Relationship Details

This document is a page from a court transcript of a direct examination of a witness named Carolyn. She testifies about her first visit to Jeffrey Epstein's house, stating she went inside with a person named Virginia. Upon entering the kitchen, they were greeted by Ms. Maxwell, whom Carolyn describes as an older lady with an accent and shoulder-length black hair.

This court transcript details the testimony of a witness named Carolyn. She states that Ms. Maxwell paid her $300 in cash after she engaged in a "sexualized massage" with Jeffrey Epstein. Carolyn also testifies to receiving lingerie as a gift from Jeffrey Epstein, which was delivered via FedEx from Manhattan, New York, to her home in West Palm Beach.

This legal document is a filing by the defense in the case against Ms. Maxwell, arguing against the government's motion to preclude evidence related to its motives for prosecution. The defense asserts its right to present evidence about the timing of the charges against Maxwell in relation to Jeffrey Epstein's 2019 death, not to claim 'vindictive prosecution,' but to challenge the thoroughness and reliability of the government's investigation. The defense argues that the government's motion is an overreach and an attempt to force the disclosure of their trial strategy.

This document is a page from a court transcript of direct testimony by a witness named Carolyn. She describes her first visit to Jeffrey Epstein's house, accompanied by a person named Virginia. Upon entering the kitchen, they were greeted by Ms. Maxwell, whom the witness describes as an older lady with an accent and shoulder-length black hair.

This document is page 2 (filed page 6) of a defense motion filed on December 23, 2020, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that the Court should grant bail because the government has conceded its case relies almost exclusively on the testimony of three unidentified witnesses regarding events from over 25 years ago, lacking the 'significant contemporaneous documentary evidence' previously promised. The defense asserts that existing documentary evidence pertains to Jeffrey Epstein rather than Maxwell, though specific government concessions on this point are redacted.

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that Ms. Maxwell is being subjected to abusive and inhumane conditions by the Bureau of Prisons (BOP). The filing claims this treatment is retribution for Jeffrey Epstein's death while in BOP custody. To support the claim of agency incompetence, it quotes District Judge Colleen McMahon from a separate case criticizing the Department of Justice and the Bureau of Prisons.

This document is page 11 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated February 4, 2021. It outlines Counts Five and Six of the indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell, citing specific testimony from April and July 2016 depositions alleged to be perjury regarding her knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's recruitment of underage girls and the presence of sex toys at his Palm Beach home. The text also notes a potential violation of a protective order by Giuffre's lawyers in sharing confidential deposition contents with the government.

This legal document is a filing from Ms. Maxwell's defense team arguing that she was not trying to avoid arrest or hide from law enforcement. The defense claims they would have arranged a self-surrender if requested and that her actions during the arrest, such as moving to an interior room and wrapping a phone in foil, were pre-arranged security measures to protect herself from the press, not to evade officers. A new statement from the head of her security company is presented as evidence to support this claim.

This document is a page from a juror questionnaire for the legal case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on October 22, 2021. It contains questions designed to determine if a potential juror has prior knowledge of Ms. Maxwell or Jeffrey Epstein and whether that knowledge would prevent them from being fair and impartial. The questions also probe whether a juror's personal experiences, as indicated in previous answers, would affect their ability to serve.

This page from a defense filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) argues that the government's case against Ghislaine Maxwell relies entirely on the uncorroborated testimony of three accusers, specifically noting that Counts Two and Four rely solely on 'Minor Victim-1'. The defense asserts that the government only began issuing subpoenas regarding Maxwell after Jeffrey Epstein's death, suggesting the case was assembled 'after the fact'. A large block of text regarding specific government evidence is redacted.

This page is from a legal filing (Document 382) in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 29, 2021. It presents a legal argument citing case law (Kyles v. Whitley, Bowen v. Maynard) to support the admissibility of evidence regarding the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), prior charging decisions, and the death of Jeffrey Epstein. The defense argues these elements are necessary to challenge the thoroughness and good faith of the government's investigation.

This legal document, filed by the law office of Bobbi C. Sternheim on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, argues against the restrictive conditions of her confinement at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The filing contends that these measures, including constant surveillance and repeated searches, are an overreaction to the BOP's failure to prevent Jeffrey Epstein's death, rather than being based on any specific risk posed by Maxwell. The document also raises concerns about Ms. Maxwell's exposure to COVID-19 and the erasure of her legal emails, quoting then-Attorney General William Barr's stated interest in ensuring she makes it to trial.

This legal document is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, arguing for her innocence. It claims the government's evidence is weak and consists of old, untested hearsay, and that the prosecution is motivated by the 'Epstein Effect'—a need for a scapegoat following the public outrage over Jeffrey Epstein's death in custody. The filing asserts that this effect has biased prosecutors, the Bureau of Prisons, and the public against her.

This legal document, filed on behalf of Ms. Maxwell, argues that she did not attempt to avoid arrest. The defense counters the government's claims by stating they would have arranged for a self-surrender if asked and that her actions during the arrest, such as moving to an interior room and having a phone wrapped in tin foil, were pre-arranged security measures to protect her from the press, not to evade law enforcement. This claim is supported by a newly obtained statement from the head of her security company.

This legal document, part of a court filing, argues against granting bail to the defendant, Ms. Maxwell. The prosecution contends that she possesses significant financial resources, has demonstrated sophistication in hiding herself and her assets, and has an extraordinary capacity to evade detection, as evidenced by her behavior after Jeffrey Epstein's arrest. The document concludes that even a bail package with electronic monitoring would be insufficient to prevent her from fleeing.

This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated October 22, 2021, containing proposed voir dire questions and jury instructions. It specifically highlights disputes between the Government and the Defense regarding whether potential jurors should be asked live questions about their knowledge of or dealings with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell. The text includes standard admonitions to jurors not to discuss the case and to report any outside communication attempts.

This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named A. Farmer by an attorney, Ms. Menninger. The questioning establishes that Farmer did not communicate with either Jeffrey Epstein or Ms. Maxwell before a trip she took from Arizona to New Mexico. It is also established that Epstein did not inform Farmer that Maxwell would be present in New Mexico.