DOJ-OGR-00020536.jpg

1.45 MB

Extraction Summary

13
People
5
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
4
Relationships
5
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court docket / case log (usa v. ghislaine maxwell)
File Size: 1.45 MB
Summary

This document is a docket sheet page from October 2021 regarding the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It details a pretrial conference held via telephone on October 21, 2021, attended by the defendant and legal teams. Significant entries include Judge Nathan's order (Doc 364) establishing jury selection protocols, denying a defense request to seal questionnaires, and addressing media opposition to secret proceedings filed by the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

People (13)

Name Role Context
Alison J. Nathan Judge
Presiding judge, issued orders regarding jury selection and sealing.
Ghislaine Maxwell Defendant
Present via telephone at pretrial conference; subject of orders.
Bobbi Sternheim Defense Attorney
Represented Maxwell at 10/21/2021 conference.
Jeff Pagliuca Defense Attorney
Represented Maxwell at 10/21/2021 conference.
Christian Everdell Defense Attorney
Represented Maxwell at 10/21/2021 conference.
Laura Menninger Defense Attorney
Represented Maxwell at 10/21/2021 conference.
Lara Pomerantz AUSA (Prosecutor)
Represented Government at 10/21/2021 conference; author of 10/11 letter motion.
Maurene Comey AUSA (Prosecutor)
Represented Government at 10/21/2021 conference.
Alison Moe AUSA (Prosecutor)
Represented Government at 10/21/2021 conference; author of 10/11 letter motion.
Andrew Rohrbach AUSA (Prosecutor)
Represented Government at 10/21/2021 conference; author of 10/11 letter motion.
Pete Brush Reporter
Sent letter to Judge opposing secret jury selection.
Carol Ganley Court Reporter
Recorded the 10/21/2021 conference.
Katiclynn Townsend Associated with Filing
Name appearing in entry 362 (likely docket clerk or attorney filer).

Organizations (5)

Name Type Context
Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
Filed opposition to sealing jury questionnaire.
17 News Media Organizations
Co-signers on the opposition letter.
U.S. Attorney's Office
Responsible for distributing copied questionnaires to defense.
SDNY press corps
Mentioned in Pete Brush's letter.
Clerk's Office
Tasked with creating juror lists and assigning numbers.

Timeline (3 events)

11/04/2021
Jury Selection - Questionnaire Administration (Scheduled)
Court
Prospective Jurors
11/16/2021
Voir Dire (Scheduled)
Court
Judge Counsel Jurors

Locations (1)

Location Context
SDNY, location of proceedings.

Relationships (4)

Ghislaine Maxwell Attorney-Client Bobbi Sternheim
Minute entry states Maxwell present with attorney Bobbi Sternheim.
Ghislaine Maxwell Attorney-Client Jeff Pagliuca
Minute entry states Maxwell present with attorney Jeff Pagliuca.
Ghislaine Maxwell Attorney-Client Christian Everdell
Minute entry states Maxwell present with attorney Christian Everdell.
Ghislaine Maxwell Attorney-Client Laura Menninger
Minute entry states Maxwell present with attorney Laura Menninger.

Key Quotes (5)

"Defendant remains remanded."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00020536.jpg
Quote #1
"Jurors will be identified on the questionnaire and in court throughout the process by their assigned number only."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00020536.jpg
Quote #2
"The Court will conduct one-on-one voir dire with each prospective juror in the presence of the parties and with public access to the proceeding."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00020536.jpg
Quote #3
"The Court implements these procedures taking into account the significant publicity this case has garnered, the nature of the charges, and the District's COVID-19 protocols."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00020536.jpg
Quote #4
"the defense did not justify sealing the entirety of the proposed and draft questionnaires and voir dire."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00020536.jpg
Quote #5

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (5,163 characters)

Case 22-1426, Document 3-2, 07/08/2022, 3344434, Page50 of 92
10/20/2021 | 362 | LETTER RESPONSE in Opposition by Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press as to Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press and 17 News Media Organizations dated October 20, 2021 re: 339 LETTER MOTION addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from AUSAs Alison Moe, Lara Pomerantz, and Andrew Rohrbach dated October 11, 2021 re: Sealing of Joint Proposed Juror Questionnaire and Voir Dire .. (Townsend, Katiclynn) (Entered: 10/20/2021)
10/21/2021 | 363 | LETTER as to USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan from Pete Brush, reporter, New York federal courts, dated Thu 10/21/2021 11:28 AM re: members of SDNY press corps join RCFP in opposition to secret jury selection in USA v. Maxwell. (bw) (Entered: 10/21/2021)
10/21/2021 | | Minute Entry for proceedings held before Judge Alison J. Nathan: Pretrial Conference as to Ghislaine Maxwell held on 10/21/2021. Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell present via telephone with attorney Bobbi Sternheim, Jeff Pagliuca, Christian Everdell and Laura Menninger via telephone. AUSA Lara Pomerantz, Maurene Comey, Alison Moe and Andrew Rohrbach for the government via telephone. Court Reporter Carol Ganley via telephone. Pretrial Conference held via telephone. Defendant remains remanded. See Transcript. (jbo) (Entered: 10/25/2021)
10/22/2021 | 364 | ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell: For the reasons stated on the record at yesterday's conference, the Court will implement the following procedures for jury selection: A screening questionnaire will be administered on November 4, 5, and 12. The Clerk's Office will create a corresponding list of names and randomly assigned juror numbers. The list will be provided to counsel and the Court for use throughout jury selection. Jurors will be identified on the questionnaire and in court throughout the process by their assigned number only. Completed questionnaires will be copied and distributed to defense counsel by the U.S. Attorney's Office. After reviewing the completed questionnaires, counsel must confer in good faith and jointly submit four lists: (1) prospective jurors that both sides agree should proceed to voir dire; (2) prospective jurors that both sides agree should be excused; (3) prospective jurors that the defense, but not the Government believes should be excused; and (4) prospective jurors that the Government, but not the defense believes should be excused. Lists for questionnaires completed on November 4 and 5 will be due to the Court via email by November 7. Lists for questionnaires completed on November 12 will be due to the Court via email by November 13. If necessary, there will be an in-person conference on November 15 at 9:30 a.m. to resolve any disputes. Voir dire will proceed on November 16-19. The Court will conduct one-on-one voir dire with each prospective juror in the presence of the parties and with public access to the proceeding. At the conference, both sides indicated the potential need for additional procedures during voir dire under certain circumstances. See Transcript at 1011. As the Court indicated, it will consider proposed narrowly tailored measures that may be necessary during voir dire on a case-by-case basis. See id. at 12. The Court will decide in due course whether the exercise of peremptory strikes will proceed on November 19 or November 29. The Court implements these procedures taking into account the significant publicity this case has garnered, the nature of the charges, and the District's COVID-19 protocols. These procedures are carefully balanced and tailored to ensure the safety of the parties and prospective jurors in light of the continuing pandemic; to ensure juror candor, impartiality, and privacy; and to ensure the First Amendment right to public access of criminal proceedings. Also for the reasons stated on the record at yesterday's conference, the request to seal the parties' proposed questionnaire and voir dire and the Court's draft questionnaire and voir dire until after jury selection is completed is denied. Although the Court has and will continue to implement tailored measures to ensure a fair trial despite significant media interest, see Dkt. Nos. 28, 81, 95, 99, 101, 232, 241, 284, 301, 315, the defense did not justify sealing the entirety of the proposed and draft questionnaires and voir dire. See Lugosch v. Pyramid Co. of Onondaga, 435 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2006). The Court's planned individual voir dire process is designed to carefully probe the prior exposure to and the potential influence of any pre-trial media. As noted at the conference, the parties may continue to propose for the Court's consideration, any appropriate and tailored procedures in light of the specific factors related to this case and upcoming trial. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Alison J. Nathan on 10/22/2021) (lnl) (Entered: 10/22/2021)
10/22/2021 | 365 | ORDER as to Ghislaine Maxwell: Attached are the Court's draft jury questionnairewith changes adopted at yesterday's proceeding in redlineand draft voir
DOJ-OGR-00020536

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document