SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
OrganizationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00014430.jpg
This document is a page from a court summation in which the speaker, likely a prosecutor, argues why a victim named Jane took a long time to disclose sexual abuse. The speaker cites expert testimony from Dr. Rocchio, who explained that victims are less likely to report abuse when the perpetrator is close to them, and points to Jane's close relationships with Maxwell (like a "big sister") and Epstein (a "godfather"). The text also recounts testimony from a witness, Matt, about Jane confronting her mother years later, stating that money she received was "not free."
DOJ-OGR-00014429.jpg
This document is a page from a court summation by Ms. Moe, discussing testimony related to a victim referred to as "Jane." The prosecutor highlights corroborating testimony from a witness named Matt, who confirmed that Jane had told him years prior about her abuse by Jeffrey Epstein and a woman identified as Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00014428.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of a summation delivered by Ms. Moe (prosecution) in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. The speaker details two specific flights in May 1997 and April 1998 where a minor victim, 'Jane,' traveled with Epstein and Maxwell to New Mexico and New York. The speaker also rebuts the defense's argument that the 'Jane' listed in the flight logs was actually an adult personal assistant with the same first name, citing pilot and DMV testimony as proof.
DOJ-OGR-00014426.jpg
This document is a transcript of a prosecutor's (Ms. Moe) summation in a criminal case. The prosecutor argues that the victim, Jane, was abused by Maxwell and Epstein for years, starting when she was a teenager, and that her testimony is corroborated by another witness, Juan Alessi. Alessi's testimony confirms he knew Jane at a young age and remembered driving her to the airport with Maxwell and Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00014422.jpg
This document is a page from the government's summation (by Ms. Moe) in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It details the grooming and abuse of a victim referred to as 'Jane,' beginning when she was an 8th grader in 1994 at a summer camp and continuing in Palm Beach. The text describes Maxwell acting as an 'older sister figure' to facilitate abuse and Epstein using scholarship offers as a cover story for Jane's mother before physically abusing Jane in a pool house.
DOJ-OGR-00014418.jpg
This document is a transcript of a court summation by Ms. Moe, outlining the systematic method, or 'playbook,' used by Maxwell and Epstein to groom and abuse young girls. It details how they used isolation, false promises of gifts and opportunities, and relationship-building to manipulate victims like Annie, Jane, and Kate. The text specifically describes how Maxwell's actions escalated from grooming to direct sexual touching, highlighting her central role in the abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00014417.jpg
This document is page 17 of a transcript from the closing summations (Ms. Moe) in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecutor outlines the vulnerable backgrounds of victims Annie (16), Kate (17), and Carolyn (14), emphasizing financial struggles, sick or alcoholic parents, and prior abuse. The text describes the 'playbook' used by Maxwell and Epstein to exploit these needs and isolate the girls at Epstein's properties, including his ranch and Upper East Side mansion.
DOJ-OGR-00014415.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the closing summation by prosecutor Ms. Moe. The text focuses on a restrictive household manual that warned employees to 'see nothing, hear nothing,' which the prosecution argues was designed to cover up the 'horrifying crimes' committed by Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. The prosecutor also highlights a repeating pattern or 'playbook' Maxwell used to exploit multiple victims, specifically naming Jane, Annie, Carolyn, and Kate.
DOJ-OGR-00014412.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of a summation given by Ms. Moe. She characterizes the relationship between Maxwell and Epstein as a sexual partnership, which afforded Maxwell a luxury lifestyle traveling between Epstein's many properties. To establish Maxwell's authority, Ms. Moe references the testimony of Juan Alessi, a former house manager, who stated Maxwell took control of the household immediately upon her arrival.
DOJ-OGR-00014407.jpg
This document is page 7 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The text captures the beginning of the closing arguments phase, where the Judge outlines the schedule: Ms. Moe will present for the government, followed by a lunch break, and then Ms. Menninger will present for the defense. The page concludes with the Judge introducing Ms. Moe to the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00014363.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a discussion about jury instructions. Counsel argues that the jury should be instructed not to convict based solely on the testimony of a witness named Kate, a point with which the Court agrees. Following a brief request between counsel members, the judge calls for a 10-minute recess.
DOJ-OGR-00017609.jpg
This document is the final page of a court filing from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It serves as an index, listing 'DEFENDANT EXHIBITS' (LV3A, LV3B, LV4, LV5) and 'JOINT EXHIBITS' (J-3) along with corresponding reference numbers.
DOJ-OGR-00017608.jpg
This document is an index page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It outlines the examination of witnesses Lawrence Visoski (Epstein's pilot) and a witness identified only as 'Jane', along with a list of government exhibits received into evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00017607.jpg
This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It records a conversation between the judge, a government attorney (Ms. Moe), and another attorney (Ms. Sternheim) concerning the testimony of an upcoming witness. The judge acknowledges their points and adjourns the court until 8:45 a.m. on December 1, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00017602.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) dated August 10, 2022. Prosecutors are arguing to admit the testimony of a witness named 'Matt,' who was in a relationship with a victim named 'Jane' starting in 2007. Matt is expected to testify that Jane told him her family struggled financially during her childhood and mentioned an 'uncle' who paid for things, implying a cover story for abuse or grooming.
DOJ-OGR-00017601.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between the judge (THE COURT) and two attorneys (Ms. Moe and Ms. Menninger). The discussion centers on the procedure for redacting a witness's identifying information from the testimony, which the judge had previously sealed. They agree on a timeline for the government to propose redactions and for the attorneys to confer and file letters with the court by 10 PM that evening if any disagreements arise.
DOJ-OGR-00017600.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It records a discussion between the prosecution (Ms. Moe), the defense (Ms. Menninger), and the Court regarding the need to protect the privacy of a crime victim during upcoming cross-examination. The Court instructs the parties to 'meet and confer' to resolve issues regarding anonymizing names and identifying topics.
DOJ-OGR-00017599.jpg
This document is a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, capturing a procedural discussion between a judge and several attorneys (Ms. Comey, Ms. Menninger, Ms. Moe). The main topics are setting a 9:00 p.m. deadline for both the government and defense to submit letters regarding a dispute over Rule 16, and initiating a discussion on how to handle witness identifying information.
DOJ-OGR-00017598.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The Judge, Ms. Menninger, and Ms. Comey are discussing legal obligations under Rule 16 regarding the disclosure of impeachment evidence (specifically photographs) prior to cross-examination. The text mentions a witness who testified about the appearance of a home and notes that this witness worked for Jeffrey Epstein until 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00017597.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022, involving a legal dispute over the admissibility of impeachment evidence. Ms. Menninger (Defense) argues that she was not required to produce impeachment photographs to the government prior to trial, while Ms. Comey (Government) requests to brief the issue. The discussion specifically references photographs of the 'Epstein home' taken recently (2021/last year) being used to discuss past events.
DOJ-OGR-00017596.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a legal argument between Ms. Menninger (Defense) and Ms. Comey (Prosecution) regarding Federal Rule 16 and the disclosure of impeachment evidence. The Defense argues that documents used for impeachment (bias, motive, memory) do not need to be produced to the government beforehand, while the Prosecution contests this interpretation.
DOJ-OGR-00017595.jpg
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a legal debate over the admissibility of evidence. Attorney Ms. Menninger attempts to impeach a witness's claim of being homeless by showing a document of their current residence, but opposing counsel Ms. Comey objects, citing evidence rules. The judge sustains the objection, agreeing the evidence is not proper for impeachment under the circumstances.
DOJ-OGR-00017594.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a trial, case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. The transcript captures a legal debate between two attorneys, Ms. Comey and Ms. Menninger, in front of the judge regarding the admissibility of defendants' Exhibit J36. Ms. Comey argues the exhibit is a violation of Rule 16 as it was not produced by the court-ordered deadline, while Ms. Menninger contends it is impeachment material and thus exempt from the rule, a point which Ms. Comey then disputes.
DOJ-OGR-00017591.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, showing the testimony of a witness named "Jane." Questioned by attorney Ms. Moe, Jane confirms she has no financial stake in the trial's outcome and explains her desire to remain anonymous as a victim of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell to protect her private life and career and to avoid public shaming.
DOJ-OGR-00017590.jpg
A court transcript excerpt from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving a discussion about witness 'Jane'. Defense attorney Ms. Menninger raises a concern about a potential undisclosed statement from May 2019. Prosecutor Ms. Comey clarifies that the witness was approached by the FBI in May 2019 but declined to speak, and her first substantive interview did not occur until September 2019.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity