This document is a court docket report from the Southern District of New York for the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering proceedings between December 11 and December 15, 2021. It details various filings including letters regarding witness orders, privilege stipulations, and expert testimony, as well as a significant Memorandum Opinion denying a defense motion to allow witnesses to testify anonymously. The document lists the legal teams for both the prosecution (USA) and the defense, along with Judge Alison J. Nathan's rulings during this trial period.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the court case and various orders/letters.
|
| Alison J. Nathan | Judge |
Presiding judge issuing orders and receiving letters.
|
| Bobbi Sternheim | Defense Attorney |
Representing Maxwell, filing letters regarding witnesses and expert testimony.
|
| Jeff Pagliuca | Defense Attorney |
Representing Maxwell, filing letters.
|
| Christian Everdell | Defense Attorney |
Representing Maxwell.
|
| Laura Menninger | Defense Attorney |
Representing Maxwell.
|
| Maurene Comey | AUSA (Assistant United States Attorney) |
Prosecution team, filing letters and motions.
|
| Alison Moe | AUSA (Assistant United States Attorney) |
Prosecution team.
|
| Lara Pomerantz | AUSA (Assistant United States Attorney) |
Prosecution team.
|
| Andrew Rohrbach | AUSA (Assistant United States Attorney) |
Prosecution team, often the filer of record.
|
| Martha Martin | Court Reporter |
Recorded proceedings.
|
| George Malinowski | Court Reporter |
Recorded proceedings.
|
| Jack Scarola | Subject of Letter |
Mentioned in letter dated Dec 13, 2021 (Entry 544).
|
| Brad Edwards | Subject of Letter |
Mentioned in letter dated Dec 13, 2021 (Entry 544).
|
| Robert Glassman | Subject of Letter |
Mentioned in letter dated Dec 13, 2021 (Entry 544).
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction of the court case.
|
"The Court disagrees with this basic premise and denies the Defense's motion."Source
"The Defense's primary contention is that some form of anonymity for its witnesses is justified by the same reasons that the Court permitted three alleged victims and two related government witnesses to testify under pseudonyms."Source
"Jury trial held. See Transcript."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (3,809 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document