GOVERNMENT
OrganizationRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
15
Very Strong
|
29 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
62 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
55 | |
|
person
Recipient
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Adversarial |
11
Very Strong
|
10 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
THOMAS
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
9 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
21 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Adversarial |
10
Very Strong
|
24 | |
|
location
court
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
organization
Defense
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
3 | |
|
person
MR. EPSTEIN
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Thomas
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Dr. Rocchio
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Minor Victims
|
Protective |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Epstein's counsel
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Moe
|
Professional |
7
|
3 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Maxwell's motion to compel discovery from the Government, including Jencks Act, Brady, Giglio mat... | Court proceedings | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court's ruling on Maxwell's discovery requests, concluding she is not entitled to expedited disco... | Court proceedings | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court accepts Government's representations that it has disclosed all Brady and Giglio Material. | Court proceedings | View |
| N/A | N/A | Accusation by the government that Epstein paid Maxwell millions for recruiting young, underage wo... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government's intention to produce 'Materials' to the defendant (Maxwell) under a protective order... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Argument that defendants should be able to rely on government promises in written agreements and ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Maxwell's attempt to dismiss Mann Act counts for lack of specificity or to compel Government to s... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Broader investigation into Epstein's sexual abuse of minors, covering periods beyond the Indictment. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government's review of 'Materials' (documents and photographs) related to Epstein's sexual abuse ... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Maxwell's attempt to dismiss indictment due to alleged actual prejudice from Government's delay i... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Ex parte proceeding where government allegedly misled Chief Judge McMahon to obtain a subpoena. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Client's arrest and detention despite voluntary surrender. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Discussion of discovery timeline, with the government requesting until November. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Government initiated a massive OPR investigation into the execution of the NPA. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Court agrees that some of Maxwell's concerns are overstated but acknowledges defamation action re... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | NPA (Non-Prosecution Agreement) not disclosed to victims | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Search warrants executed at properties of Jeffrey Epstein. | New York and Virgin Islands | View |
| N/A | N/A | Lefkowitz argued that the government was not required to notify victims under the § 2255 provisio... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Depositions taken as a result of government-supported civil suits against the speaker. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Indictment of Thomas | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| N/A | N/A | Opening of Grand Jury Investigation | Unknown | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing hearing regarding fines, restitution, and guideline calculations. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Planned resolution of pending redaction issues | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Victims' lawsuit against the government | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Ex parte modification of the protective order by Judge McMahon. | Court | View |
DOJ-OGR-00020926.jpg
This document is page 12 of a juror questionnaire from a legal case (1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on March 9, 2022. Juror 50 indicates they have not had monetary disputes with the government and do not have close relations working in law enforcement or the justice system, suggesting they can serve as a fair and impartial juror.
DOJ-OGR-00020913.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 28, 2023, detailing a procedural argument between counsel. Government counsel Ms. Moe pushes for a quick, by-Friday deadline for a post-trial briefing on an issue concerning Juror 50's testimony. Opposing counsel Ms. Sternheim argues for a two-week extension, citing the issue's importance and an upcoming trial she is starting on the 16th. The judge acknowledges the issue's significance but appears to favor a more expedited schedule.
DOJ-OGR-00020857.jpg
This document is a court transcript from February 28, 2023, detailing a conversation between the judge (THE COURT) and an attorney (MS. MOE) while the jury is not present. The discussion centers on a letter submitted by the defense overnight, which the judge just received. Ms. Moe argues that the letter merely repeats a legal argument about jury instructions that the defense made the previous day and which the Court had already considered and rejected.
DOJ-OGR-00020821.jpg
This legal document is a court ruling denying motions filed by the defendant, Maxwell. The court denies her motion for a bill of particulars, which sought more specific dates for alleged sex trafficking crimes, ruling that the indictment's four-year timeframe (2001-2004) is sufficient. The document also addresses Maxwell's motion to compel immediate disclosure of a Minor Victim's prior statements, finding the current disclosure schedule adequate.
DOJ-OGR-00020817.jpg
This document is a court order from Case 22-1426, dated February 28, 2023, denying a motion filed by the defendant, Maxwell. The Court reaffirms its prior April 16, 2021 ruling, concluding that the statutes of limitations for sex trafficking of a minor (§ 3283 and § 3299) apply retroactively to her alleged conduct. The Court holds that this allows the prosecution to proceed on counts related to offenses committed before the statutes were enacted.
DOJ-OGR-00020791.jpg
This legal document is a court order addressing a discovery request from the defendant, Maxwell, concerning evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). The Court considers the Government's proposal to disclose this evidence 45 days before trial to be reasonable and denies Maxwell's request for earlier disclosure. However, the Court encourages the parties to negotiate a final schedule and concludes that disclosure six to eight weeks before trial would be appropriate.
DOJ-OGR-00020790.jpg
This document is page 31 of a court order filed on April 16, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The court discusses the timeline for the Government to produce a witness list, noting that while Maxwell faces challenges due to the 'decades-old allegations,' the Government's proposal to provide information six weeks in advance is reasonable. The text also notes that on April 13, 2021, the Government produced over 20,000 pages of discovery materials related to non-testifying witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00020778.jpg
This legal document is a court filing addressing a motion by the defendant, Maxwell, to dismiss charges from an indictment, specifically the Mann Act counts, arguing they lack specificity. The Court denies the motion, concluding that the S1 superseding indictment is sufficiently clear under established legal precedent, which only requires tracking the statutory language and providing the time and place in approximate terms. The Court rejects Maxwell's arguments that the indictment is too vague regarding time periods, conduct described, and the identification of victims.
DOJ-OGR-00020777.jpg
This document is page 18 of a court order (filed April 16, 2021) denying Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to dismiss her indictment. The Court rejects arguments regarding missing witnesses, specifically noting that potential testimony from the Palm Beach investigation or Epstein himself would likely not have been credible or exculpatory. The Court also rules that pretrial publicity and delays in prosecution have not caused substantial prejudice to Maxwell's right to a fair trial.
DOJ-OGR-00020776.jpg
This legal document is a court opinion addressing a motion by the defendant, Maxwell, to dismiss an indictment based on pre-indictment delay. Maxwell argues the delay prejudiced her defense because potential witnesses, including Jeffrey Epstein and his mother, have died. The court rejects this argument, finding no evidence of improper government purpose for the delay and concluding that Maxwell's claims about what deceased witnesses might have testified are too speculative to meet the high standard required for dismissal.
DOJ-OGR-00020771.jpg
This legal document analyzes the application of the § 3283 statute of limitations, particularly in cases involving child sex abuse and war frauds. It examines arguments made by 'Maxwell' and contrasts interpretations from Supreme Court cases like *Bridges v. United States* with those from the Second Circuit in *Weingarten* and the PROTECT Act. The document concludes that the legislative history and plain meaning of the statute support a broader application rather than a narrow one.
DOJ-OGR-00020767.jpg
This legal document is a court order from case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on April 16, 2021, denying a request by the defendant, Maxwell, for an evidentiary hearing. The Court rules that a hearing is unnecessary because the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) in question is clear and in writing, unlike cases involving ambiguous oral agreements. The Court also orders the Government to confirm within one week its disclosure of any evidence that might support Maxwell's interpretation of the NPA.
DOJ-OGR-00020723.jpg
A page from a court docket report for the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, detailing filings and orders from June 25-26, 2022. The entries include motions regarding victim impact statements, letters from defense counsel Bobbi Sternheim and the USA, and judicial orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan concerning sentencing procedures and the defendant's access to legal materials at the MDC.
DOJ-OGR-00020697.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket sheet for the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, dated November 22, 2021. It lists several orders by Judge Alison J. Nathan, including directives regarding the sealing and redaction of opinions, the denial of motions to quash a subpoena related to the Epstein Victims' Compensation Program, and memorandum opinions precluding the expert testimony of Bennett Gershman and Dr. Ryan Hall.
DOJ-OGR-00020696.jpg
This document is a court docket from November 22, 2021, detailing numerous filings in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan. The entries include an order regarding the testimony of 'Witness-3', an endorsement about providing a video monitor, and a series of letters and motions from both the prosecution (USA) and the defense. These filings address various pre-trial matters such as redactions, subpoenas, and the admissibility of evidence like birth certificates and testimony from 'Accuser-3'.
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-00020682.jpg
This document is a page from the court docket for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering proceedings from November 1-3, 2021. It details a pretrial conference where Maxwell was present and remanded, as well as various filings including motions for reconsideration regarding bond and juror disclosure. The Judge also issued orders regarding voir dire instructions and scheduled a hearing for November 10, 2021, to discuss evidentiary rules (Rule 412 and 702/Daubert).
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-00020663.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket for the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, listing entries from May 3, 2021, to May 6, 2021. It includes judicial orders regarding a trial continuance until fall 2021 and the acceptance of hard drives by the MDC for the defendant's use, as well as various letters filed by both the defense and the prosecution regarding discovery and witness disclosures.
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.
DOJ-OGR-00020655.jpg
This document is a docket sheet from the SDNY court case regarding Ghislaine Maxwell, covering filings from April 16 to April 19, 2021. It details various motions to dismiss and suppress evidence filed by Maxwell's defense team, orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan setting an arraignment date for April 23, 2021, and procedural orders regarding the severance of perjury counts and the handling of redacted documents. The document highlights the legal maneuvering regarding the S2 Superseding Indictment and disputes over evidence obtained via subpoena.
DOJ-OGR-00020654.jpg
This document is a court docket summary from the Southern District of New York regarding the case of Ghislaine Maxwell. It details the court's rulings on numerous pretrial motions filed by Maxwell, denying most of them, including motions to dismiss based on Epstein's non-prosecution agreement and statute of limitations. The court did, however, grant Maxwell's motion to sever the perjury charges for a separate trial and ordered both parties to negotiate and submit schedules for remaining pretrial matters by April 21, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00020650.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from the Southern District of New York for Case 22-1426, detailing legal filings from March 24 to March 29, 2021, related to Ghislaine Maxwell. Key events include attorneys from Boies Schiller Flexner LLP appearing for victims, the prosecution (USA) and defense counsel filing letters with Judge Alison J. Nathan, and the filing of a superseding indictment against Maxwell. The docket also records a motion to appear pro hac vice and a related $200 filing fee.
DOJ-OGR-00020640.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, detailing filings from December 2020. Key events include a letter from Maxwell's counsel regarding a motion for bail, a subsequent order from Judge Alison J. Nathan denying a request to summon the MDC warden to testify about Maxwell's confinement conditions, and the filing of a conference transcript. The judge ordered the government to provide regular updates on Maxwell's access to legal materials and counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00020629.jpg
This document, dated February 28, 2023, details court orders and filings from July 2020 concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's case. It outlines the scheduling of her remote arraignment, initial conference, and bail hearing for July 14, 2020, including protocols for video appearances, public access, and COVID-19 courthouse entry requirements. The document also references letters from both defense and prosecution counsel regarding scheduling and highlights crime victims' rights under 18 U.S.C. § 3771.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity