DOJ-OGR-00020530.jpg
1.34 MB
Extraction Summary
9
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court docket sheet / legal record
File Size:
1.34 MB
Summary
This document is a docket sheet from July to August 2021 detailing legal maneuvers in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. Significant entries involve a dispute over an Op-Ed written by attorney David Oscar Markus, leading to a court order enforcing Local Criminal Rule 23.1 regarding extrajudicial statements to protect the integrity of the trial. Additionally, the defense filed motions referencing the 'Cosby Opinion' and sought to suppress evidence obtained from a subpoena to the law firm Boies Schiller.
People (9)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the court orders and motions; defendant in the criminal case.
|
| Alison J. Nathan | Judge |
Presiding judge issuing orders and receiving letters.
|
| Alison Moe | Attorney (Government/USA) |
Filed Letter Motion on 07/01/2021.
|
| Maurene Comey | Attorney (Government/USA) |
Filed Letter Motion on 07/01/2021.
|
| Lara Pomerantz | Attorney (Government/USA) |
Filed Letter Motion on 07/01/2021.
|
| Christian R. Everdell | Attorney (Defense) |
Filed letters on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell regarding Cosby Opinion and unsealed exhibits.
|
| David Oscar Markus | Attorney/Counsel |
Subject of a Government motion regarding an Op-Ed he authored; ordered to comply with Local Criminal Rule 23.1; claim...
|
| Bobbi C. Sternheim | Attorney (Defense) |
Filed letter on 07/09/2021 replying to Court Order.
|
| Bill Cosby | Public Figure (mentioned) |
Referenced in 'Cosby Opinion' attached to a letter by defense counsel.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| USA / Government |
Prosecution in the case against Maxwell.
|
|
| S.D.N.Y. |
Southern District of New York (Court jurisdiction).
|
|
| Boies Schiller |
Law firm mentioned regarding a Government subpoena.
|
|
| DOJ-OGR |
Department of Justice - Office of Government Relations (Bates stamp origin).
|
Timeline (3 events)
07/02/2021
Order issued for defense counsel, including David Markus, to respond to Government's letter motion.
S.D.N.Y.
Judge Alison J. Nathan
David Markus
Defense Counsel
07/30/2021
Judge Nathan issues Order requiring David Markus to comply with Local Criminal Rule 23.1 regarding extrajudicial statements (Op-Eds).
S.D.N.Y.
Judge Alison J. Nathan
David Markus
08/13/2021
Opinion & Order denying Maxwell's motion for relief related to the S2 indictment.
S.D.N.Y.
Judge Alison J. Nathan
Ghislaine Maxwell
Relationships (3)
Markus is ordered by the court to comply with rules as 'counsel' or 'associated with the pending case', but Markus writes in a letter that he 'does not currently represent Ms. Maxwell'.
Filing letters on behalf of Maxwell as defense counsel.
Filing letters on behalf of Maxwell as defense counsel.
Key Quotes (5)
"The Government has moved for an order requiring David Markus to comply with Local Criminal Rule 23.1 following an op-ed that he authored opining on the merits of this pending case."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020530.jpg
Quote #1
"The Court emphasizes that the rule provides illustrative examples of statements that 'presumptively involve a substantial likelihood that their public dissemination will interfere with a fair trial or otherwise prejudice the due administration of justice within the meaning of the rule.'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00020530.jpg
Quote #2
"Going forward, Mr. Markus and all lawyers associated with the pending case are now clearly on notice that their conduct falls under the purview of Local Criminal Rule 23.1."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020530.jpg
Quote #3
"All those associated with this case must act to ensure the case is tried solely in court or else they risk being deemed responsible for any trial delay or for undermining the integrity of the upcoming trial."Source
DOJ-OGR-00020530.jpg
Quote #4
"undersigned counsel does not currently represent Ms. Maxwell"Source
DOJ-OGR-00020530.jpg
Quote #5
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document