SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
OrganizationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00018939.jpg
A transcript page from a court proceeding (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on August 10, 2022. Attorney Ms. Moe argues for the admissibility of a bound, sequentially numbered book under the 'business records exception,' contending that witnesses do not need to testify to recording entries at the exact moment of occurrence. The Court (Judge) agrees to review the relevant case law during a break.
DOJ-OGR-00018938.jpg
This document is page 76 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (US v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a legal argument between Ms. Moe (Prosecution) and Mr. Pagliuca (Defense) regarding the evidentiary weight and authenticity of message books/logs. Ms. Moe argues the logs are sequential and chronological, while Mr. Pagliuca contends they are disorganized, missing dates, and that multiple books were used haphazardly by staff.
DOJ-OGR-00018937.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) discussing the admissibility of spiral-bound message pads used by household staff. The prosecution (Ms. Moe) argues these are valid business records created under strict instructions from the defendant, while the defense (Mr. Pagliuca) counters that many messages are undated and unsigned, though noting Ms. Hesse's messages were 'well maintained.'
DOJ-OGR-00018936.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the direct examination of a witness named Hesse. Attorney Ms. Moe and the Court discuss the admissibility of exhibits 1B, 3P, and 3X, debating hearsay objections and the criteria for the 'business records' exception. The Judge outlines the requirements for establishing a foundation for business records.
DOJ-OGR-00018935.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a legal argument between defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca and prosecutor Ms. Moe regarding the admissibility of a 'spiral bound book' of message slips during the direct examination of a witness named Hesse. Pagliuca objects under Federal Rules of Evidence 801 and 803.6, arguing the witness lacks the knowledge to establish a business record foundation, while Moe counters that the authenticity of the book itself is not in dispute.
DOJ-OGR-00018934.jpg
This document is a page from the trial transcript (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) where the prosecution (Ms. Moe) and defense (Mr. Pagliuca) argue over the admissibility of message slips. The prosecution asserts these records prove a victim named 'Carolyn' contacted 'the house' during the conspiracy, while the defense argues the slips lack dates and signatures and cannot be fully authenticated by the current witness (Hesse).
DOJ-OGR-00018933.jpg
This page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) details a legal argument between the prosecution (Ms. Moe) and the Judge regarding the admissibility of phone message logs. The prosecution argues these logs are business records that corroborate victim testimony about calling 'the house' to schedule massage appointments. The document specifically notes that the name of a victim who testified the previous day appears in these messages.
DOJ-OGR-00018932.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument between an attorney, Ms. Moe, and the judge. Ms. Moe is seeking to admit three spiral-bound message books as evidence, arguing they have been properly authenticated and should be admitted despite a hearsay objection, citing that similar evidence was previously accepted in the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00018931.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a portion of the direct examination of a witness named Hesse. An attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, objects to the admission of certain records on hearsay grounds, arguing the witness only has personal knowledge of the signatures. In response, the judge decides to address the objection after giving the jury a 15-minute morning break.
DOJ-OGR-00018929.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Hesse. Hesse identifies Government Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 as message pads used to take phone messages while they were working at the 'Epstein home'. The witness confirms their familiarity with the message pads, their contents, and affirms that their signature is present in all three books.
DOJ-OGR-00018928.jpg
This page is a transcript of the direct examination of Mrs. Hesse, a former employee of Epstein and Maxwell. She testifies about the protocol for taking phone messages when Epstein and Maxwell were away, specifically describing a blue spiral notebook kept in the kitchen for this purpose. The prosecutor, Ms. Moe, then introduces Government Exhibits 1, 2, and 3 to the witness.
DOJ-OGR-00018926.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022. A witness, identified as Hesse, testifies about being employed around 2003 at the Palm Beach residence of Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The witness states they were hired directly by Ghislaine Maxwell to maintain the home when the owners were not present.
DOJ-OGR-00018925.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the beginning of the direct examination of a witness, Nicole Hesse, who has been called by the Government. After being sworn in, Ms. Hesse states and spells her name for the record and answers preliminary questions from an attorney, Ms. Moe, about her birthplace (West Palm Beach, Florida) and where she grew up (North Palm Beach).
DOJ-OGR-00018924.jpg
This page is a transcript from the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It documents the conclusion of the cross-examination of a witness named Shawn, regarding the timeline of her pregnancy and residence in Georgia and Florida between 2000 and 2004. Following her dismissal, the government calls its next witness, Nicole Hesse.
DOJ-OGR-00018923.jpg
This document is page 61 of a court transcript from the trial US v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), specifically the cross-examination of a witness named Shawn. The testimony covers the witness's admission to never having met Maxwell despite claiming she called him, his attendance at meetings with Jeffrey Epstein, and his history of drug use (cocaine, ecstasy, marijuana) with an individual named Carolyn, who also provided him with money. The witness also confirms moving from Florida to Georgia in 2003.
DOJ-OGR-00018922.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Shawn by Mr. Pagliuca. The testimony focuses on inconsistencies or confirmations regarding specific details Shawn provided to the government during interviews in June and July 2021 about phone calls received from a woman named Sarah and an unidentified woman with a distinct European accent. The witness struggles to identify the specific origin of the accent, noting only that it was foreign, European, but not British or French.
DOJ-OGR-00018921.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript of the cross-examination of a witness named Shawn. The questioning establishes that the witness received phone calls from Epstein and Sarah Kellen, with Kellen identifying herself as calling on Epstein's behalf. The transcript also details the witness's initial contacts with the government regarding the case, including a meeting in a Florida parking lot around January 4, 2021, and a subsequent phone or video meeting on January 13, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00018920.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, featuring the testimony of a witness named Shawn. Under questioning by Ms. Comey, Shawn denies discussing Jeffrey Epstein or his testimony with his ex-partner, Carolyn, with whom he shares a child. Following this, Mr. Pagliuca begins cross-examination, establishing that Shawn visited a house in Palm Beach in 2002 and shared a phone with Carolyn.
DOJ-OGR-00018918.jpg
This document is a court transcript page from the trial United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). A witness named Shawn testifies that he accompanied a 16-year-old girl named Carolyn to Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach house multiple times. He states that she would go inside alone for an hour and emerge with hundred-dollar bills, and admits they were using drugs during this period.
DOJ-OGR-00018917.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness named Shawn by an attorney, Ms. Comey. Shawn identifies individuals in a photograph from Melissa's 16th birthday and testifies about visiting Jeffrey Epstein's house multiple times with Melissa, and on one occasion with Carolyn. He also states that Melissa went inside the house with another individual named Amanda.
DOJ-OGR-00018916.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case dated August 10, 2022, where a witness named Shawn is under direct examination. Shawn identifies Government Exhibit 105 as a photograph from Melissa's 16th birthday, which he attended, and names Carolyn, Melissa, and Candace as being in the picture. Following a request from attorney Ms. Comey to protect privacy, the court admits the exhibit into evidence under seal.
DOJ-OGR-00018915.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Shawn by Ms. Comey. The testimony focuses on a girl named Melissa, who was 16 years old when she visited Jeffrey Epstein's house accompanied by a woman named Carolyn. The witness states that after being inside for an hour, Melissa and Carolyn emerged carrying money.
DOJ-OGR-00018914.jpg
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a legal argument between prosecutor Ms. Moe and the Judge regarding the admissibility of testimony concerning a person named Amanda. The Judge sustains an objection regarding the testimony, noting that previous testimony established a belief that the individual was 17 years old.
DOJ-OGR-00018912.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a legal objection made by an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, under Rule 404(b) during the direct examination of a witness named Shawn. Another attorney, Ms. Comey, counters that the testimony is "Direct evidence," prompting the judge to intervene.
DOJ-OGR-00018911.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Shawn. The witness identifies three women—Melissa, Amanda Lazlo, and Carolyn—as former girlfriends he dated simultaneously. Crucially, the witness testifies that the first time he saw Amanda Lazlo go to Jeffrey Epstein's house, she was approximately 15 or 16 years old.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity