Menninger
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Pomerantz
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeff Pagliuca
|
Co counsel |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-08-10 | Legal proceeding | Direct examination of witness Ms. Swain in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Court | View |
| 2020-08-19 | Legal filing | Maxwell filed a letter motion requesting a stay of the civil action pending her criminal case. | Court | View |
EFTA00018893.pdf
This document is an email chain between the defense team (including Christian Everdell, Jeff Pagliuca, and Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. The correspondence, dated November 6-7, 2021, coordinates the exchange of juror 'strike' lists and 'keeps' for a joint submission to the Court. Specific details include technical difficulties with Excel files and a specific agreement to allow jurors 127, 151, and 458 to proceed to voir dire.
DOJ-OGR-00014882.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case dated January 15, 2025. Counsel discusses logistical matters, including receiving permission for Mr. Pagliuca to miss a final pretrial conference due to a hearing in Colorado. The court then moves to a Daubert hearing concerning the government's proposed expert, Dr. Lisa Rocchio, whose name pronunciation is clarified for the record.
DOJ-OGR-00008337.jpg
This is a court transcript from a case filed on December 10, 2021, detailing a conversation between the judge and attorneys for the defense and government. The discussion focuses on whether the defense will call expert witnesses (LaPorte and Naso), with a defense attorney stating it's unlikely and was only considered as a precaution regarding 'Accuser No. 2'. A government attorney expresses concern about the potential for the defense to decide to call these experts in the middle of the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00018661.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. It details the direct examination of a witness, Mr. Flatley, by attorney Ms. Pomerantz regarding Government Exhibits 420B, 421B, and 422B. After the witness affirms their accuracy, the exhibits are admitted into evidence by the court without objection from opposing counsel, Ms. Menninger.
DOJ-OGR-00019453.jpg
This document is page 9 of a court order filed on September 14, 2020, granting a stay in a civil case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The court rules that proceeding with civil discovery would prejudice Maxwell due to her concurrent criminal prosecution (raising Fifth Amendment issues) and the restrictive detention conditions at the MDC during the COVID-19 pandemic, which hinder her ability to consult with counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00019451.jpg
This document is page 7 of a court order or legal filing (Case 1:20-cv-00484) dated September 24, 2020. It discusses the motion to stay civil proceedings against Ghislaine Maxwell due to the parallel criminal indictment. The text highlights the substantial overlap between the civil and criminal allegations, specifically noting accusations of grooming victims and facilitating Jeffrey Epstein's abuse.
DOJ-OGR-00019446.jpg
This legal document, filed on September 14, 2020, outlines the arguments surrounding a motion for a stay in a civil case involving a defendant named Maxwell. Maxwell requested the stay pending her criminal case, a motion supported by the Co-Executors who argued against a partial stay. The Plaintiff vigorously opposed the motion, accusing Maxwell of attempting to gain an unfair discovery advantage.
DOJ-OGR-00016792.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding filed on August 10, 2022. It captures the redirect examination of Special Agent Richards by attorney Mr. Pagliuca, focusing on the accuracy of the agent's interview notes. After the examination concludes, the Court excuses Special Agent Richards, and defense counsel Ms. Menninger calls the next witness, Agent Amanda Young.
DOJ-OGR-00016470.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between a judge and several attorneys (Mr. Everdell, Ms. Moe, Ms. Menninger). The discussion centers on procedural issues concerning witnesses, including the legal authority for witness anonymity and the application of Rule 615, which governs the presence of witnesses in the courtroom. The attorneys agree to research and brief the court on the legal basis for their positions.
DOJ-OGR-00013029.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It details a conversation between the judge, government counsel (Mr. Rohrbach), and opposing counsel (Ms. Menninger) regarding the scope of testimony for a witness named Mr. Flatley. The government agrees not to question Mr. Flatley about 'CDs' on direct examination, resolving the issue and making prior preparation on the topic moot for the time being.
DOJ-OGR-00013813.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of a witness, Ms. Swain, by an attorney, Ms. Pomerantz. The testimony covers Ms. Swain's relationship with a young woman named Annie, including discussions about college, and also touches on an individual named Maria who lived in New York in 1995. The witness confirms having spoken with Jeffrey Epstein on the phone, and the transcript records a sustained hearsay objection by another attorney, Ms. Menninger.
DOJ-OGR-00014557.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, where the jury is not present. A lawyer, Ms. Moe, makes an application to the court, objecting to the defense counsel's summation, arguing that they referred to facts not in evidence. As a specific example, she states that Ms. Menninger read an email from someone named Kate that the court had previously ruled inadmissible.
RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: questionnaires
Sending draft joint letter regarding juror questionnaires. Notes withdrawal of objection for jurors 127, 151, and 458.
RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: questionnaires
Stating they did not use Excel to prepare their list and don't know how to convert the PDF to Excel.
RE: [EXTERNAL] RE: questionnaires
Apologizing for delay due to Excel glitch, attaching current list of proposed strikes, requesting defense list in Excel.
Reply Letter
Reply letter referenced regarding defense preparation difficulties.
Defense arguments
Letter referenced regarding defense preparation difficulties.
Arguments for stay
Summarizing allegations and noting similarities between Indictment and Complaint.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity