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity