| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-10-19 | N/A | Government sends 'preliminary statement of facts' to defense counsel to discuss potential resolut... | Email correspondence | View |
This document is an email chain between the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) and the FBI's NY Computer Analysis Response Team (CART) regarding the forensic processing of digital evidence seized from Jeffrey Epstein's properties in New York and the US Virgin Islands. The correspondence reveals significant friction caused by technical incompatibility between the FBI's forensic tools and the USANYS's 'Relativity' review platform, exacerbated by delays due to COVID-19 and FBI network infrastructure updates. The document lists specific seized hardware (Dell servers, Sony laptops, various hard drives with NYC serial numbers) and concludes with USANYS seeking funding to hire a private vendor (BRG) to expedite the processing because they have lost confidence in the FBI's ability to deliver in a timely manner. While flight records are mentioned as a type of document contained within the evidence (specifically regarding the inability to link attachments to emails), no actual flight logs are present in this document.
This document is an email dated November 6, 2021, concerning the transmission of legal discovery material ('3500 material') in the case U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The sender confirms that files have been uploaded to USAfx for the defense team and that a physical drive will be prepared and sent via FedEx. The email includes several attachments referencing indices, non-testifying witness material, and cover letters.
This is the final page (page 15) of a court transcript filed on December 19, 2019, for Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT. The judge rules to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act until April 20, 2020, to allow for discovery production and motion preparation. The hearing is adjourned, and the defendants' bail status remains unchanged.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. A government prosecutor addresses the Court regarding the potential calling of a rebuttal expert and the logistics of closing arguments, specifically how to present sealed exhibits to the jury without making them public. The speaker emphasizes coordination with the defense to ensure the process runs smoothly.
This document is the Table of Contents for a legal filing (Document 384) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. The filing outlines the Defense's arguments that the Government failed to identify co-conspirator statements and overwhelmed the defense with document dumps, violating court orders. The Defense argues this hinders cross-examination and requests the preclusion of these purported statements as a remedy.
This document is page 3 of a Government filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated October 15, 2021. The Government argues that the defense's proposed deadline of November 15, 2021, for filing Rule 412 motions (regarding the admissibility of victims' sexual behavior) is impractical as it conflicts with jury selection and the Thanksgiving holiday. The Government requests an earlier deadline to allow sufficient time for investigation and *in camera* hearings.
This legal document, filed on October 13, 2021, argues for the necessity of individual, sequestered voir dire (jury questioning) for a high-publicity case involving a well-known defendant. The filing contends that the sensitive and inflammatory nature of the charges, specifically sexual abuse of minors, makes it unlikely for jurors to be candid in a group setting, thus hindering the ability of both the defense and prosecution to identify biases and ensure a fair trial.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1789-01-01 | Received | PRC / US Government | defense | $40,332,000,000.00 | Defense Spending ($40,332 MM) | View |
Initial written offer to the defense formulated with Menchel's participation.
Disclosure containing potential testimony regarding metadata verification.
Disclosure of witness testimony scope.
Earlier disclosure referenced as the acceptable scope for testimony.
Additional things disclosed on this date.
Disclosure regarding witness statements received by defense at 3 AM.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity