DOJ-OGR-00020573.jpg

Case 22-1426, Document 3-2, 07/08/2022, 3344434, Page87 of 92

| | USA. (Moe, Alison) (Entered: 04/01/2022) |
| 04/01/2022 | ***DELETED DOCUMENT. Deleted docket entry, no document number. NOTICE OF CASE REASSIGNMENT, as to Ghislaine Maxwell. The document was incorrectly filed in this case. (bw) (Entered: 04/01/2022) |
| 04/01/2022 | REMARK as to USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Case reassigned to Judge Broderick due to an administrative error. Case returned to Judge Nathan. (bw) (Entered: 04/01/2022) |
| 04/01/2022 | 653 | OPINION & ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court concludes that Juror 50 testified credibly and truthfully at the post-trial hearing. His failure to disclose his prior sexual abuse during the jury selection process was highly unfortunate, but not deliberate. The Court further concludes that Juror 50 harbored no bias toward the Defendant and could serve as a fair and impartial juror. The requirements for a new trial under McDonough are not satisfied. The Defendant's motion for a new trial pursuant to Rule 33 is therefore DENIED. The Court orders the preparation of the presentence investigation report. With respect to Counts 7 and 8, the Court hereby excludes time under the Speedy Trial Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(7)(A), from today's date through April 22, 2022. The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting this exclusion from speedy trial computations outweigh the interests of the public and the Defendant in a speedy trial on these counts because the pending post-trial motions affect the scheduling considerations set forth in the Government's January 10, 2022 letter. See Dkt. No. 574. The Defendant consents to this exclusion. Dkt. No. 650. The Court will rule on the Defendant's remaining post-verdict motions in due course. Sentencing remains scheduled for June 28, 2022. This resolves docket numbers 613, 614, 642, 650, and 651. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 4/1/2022) (See ORDER set forth) (ap) (Entered: 04/01/2022) |
| 04/04/2022 | 654 | SEALED DOCUMENT placed in vault. (nmo) (Entered: 04/04/2022) |
| 04/25/2022 | 655 | LETTER MOTION addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated April 25, 2022 re: Advance PSR Deadline . Document filed by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell. (Rohrbach, Andrew) (Entered: 04/25/2022) |
| 04/26/2022 | 656 | ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court is in receipt of the Government's letter regarding the deadline for the disclosure of the Presentence Investigation Report. Dkt. No. 655. After conferring with the Probation Office, the Court determines that advancing the PSR disclosure schedule will aid the parties in preparing their sentencing submissions. Further the Court hereby adjusts its standard sentencing submission schedule to ensure sufficient time to prepare for sentencing. Accordingly, the Court ORDERS the following schedule for sentencing: May 24, 2022 – First PSR disclosure; May 31, 2022 – Defendant objections due; June 6, 2022 – Government response due; June 9, 2022 – Second PSR disclosure; June 15, 2022 – Defendant sentencing submission due; June 22, 2022 – Government sentencing submission due; June 28, 2022 – Sentencing. This resolves Dkt. No. 655. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 4/26/2022)(bw) (Entered: 04/26/2022) |
| 04/29/2022 | 657 | OPINION & ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell....[*** See this Opinion & Order ***]... V. Conclusion. For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies the Defendant's Rule 29 motion because the jury's guilty verdicts were supported by the witness testimony and documentary evidence presented at trial. The Court denies the Defendant's motion based on constructive amendment or variance because the jury instructions, the Government's evidence at trial, and summation all captured the core of criminality charged in the Indictment, and the Defendant was not prejudiced by any alleged variance. Further, because the Government neither intentionally delayed its prosecution nor was the Defendant prejudiced by any delay, the Court also denies the Defendant's motion based on pre-indictment delay. Finally, the Court grants the Defendant's motion as to multiplicity. The Government concedes that Count One is multiplicitous with Count Three, and the Court further concludes that Count Five is multiplicitous with Count Three. Count Five, like Counts One and Three, charged the Defendant's participation in the same decade-long unlawful agreement with the Defendant's continuous coconspirator, Jeffrey Epstein, to groom and sexually abuse underage girls. Accordingly, the Court will enter judgment of conviction on Counts Three, Four, and Six. The Defendant's sentencing date remains scheduled for June 28, 2022. The Court previously set a schedule for sentencing submissions that remains in |

DOJ-OGR-00020573