| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Jury
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
13 | |
|
person
Counsel
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Jury
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
Mr. Shechtman
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
Jury
|
Judicial instruction |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jury
|
Authority instruction |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Counsel
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Judicial |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Unnamed Investigator
|
Professional investigator judge |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Jurors
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Counsel (Teams)
|
Judicial oversight |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jurors
|
Authority instruction |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
prospective jurors
|
Judicial authority |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unnamed speaker
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
JUROR
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. PAGLIUCA
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Secretary of State
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Secretary of State
|
Procedural |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. OKULA
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MS. MENNINGER
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. SCHECTMAN
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing hearing where the judge discusses factors for punishment. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Jury Charge/Instructions regarding Counts Two, Four, and Six. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Afternoon Court Session during Jury Deliberations | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Preliminary instructions | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Trial proceedings where judge instructs jury. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Lenny Bruce's trial (implied by jury mention) | Chicago | View |
| N/A | N/A | Delivery of Instruction No. 36 regarding Conspiracy to Violate Federal Law. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A Franks hearing, which is a legal proceeding to determine the validity of an affidavit supportin... | court | View |
| N/A | Jury instruction | A judge is instructing the jury on the proper method for evaluating witness testimony, including ... | courtroom | View |
| N/A | Jury instruction | A judge provides Instruction No. 39 to the jury regarding the legal concept of 'Conscious Avoidan... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | Cross-examination of witness Brune regarding the decision not to investigate Juror No. 1, Ms. Con... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Court testimony | Redirect and recross-examination of witness Brune. | Implied to be a court in th... | View |
| N/A | Trial | A legal trial is taking place, during which these instructions are given. | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal procedure | Sending the case to the Secretary of State. There is no statutory time-limit, but in practice, th... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | A judge overruled a defendant's objection regarding a sentencing enhancement for undue influence,... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | A discussion in court regarding the logistics for concluding a trial. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Trial | The trial of United States v. Guzman Loera, during which the district court repeatedly instructed... | district court | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | Direct examination of witness Brune. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Hearing | A legal hearing for which the witness, Brune, is being questioned. The witness denies meeting wit... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Jury instruction | Instruction No. 4 was given to the jury, detailing that statements from counsel and the court are... | Court | View |
| N/A | Cross-examination | Attorney Mr. Okula cross-examines witness Berke during a legal proceeding. | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | An extradition hearing where a judge must decide on multiple factors, including technical require... | court | View |
| N/A | Legal event | Judge had to restart jury deliberations the next week. | court | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Jury selection and trial for case 2:20-cr-00030-ABN. | courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Instruction No. 36: Conspiracy to Violate Federal Law - Third Element is read to the jury. | Courtroom | View |
This document is a legal instruction (Instruction No. 3) for a jury in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 19, 2021. It strictly prohibits jurors from communicating about the case with anyone or conducting outside research using any electronic devices, the internet, or social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter. The instruction emphasizes that jurors must base their verdict solely on evidence presented in the courtroom and may only discuss the case with fellow jurors in the jury room during deliberations.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between Ms. Sternheim and the Judge. Ms. Sternheim argues that lawyers who attended proffer sessions with the government can be considered witnesses, but the Judge denies this, stating that such an action would have required a specific briefing that was never submitted. The core issue is the admissibility of testimony from these lawyers during the trial.
This document is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, detailing a portion of a legal proceeding involving Ms. Maxwell. Her attorney, Ms. Sternheim, requests that she be placed at the BOP facility in Danbury and enrolled in the Female Integrated Treatment (FIT) program, which the court recommends to the Bureau of Prisons. The court also grants a motion from the government, represented by Ms. Moe, to dismiss Counts Seven and Eight and any underlying indictments against Ms. Maxwell.
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding on July 22, 2022, concerning the sentencing of Ms. Maxwell. Her counsel, Ms. Sternheim, argues that Ms. Maxwell cannot pay a fine because a bequest she was to receive is 'unactualized' and she has received no money from it. The Court acknowledges she hasn't received the bequest but determines that other 'additional assets' make her able to pay the fine, and subsequently imposes the sentence.
This document is a court transcript from July 22, 2022, capturing a defense attorney's argument during a sentencing hearing. The attorney, Ms. Sternheim, asks the Court for a sentence below the recommended guidelines, arguing the government's request is disproportionate and that the more culpable Jeffrey Epstein would have faced the same sentencing guidelines as her client, Ghislaine Maxwell.
This document is page 12 of a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on July 22, 2022, involving the sentencing or factual findings regarding the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell). The judge overrules objections to Paragraph 55, stating the record supports that the defendant recruited a minor, Virginia, for sexualized massages with Epstein and was aware of the nature of the acts. The text also details that the defendant instructed Virginia to show another minor, Carolyn, 'what to do,' and that monetary incentives were used to encourage Virginia to recruit Carolyn.
This document is a page from a Palm Beach Police Department incident report concerning Case No. 1-05-000368 involving Jeffrey Epstein. It details the collection of evidence from Epstein's residence, including notepads, a high school transcript, sexual lubricant, photographs, and video tapes, followed by a meeting with Epstein's attorney, Guy Fronstein. The report also notes delays in filing paperwork due to Hurricane Wilma and begins a narrative by Gregory A. Parkinson describing the assembly of the Crime Scene Investigative Team on October 20, 2005.
Epstein told the judge that the $10,000 he'd returned was actually the payment for a horse Stroll had sold him.
Instruction to avoid media, not communicate about the case, and contact Ms. Williams for issues.
The judge instructs the jury that any communication with the court must be done in writing or by returning to the courtroom. The jury is explicitly forbidden from revealing its standing on the verdict until a unanimous decision is reached.
The judge explains to the jury that a defendant is presumed innocent, the government has the burden to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, and the defendant has no obligation to prove their innocence. The judge also outlines their own role in applying the law and the jury's role in deciding the facts.
The judge instructs the jury not to draw inferences from lawyers' objections or the judge's rulings. The jury is told that their own recollection of facts governs, and that statements by counsel are not evidence. The judge also clarifies that any instructions to witnesses were for clarity and should not imply any bias.
The judge instructs the jury on their role. They must follow the law as given by the judge, act as the sole judges of the facts based only on evidence, determine witness credibility, and understand that lawyers' statements are not evidence.
The judge instructs the jury not to discuss the case with anyone and to have no contact with the parties or counsel. The judge also explains the COVID-19 safety measures in place, such as witnesses and lawyers using a Plexiglas box with a HEPA filter.
The judge defines what a legal inference is, explains that the jury must decide which inferences to draw from the evidence, and provides specific instructions on impermissible inferences, particularly regarding the defendant, Ms. Maxwell.
The judge explains the jury's role as the 'triers of fact,' defines what constitutes legal evidence (testimony, documents, stipulations), and distinguishes it from things that are not evidence (arguments, statements, questions).
Instructions on evaluating testimony, keeping an open mind, and the use of pseudonyms for witnesses due to media attention.
Instructions regarding the schedule for deliberations until a verdict is reached and procedure for reporting scheduling hardships.
Instructions regarding the necessity of a unanimous verdict, prohibition on revealing vote splits, role of the foreperson, and requirement for courtesy.
Judge sustains an objection regarding the line of questioning, prohibiting the attorney from drawing associations with other defendants the witness has testified for to avoid prejudice under Rule 403.
Instructions regarding note-taking, requesting transcripts, and the standard of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt) for the verdict.
Mr. Shechtman argues against the government's position that his client, Mr. Parse, benefited from a strategic choice regarding a juror. He contends the acquittal was due to a split verdict caused by a partisan juror who failed to persuade others, not because Mr. Parse benefited from her presence.
Instruction to the jury to disregard media attention when evaluating evidence or witness credibility.
The judge instructs the jury on the requirement for a unanimous verdict, the procedure for filling out the verdict form, how to notify the marshal, the importance of courtesy during deliberations, and asks them to wait for a side bar conference to conclude.
An instruction to the jury prohibiting any communication or research about the case using external sources, including electronic devices and social media, during deliberations. Jurors are only allowed to discuss the case with fellow jurors in the jury room.
The judge instructs the jury on the requirement for a unanimous verdict, the procedure for filling out the verdict form, how to notify the marshal, the importance of courtesy during deliberations, and asks them to wait for a side bar conference to conclude.
Instructions regarding unanimous verdicts, the role of the foreperson, maintaining courtesy, and a pause for a sidebar conference.
Instructions regarding the assembly of jurors, video feed usage, and specific questions to be asked regarding media exposure and impartiality.
Thanking participants for following rules and instructions and supporting the trial by jury system.
Defense argues the government misrepresented the client's behavior during arrest as fleeing rather than following security protocol.
A letter from Ghislaine Maxwell's side replying to the USA's response to her motion.
Instructions regarding diligence and dismissal for the day.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity