MDC
LocationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Sophia Papapetru
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Detainee facility |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Court order | The Court issued an order directing the MDC to permit Ms. Maxwell access to a computer on weekend... | MDC | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001177.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Government, argues against the release of a defendant from the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The filing asserts that the MDC has adequately addressed the defendant's complaints about her diet and security searches, and that precautionary measures taken after a potential COVID-19 exposure were effective. The Government concludes that because the defendant has no underlying health conditions, the pandemic does not warrant her release.
DOJ-OGR-00001176.jpg
This page from a government legal filing addresses defense complaints regarding discovery access and confinement conditions. The government asserts that a hard drive malfunction was caused by the defendant dropping it and that she currently has full access to materials. It also defends her confinement conditions at the MDC, detailing privileges such as 13 hours out of cell daily, private shower, computer access, and television, arguing these are superior to general population conditions.
DOJ-OGR-00001175.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Government, argues that the defendant housed at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) has been given sufficient resources to prepare for trial, refuting a defense claim to the contrary. The filing details the defendant's access to discovery materials via hard drives, a dedicated laptop, and a desktop computer, as well as arrangements for regular video and phone calls with her legal counsel. It asserts that these accommodations, even with pandemic-related restrictions, are adequate for trial preparation.
DOJ-OGR-00001139.jpg
This legal document outlines two major impediments to Ms. Maxwell's defense preparation. Firstly, it details persistent technical failures with discovery materials provided by the government, including broken and malfunctioning hard drives, which have left her without access to readable evidence for over four months. Secondly, it describes the added burdens of a 14-day COVID-19 quarantine and heightened exposure risk at the MDC due to contact with untested staff, further limiting her ability to review case materials and prepare for trial.
DOJ-OGR-00001137.jpg
This document is page 35 of a legal filing (Document 102) dated December 14, 2020, arguing for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. The defense argues she is not a flight risk and that her current detention at the MDC constitutes 'de facto solitary confinement' under conditions more severe than USP Florence ADMAX, hindering her ability to prepare her defense. It claims prison wardens have noted the unprecedented nature of her restrictive regime.
DOJ-OGR-00001114.jpg
This document is page 12 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) supporting a bail application for Ghislaine Maxwell. It emphasizes her strong family ties to the United States, specifically her marriage to a heavily redacted individual. The text explains that her husband did not co-sign her first bail application to protect himself from 'ferocious media aggression,' but is now coming forward with full financial support due to concerns over her treatment at the MDC.
DOJ-OGR-00001107.jpg
This legal document argues for Ms. Maxwell to be released on restrictive bail. Her defense contends that the government's case lacks corroborating evidence, relies on old testimony, and that her oppressive confinement conditions at the MDC, including a COVID-19 outbreak, are unjust and impede her ability to prepare her defense. The filing also asserts she is not a flight risk, citing expert opinions on extradition from the UK and France.
DOJ-OGR-00001094.jpg
This legal document, dated April 1, 2021, addresses the issue of attorney-client access for detainees at a federal facility (MDC). It argues that current measures, such as video and phone conferences, are sufficient for defendants like Ms. Maxwell to prepare their defense, especially given the ongoing pandemic in New York City. The court orders the government to work with the defense to ensure adequate communication, noting that the MDC is also planning to resume in-person visits in the near future.
DOJ-OGR-00001093.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, concerning United States v. Maxwell. The judge is ruling against Ms. Maxwell's motion for release, stating that unlike other cases, she has not argued specific health vulnerabilities to COVID-19. The court also rejects the argument that prison restrictions at the MDC prevent her from preparing her defense, noting the case is in early stages.
DOJ-OGR-00001070.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, featuring defense attorney Mr. Cohen addressing the Court. Cohen requests more time to arrange sureties for a bail package, citing extreme difficulties caused by his client's (implied to be Ghislaine Maxwell) harsh detention conditions at the MDC. He describes these conditions as equivalent to solitary confinement, including constant lighting, isolation, lack of showers, and confiscation of legal materials.
DOJ-OGR-00001002.jpg
This legal document, filed on June 15, 2020, argues against a defendant's request for temporary release by citing two recent S.D.N.Y. precedents (involving Gonzalez and Eley) where release was denied due to trials not being imminent. The filing also asserts that the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) has been responsive and accommodating to defense counsel's requests for client access, undermining the claim that release is necessary for trial preparation.
DOJ-OGR-00000968.jpg
This document is page 12 of a legal filing (Document 18, filed July 10, 2020) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Defense counsel argues for Maxwell's release on bail, citing the inability to effectively communicate with her due to MDC's COVID-19 protocols, which restrict in-person visits and delay phone calls. The text details a specific incident on July 6, 2020, where counsel struggled to connect with Maxwell to comply with a court order, and footnotes cite legal precedents where other defendants were released due to similar pandemic-related restrictions.
DOJ-OGR-00000898.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from Case 21-770 (related to Ghislaine Maxwell) covering filings between February 4, 2021, and February 16, 2021. It details numerous defense motions filed by Maxwell's legal team (Cohen, Pagliuca) to dismiss charges, suppress evidence, and strike surplusage, alongside multiple sealed documents. The log also records correspondence to Judge Nathan regarding conditions at the MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center) from both the prosecution (USA) and the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00000891.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from December 2020 in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It details correspondence regarding Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the MDC and a denied request for an in camera conference regarding a renewed bail motion. Judge Alison J. Nathan issued orders balancing privacy interests with public access, ultimately allowing tailored redactions to defense letters but denying the request to keep proceedings entirely sealed or in camera.
DOJ-OGR-00000860.jpg
This document is a court docket log from February 2021 for Case 21-770 involving Ghislaine Maxwell. It details the filing of numerous defense motions including attempts to suppress evidence, dismiss counts based on time-bars and a non-prosecution agreement, and strike surplusage. The log also records the filing of sealed documents and correspondence between attorneys (both defense and prosecution) and Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding Maxwell's confinement conditions at the MDC.
DOJ-OGR-00000853.jpg
This is a court docket sheet from December 2020 (entries 78-84) detailing proceedings in the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It records correspondence regarding Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the MDC and legal arguments concerning the sealing and redaction of defense letters. Judge Alison J. Nathan issued orders requiring MDC counsel to submit information, approved specific redactions based on privacy interests, denied a request for an in-camera conference, and ordered three documents to be placed in a sealed vault.
DOJ-OGR-00020692.jpg
This document is a court docket report (SDNY) covering November 15-17, 2021, detailing pretrial proceedings in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It lists the filing of transcripts for prior conferences, a memo endorsement ordering the government to use FedEx for disclosures due to mail delays at the MDC, and minute entries for a pretrial conference, voir dire, and the beginning of jury selection. The document lists the full legal teams for both the defense and the prosecution present during these proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00020685.jpg
This document is a docket report from the SDNY for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated November 8-9, 2021. It details several filings, including the Government's opposition to bail reconsideration, a motion to preclude expert testimony from Dr. Dietz and Dr. Loftus, and letters regarding legal mail. Judge Alison J. Nathan issued orders scheduling a conference for November 10, 2021, denying the renewed request for bail, and establishing protocols for the defendant's transport and access to legal counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00020683.jpg
This document is a docket sheet from the SDNY regarding the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, specifically detailing orders from November 2021 leading up to her trial. Key issues addressed include the logistics of transporting Maxwell from the MDC to the courthouse, security concerns, delays in Maxwell receiving legal mail, and the schedule for juror selection and peremptory strikes. Judge Alison J. Nathan issued orders requiring coordination with the US Marshals and MDC legal counsel to resolve these pre-trial issues.
DOJ-OGR-00020681.jpg
This document is a page from the SDNY court docket for the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, printed in 2023 as part of an appeal or related filing. It lists filings from late October and early November 2021, including multiple Motions in Limine by the defense attempting to exclude evidence regarding 'flight' logs, terms like 'victim', items seized from a 2005 search of 358 El Brillo Way, and alleged rape by Jeffrey Epstein. It also includes judicial orders regarding hearing schedules for Rule 412 (sexual behavior evidence) and Daubert (expert witness) motions, as well as orders regarding legal mail issues at the MDC.
DOJ-OGR-00020675.jpg
This document is a court docket report from the Southern District of New York for the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, detailing filings from October 15 to October 18, 2021. The entries primarily concern pre-trial procedural matters, including a dispute over the timely delivery of legal mail to Maxwell at the MDC, and judicial orders setting deadlines for motions related to Federal Rule of Evidence 412. The docket reflects communications between the prosecution (USA), the defense (Maxwell's counsel), and the presiding judge, Alison J. Nathan.
DOJ-OGR-00020671.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from the Southern District of New York for the case involving Ghislaine Maxwell, dated February 28, 2023, but detailing events from August 2021. The entries describe several orders by Judge Alison J. Nathan, including the denial of Maxwell's motion for subpoenas and instructions on sealing documents. The docket also records letters filed by both the defense, concerning interference with attorney-client communications at the MDC, and the prosecution (USA), regarding the identification of co-conspirators, along with the judge's orders for the parties to confer on these issues.
DOJ-OGR-00020666.jpg
This document is a page from the SDNY court docket for the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, covering filings between May 14 and May 21, 2021. It details legal maneuvering regarding redactions to protect third parties and victims, as well as defense motions to suppress evidence obtained via subpoena and to strike surplusage from the indictment. Notably, it includes a judge's order admonishing the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) to ensure Maxwell's security protocols are necessary and neutral, and urging them to reduce sleep disruption.
DOJ-OGR-00020665.jpg
This document is a page from the SDNY court docket in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, covering entries from May 12-14, 2021. It includes administrative orders regarding redactions and deadline extensions, as well as a significant order (Entry 282) denying Maxwell's request to alter prison protocols regarding flashlight checks. The Judge ruled that the 15-minute flashlight checks were necessary safety measures for high-profile inmates housed alone and that the defense's claims of sleep deprivation were unsubstantiated.
DOJ-OGR-00020662.jpg
This document is a page from the SDNY court docket for the Ghislaine Maxwell case, dated May 3, 2021. It includes entries regarding the filing of transcripts, a memo endorsement regarding hard drives, and an order protecting the anonymity of a non-party alleged victim of sexual crime. A significant entry (Doc 265) details a dispute between MDC counsel and Maxwell's defense team regarding an incident on April 24, 2021, where MDC alleged defense lawyers violated BOP rules during a visit, leading to a request for video tapes of the encounter.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity