SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
OrganizationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00011586.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 22, 2022, from the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It contains a victim impact statement written by Virginia Giuffre (referred to as Virginia Roberts by the court) and read by her counsel. The statement directly accuses Maxwell of spotting Giuffre at Mar-a-Lago in the summer of 2000, procuring her for Jeffrey Epstein, and participating in the subsequent abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00011585.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on July 22, 2022, containing a victim impact statement regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. The speaker, who has known Maxwell for many years, characterizes her as a manipulative and cruel person who uses kindness for recognition. The victim expresses pride in standing with other survivors ('sisters') to hold Maxwell accountable and vows to pass empowerment on to her daughter.
DOJ-OGR-00011583.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 22, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It captures a portion of a court proceeding where a witness, identified only as 'Kate' due to an anonymity order, begins to deliver her victim impact statement. Before she speaks, Ms. Moe confirms the protective order with the court, which is affirmed, and Kate then starts her emotional testimony about fearing for her child's safety and fighting for justice against a 'common enemy'.
DOJ-OGR-00011582.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on July 22, 2022. It features a victim impact statement from a woman, now a psychologist, who describes her silence for two decades due to shame and fear of professional ruin. She addresses Judge Nathan directly, urging her to consider the ongoing suffering of victims and the systemic effects of the crimes when sentencing Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00011581.jpg
This page contains a transcript from a court proceeding, filed on July 22, 2022, appearing to be a victim impact statement. The speaker describes the trauma inflicted on their family, specifically detailing the abuse their sister, Maria, suffered at the hands of Ghislaine Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein. The text highlights how Maxwell used Maria to access the speaker, threatened Maria to silence her, and lied to the media to shut down investigations.
DOJ-OGR-00011579.jpg
This page contains a transcript from the sentencing hearing of Ghislaine Maxwell on July 22, 2022. A speaker named Ms. Moe concludes her argument for a harsh, above-guideline sentence, emphasizing accountability for the wealthy and powerful. Following this, Judge Nathan calls Ms. Farmer to the podium, who begins her victim impact statement describing the long-term psychological damage caused by the abuse she suffered at the hands of Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00011577.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on July 22, 2022, concerning United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text, likely spoken by a prosecutor during sentencing arguments, characterizes Maxwell as Jeffrey Epstein's 'right hand' and a 'partner in crime' who preyed on children and viewed people as either 'disposable' or 'mattered.' It highlights that she received millions of dollars from Epstein to fund a luxurious lifestyle and emphasizes the lasting trauma inflicted on the victims.
DOJ-OGR-00011576.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) containing a statement, likely a closing argument or sentencing memo, regarding the defendant, Maxwell. The text details the defendant's predatory behavior, describing how she manipulated and trafficked young girls for sex to serve a middle-aged man.
DOJ-OGR-00011575.jpg
This document is page 56 of a court transcript from the sentencing hearing of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on July 22, 2022. Prosecutor Ms. Moe is addressing the court, requesting an above-guideline sentence of multiple decades in prison for Maxwell's role in a child exploitation scheme. The prosecutor specifically names victims Jane, Kate, Annie, Virginia, Carolyn, and Melissa, detailing that Maxwell first met Jane at a summer camp in 1994 when Jane was 14.
DOJ-OGR-00011574.jpg
This is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, detailing a procedural discussion about the order of statements. Counsel Ms. Moe asks the judge if victims should speak before or after the main parties. The judge clarifies the intended sequence is government, victims, defense counsel, and then Ms. Maxwell, to which all parties present agree before the court takes a luncheon recess.
DOJ-OGR-00011573.jpg
This page from a court transcript (case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) details sentencing proceedings for Ms. Maxwell. The Judge rejects the claim that Maxwell is indigent, citing $22 million in assets reported in 2020 and a lack of documentation regarding her marriage/divorce, and states an intention to impose a fine. The Judge also notes the government is not seeking restitution, finds no grounds for downward departures from sentencing guidelines, and calls for a lunch break.
DOJ-OGR-00011572.jpg
This document is page 53 of a court transcript from the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The Court overrules an objection regarding the inclusion of assets in the Presentence Report (PSR), specifically noting a $10 million bequest from Jeffrey Epstein to Maxwell. The Judge determines that Maxwell has failed to establish an inability to pay a fine, citing the bequest and $3.8 million in assets reported in July 2020.
DOJ-OGR-00011571.jpg
This document is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, detailing a conversation between an attorney, Mr. Everdell, and the court. Mr. Everdell argues that a bequest made to an estate currently in bankruptcy should not be considered a firm asset for the purpose of calculating fines, as the estate has outstanding victims' claims and the bequest itself is likely to be contested. He states it was disclosed on a financial affidavit out of an abundance of caution and good faith.
DOJ-OGR-00011570.jpg
This court transcript from July 22, 2022, details a discussion about victims in a conspiracy, establishing a recruitment chain where the defendant recruited Virginia, who recruited Carolyn, who then recruited Melissa. The court agrees with the government's position on this matter and overrules objections related to Carolyn's prior testimony about her age. The document also notes the defendant's objection to including a $10 million bequest from Epstein in her assets when determining her ability to pay fines.
DOJ-OGR-00011569.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a hearing on July 22, 2022, concerning sentencing guidelines. The attorneys, Mr. Everdell and Ms. Moe, and the Court discuss the calculation of the total offense level, resulting in a guideline range of 188 to 235. Mr. Everdell, while agreeing with the calculation, formally preserves an objection to the government's request to treat two individuals, Virginia and Melissa, as separate offense groups, an issue the Court has previously ruled on.
DOJ-OGR-00011568.jpg
This document is a transcript from a legal proceeding where a judge determines a defendant's sentence based on the 2003 Guidelines. The judge calculates a total offense level of 37, leading to a guideline imprisonment range of 210-262 months and a fine range of $20,000 to $200,000 per count. An attorney, Ms. Moe, then interjects to correct the judge's calculation, stating that 5 units should add 4 levels, not 5.
DOJ-OGR-00011567.jpg
This legal document, filed on July 22, 2022, is a transcript of a judge's explanation for calculating sentencing guidelines in a criminal case involving five victims: Jane, Annie, Carolyn, Virginia, and Melissa. The judge uses the 2003 Guidelines manual to establish a base offense level and applies various enhancements based on the victims' ages and circumstances, resulting in a final offense level of 27 for Jane and Carolyn, and 25 for Annie, Virginia, and Melissa.
DOJ-OGR-00011566.jpg
This document is a page from a judicial ruling dated July 22, 2022, concerning a sentencing guideline calculation. The judge finds that two individuals, Virginia Roberts and Melissa, were minor victims trafficked and abused by the defendant and Epstein. The judge overrules a prior decision by the Probation department to exclude them from the calculation and, citing Second Circuit precedent, decides to consider them as additional victims for sentencing purposes.
DOJ-OGR-00011565.jpg
This legal document is a court filing from July 22, 2022, discussing a defendant's conviction for sex trafficking a victim named Carolyn. The court refutes the defense's argument against an "undue influence" sentencing enhancement, finding that the defendant exploited Carolyn's financial needs for her drug addiction and newborn son. The court concludes that taking advantage of a victim's financial vulnerability constitutes undue influence, referencing testimony from Carolyn and other victims (Jane, Annie) who received payments.
DOJ-OGR-00011564.jpg
This document is a page from a legal transcript or ruling, filed on July 22, 2022. A judge overrules a defendant's objection to a sentencing enhancement, arguing that applying an enhancement for 'undue influence' over a minor in a commercial sex act case is not impermissible 'double counting'. The judge explains that the enhancement addresses a different type of harm than the base offense level and cites precedent from 'United States v. Watkins' and 'United States v. Kohlmeier' to support the ruling.
DOJ-OGR-00011562.jpg
This legal document, filed on July 22, 2022, discusses the extensive nature of a criminal conspiracy, identifying Epstein and the defendant as knowing participants. It notes that Sarah Kellen joined the conspiracy in 2002 and that minor victims were recruited through Virginia and Carolyn starting around 2001. The document also details the roles of unknowing participants, such as Epstein employee Juan Alessi and pilots Visoski and Rodgers, whose services were directed by the defendant and were necessary for the criminal scheme.
DOJ-OGR-00011560.jpg
This document is page 41 of a court filing from July 22, 2022, discussing legal arguments related to a defendant's sentencing. It focuses on the application of sentencing guidelines 4B1.5(b) concerning public danger and 3B1.1(a) regarding leadership roles in criminal activity, particularly in cases involving sexual abuse or exploitation of minors. The document cites congressional intent and the defendant's objections to these enhancements.
DOJ-OGR-00011559.jpg
This document is page 40 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on July 22, 2022, related to the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell (the defendant). The judge overrules a defense objection regarding sentencing enhancements, affirming that the defendant engaged in a pattern of prohibited sexual conduct with a minor and rejecting the argument that a finding of 'continuing danger to the public' is required by the Guidelines. The judge cites legal precedents (United States v. Sash, NLRB v. SW General) to prioritize the clear text of the Guidelines over background commentary or legislative history.
DOJ-OGR-00011558.jpg
This document is page 39 of a court transcript from the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The judge is ruling on which sentencing guidelines apply (2003 vs 2004) based on the timeline of evidence involving 'Epstein's house' and a victim named Carolyn. The judge determines that message pads evidence (including exhibit GX-4B) does not sufficiently prove the offense continued after November 1, 2004, leading to the application of the 2003 guidelines and a discussion of the 4B1.5(b) enhancement for a pattern of prohibited sexual conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00011557.jpg
This legal document analyzes evidence to determine if a sex trafficking conspiracy involving Carolyn and Epstein continued in late 2004, before she turned 18 in early 2005. It references Carolyn's testimony about visiting Epstein's house and phone calls made to him in the summer of 2004, supported by message pad evidence. The document also notes her testimony that Epstein considered her 'too old for him' at age 18 and asked about younger friends.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity