United Kingdom
LocationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Legal representative |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Citizenship |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
Hong Kong
|
Historical diplomatic |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
France
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
Germany
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
United States
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
France
|
Diplomatic colonial |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
USA
|
Alliance |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Citizenship property owner |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
China
|
Diplomatic tense |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Citizenship |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
[Redacted Client]
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2014-01-01 | N/A | Official elevation of UK-China relations to Golden Era status | United Kingdom | View |
| 2003-03-31 | N/A | Signing of Extradition Treaty with United Kingdom (Pending) | United Kingdom | View |
| 2003-03-31 | N/A | Signing of Extradition Treaty (Pending status) | Unknown | View |
| 1993-10-15 | N/A | Conseil d’Etat decision no. 142578 | France | View |
| 1978-03-01 | N/A | UK petitions UNCHR for special rapporteur in Cambodia; blocked by Syria, USSR, Yugoslavia. | UN | View |
| 1922-01-01 | N/A | League of Nations issued the Mandate of Palestine | Palestine | View |
| 1916-01-01 | N/A | Sykes-Picot Agreement | Middle East | View |
DOJ-OGR-00002182(1).jpg
This page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) argues against the defendant's bail release by highlighting the risk of non-extradition. The Government asserts that France does not extradite its citizens (citing the 'Peterson' case) and that any anticipatory waiver of extradition to the UK provided by the defendant is unenforceable under the UK Extradition Act of 2003.
DOJ-OGR-00002178.jpg
This page from a government filing (opposition to bail) argues that the defendant (Ghislaine Maxwell) is a flight risk. It highlights that her marriage is not a sufficient tie to the US, noting she lived alone while hiding in New Hampshire and that she and her spouse listed themselves as 'single' on bank trust account forms in 2018. The document also dismisses the defense's offer to waive extradition rights, particularly noting that France generally does not extradite its own nationals.
DOJ-OGR-00002152.jpg
This document is a sworn affidavit and waiver of extradition from Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on December 14, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Maxwell affirms her identity as the defendant, states her triple citizenship (US, UK, France), and confirms she is incarcerated at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. She attests to having reviewed the charges and her extradition rights under various international treaties with her legal counsel from Cohen & Gresser, LLP.
DOJ-OGR-00002144.jpg
This legal document, authored by attorney William Julié, analyzes the legal framework surrounding the extradition of a country's own nationals, with a specific focus on France and its treaty with the USA. It contrasts different legal approaches under international law, noting that some countries constitutionally prohibit extraditing citizens while others, particularly common law jurisdictions, permit it. The document also examines European law, including the European Convention on Extradition and the European Arrest Warrant, which has different rules for member states.
DOJ-OGR-00002130.jpg
This legal document, authored by attorney William Julié and filed on December 14, 2020, provides a background on the bail hearing of Ghislaine Maxwell held on July 14, 2020. It highlights the US Government's argument and the Court's decision to deny bail, both of which centered on Maxwell's French citizenship and France's policy of not extraditing its nationals, which established her as a flight risk. The report's stated purpose is to legally evaluate the validity of the claim that France does not extradite its citizens.
DOJ-OGR-00002117.jpg
This document is an Affidavit and Waiver of Extradition filed by Ghislaine Maxwell on December 14, 2020. In it, Maxwell confirms her citizenship (US, UK, France), her residence in the US since 1991, and her incarceration at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. She acknowledges reviewing the charges with her legal counsel from Cohen & Gresser, LLP, and indicates an understanding of her rights regarding extradition treaties between the US and the UK.
DOJ-OGR-00002115.jpg
This document is page 20 of a legal filing (Document 97-21) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (indicated by case number 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It details the 'Practical Experience' of a legal expert named Mr. Perry, specifically focusing on his history with high-profile extradition cases involving the US, UK, and Russia. The document lists specific case citations where Mr. Perry represented various parties, including the US Government, the Governor of the Cayman Islands, and individual defendants resisting extradition.
DOJ-OGR-00002114.jpg
This document is the Curriculum Vitae of David Perry QC, a prominent UK barrister specializing in extradition law. It outlines his extensive career, including roles as Treasury Counsel and a judge, and highlights his expertise in extradition matters. A key event detailed is his co-authorship of a major 2011 independent review for the UK Home Office on the nation's extradition arrangements, which concluded that the 2003 UK-US treaty was fair and did not need renegotiation.
DOJ-OGR-00002112.jpg
This document is an annex from a legal filing, dated August 12, 2020, containing instructions from the law firm Peters and Peters to an unnamed Counsel. The instructions outline five specific questions for an expert opinion on the extradition arrangements between the United Kingdom and the United States, focusing on procedures, bail, and potential legal and human rights-based challenges to extradition that could be relevant to Ms. Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00002109.jpg
This document is a page from a legal memorandum filed on December 14, 2020, analyzing the legal viability of Ghislaine Maxwell resisting extradition from the UK to the US. It specifically argues that she would fail to invoke Article 6 (fair trial) or Article 8 (private and family life) of the ECHR to stop extradition. The conclusion begins to state that if she absconded to the UK in breach of US bail, she would likely be denied bail there.
DOJ-OGR-00002108.jpg
This document is page 13 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated December 14, 2020, analyzing the potential human rights objections Ghislaine Maxwell might raise against extradition to the US. The text specifically argues that Maxwell is unlikely to succeed in claiming a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR regarding prison conditions, citing numerous legal precedents where such claims were rejected. Footnotes reference specific cases and US detention facilities (MDC and MCC) in New York.
DOJ-OGR-00002105.jpg
This legal document, filed on December 14, 2020, analyzes arguments against Ms. Maxwell's extradition, specifically addressing claims of political motivation, abuse of process, and the impact of the passage of time. It asserts that it is highly unlikely Ms. Maxwell could establish bad faith by the US prosecutor or that her extradition is politically motivated or oppressive. The document cites various legal precedents to support the view that the public interest in honoring extradition arrangements and trying serious allegations outweighs potential personal hardship or the passage of time since the alleged offences (1994-1997).
DOJ-OGR-00002102.jpg
This document, a page from a court filing, details the legal framework and timelines for extradition from the UK, with a focus on requests from the US. It explains that while contested cases can take over 10 months, consenting to extradition can reduce the timeframe to within three months. The document outlines the specific legal procedure for giving consent under the Extradition Act 2003, detailing the roles of the judge and the Secretary of State in the process.
DOJ-OGR-00002101.jpg
This document is page 6 of 29 from a legal filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 14, 2020. It outlines the legal framework and procedural hurdles for appealing extradition in the United Kingdom under the Extradition Act 2003, noting the specific roles of the Secretary of State, High Court, and Supreme Court. The text emphasizes the rarity of successful appeals to the Supreme Court or the European Court of Human Rights in extradition cases.
DOJ-OGR-00002100.jpg
This legal document, filed on December 14, 2020, details the procedural steps of an extradition hearing in the United Kingdom. It explains the specific legal questions a judge must resolve, including technical compliance and human rights compatibility, before a case can proceed. If the judge approves the extradition request, the case is then sent to the Secretary of State, who must consider a different set of potential bars before issuing a final extradition order.
DOJ-OGR-00002099.jpg
This legal document, filed on December 14, 2020, outlines the extradition arrangements between the United Kingdom and the United States. It specifies that the process is governed by the UK's Extradition Act 2003 and a bilateral treaty signed in 2003, which designates the U.S. as a 'Part 2 territory'. This designation exempts the U.S. from the standard requirement to provide prima facie evidence when requesting an extradition from the UK.
DOJ-OGR-00002093.jpg
This document is a sworn affidavit and waiver of extradition from Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on December 14, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. In it, Maxwell states her citizenship (US, UK, France), her current incarceration at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn, and confirms she has reviewed the indictment with her lawyers, Mark S. Cohen and Christian R. Everdell. She also acknowledges being informed of her rights regarding extradition under various treaties between the U.S., France, and the EU.
DOJ-OGR-00002090.jpg
This document is a sworn affidavit from Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on December 14, 2020, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. In the affidavit, Maxwell confirms her identity, her citizenship in the US, UK, and France, and her incarceration at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. She attests that she has reviewed the indictment with her lawyers and understands her rights concerning a potential extradition request from the United States to the United Kingdom.
DOJ-OGR-00002089.jpg
This document is a cover or separator page from a legal filing dated December 14, 2020, associated with Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (the Ghislaine Maxwell criminal case). The page is titled 'Waiver of Extradition: United Kingdom' and bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00002089.
DOJ-OGR-00002084.jpg
This document is a statement from a security consultant detailing their extensive military and security background. The consultant attests to providing security services for Ghislaine Maxwell from July 2019 until her arrest on July 2, 2020. The statement highlights the security threats Maxwell faced, including death threats related to her past relationship with Jeffery Epstein and aggressive harassment from the press.
DOJ-OGR-00002067.jpg
This document is a page from a forensic accounting report filed in the case US v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330). It details the finances of the Terramar Project (US and UK), noting Maxwell's contributions of over $560,000 and a $57,000 donation from the Epstein Interests Foundation in 2013. The report asserts Maxwell received no financial benefit from the charity and lists reviewed bank accounts belonging to Maxwell and her spouse, though the specific bank names are redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00002045.jpg
This document is a heavily redacted character reference letter, dated October 29, 2020, submitted to Judge Alison J. Nathan of the Southern District of New York in support of Ghislaine Maxwell's bail application. The anonymous author claims a long-standing, close relationship with Maxwell, describing her as a 'lovely, energetic and capable' person with a 'relentless work ethic'. The letter emphasizes their continued contact even after Maxwell relocated from the United Kingdom to America.
DOJ-OGR-00002037.jpg
This document is page 3 of a character reference and bail support letter filed on December 14, 2020, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The redacted author, using British spelling (candour, realisable, gap year), describes Maxwell's generosity towards friends and philanthropic work in ocean conservation. Crucially, the author offers to co-sign a bail bond of US$3,500,000, stating that this sum represents their 'entirety of realisable family wealth,' to secure Maxwell's release.
DOJ-OGR-00002029.jpg
This document is a redacted character reference letter filed on December 14, 2020, as part of the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The anonymous author outlines Maxwell's history, including her Oxford graduation, her move to New York in the early 1990s, and her philanthropic work with The Terramar Project and the UN. The letter strongly defends her character against media portrayals and asserts her innocence regarding the criminal charges.
DOJ-OGR-00002006.jpg
This document is page 34 of a legal filing from December 14, 2020, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It details expert opinions from Mr. Perry (UK law) and William Julié (French law), both arguing that Maxwell would be unable to resist extradition to the US from either the UK or France, and would be unlikely to receive bail in the UK if she absconded there. These arguments appear designed to support a request for bail in the US by minimizing her flight risk.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity