| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Harvey Weinstein
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 |
This document is page 2 (Bates DOJ-OGR-00008623) of a Table of Contents for Jury Instructions filed on December 18, 2021, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It outlines instructions for the jury regarding their role, the burden of proof, and specific charges including 'Enticement to Engage in Illegal Sexual Activity' (Count Two) and 'Transportation of an Individual Under the Age of 17 to Engage in Illegal Sexual Activity' (Count Four). The document details the structure of the legal charge, breaking down specific crimes into their constituent elements for jury consideration.
This legal document, part of a court filing, analyzes a question posed by a jury during a trial. The core issue is whether sexual activity involving the defendant and a minor named Jane in New Mexico could be considered as evidence for a conviction on a charge related to transporting Jane to New York. The text argues that the jury's question is legally valid and references a prior statement by the Court from the trial transcript to support the relevance of the New Mexico events to the defendant's intent.
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 12 of 17 from a court filing (Document 367-1) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 22, 2021. It lists proposed voir dire (jury selection) questions 43 through 48, focusing on juror bias regarding expert witnesses, evidence types, and the absence of co-conspirators at trial. The document contains significant sidebar commentary detailing objections from the Defense regarding the wording of questions about search evidence and missing witnesses, citing legal precedents like Skilling v. United States.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | Court | $750,000.00 | Fine for Counts 3, 4, 6 related to conspiracy t... | View |
| N/A | Received | Esposito | Court | $9,800,000.00 | Comparative bond amount. | View |
| N/A | Received | defendant | Court | $500.00 | Mention of fine for misdemeanors. | View |
| N/A | Received | Karni | Court | $7,500,000.00 | Comparative bond amount. | View |
| N/A | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | Court | $0.00 | Defendant proposes a 'substantially larger bail... | View |
| N/A | Received | Khashoggi | Court | $10,000,000.00 | Comparative bond amount. | View |
| N/A | Received | Dreier | Court | $10,000,000.00 | Comparative bond amount. | View |
| N/A | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | Court | $0.00 | Defendant proposes a 'substantially larger bail... | View |
| N/A | Received | Sadr | Court | $32,600,000.00 | Comparative bond amount. | View |
| N/A | Received | Narrator | Court | $100.00 | Fine for possession of magic mushrooms (negotia... | View |
| N/A | Received | Ms. Maxwell | Court | $0.00 | Judge intends to impose a fine. | View |
| N/A | Received | Madoff | Court | $10,000,000.00 | Comparative bond amount. | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | Court | $505.00 | Filing fee for Notice of Appeal (Receipt number... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | Court | $750,000.00 | Criminal Fine imposed at sentencing | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | Court | $300.00 | Special Assessment due immediately | View |
| 2022-06-28 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | Court | $250,000.00 | Fine imposed on each count. | View |
| 2022-06-28 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | Court | $750,000.00 | Total fine imposed. | View |
| 2021-03-26 | Received | Boies Schiller Fl... | Court | $200.00 | Filing fee for Motion to Appear Pro Hac Vice (R... | View |
| 2021-03-24 | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | Court | $505.00 | Appeal Fee Due | View |
| 2021-03-24 | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | Court | $505.00 | Appeal Fee Due | View |
| 2021-03-24 | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | Court | $505.00 | Appeal Fee Due regarding Notice of Appeal. | View |
| 2021-03-24 | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | Court | $505.00 | Appeal Fee Due regarding Notice of Appeal 173. | View |
| 2021-03-24 | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | Court | $505.00 | Appeal Fee Due | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | Maxwell/Sureties | Court | $10,000,000.00 | Proposed 'eight-figure bond secured by real pro... | View |
| 2021-03-16 | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | Court | $28,500,000.00 | Proposed bond package. | View |
Cited as 'Gov't Opp'n at 23'.
Cited as 'Def. Reply at 6'.
Described their 'quiet family life' and disputed the government's characterization of Maxwell's lifestyle.
Legal arguments in support of bail release.
Request to reverse detention decision based on financial data and ties to US.
Briefing and oral argument regarding bail.
Memorandum of Law in Opposition by USA as to Ghislaine Maxwell Renewed Bail Motion.
Argument against granting bail to Ghislaine Maxwell.
Response to Defendant's submission.
Letters written in support of Maxwell.
Argument that the case is weak and bail should be granted.
Memorandum in support of bail with Exhibits A through X.
Explanation of why he did not initially co-sign (media aggression) and his current support.
Support document for bail motion including Exhibits A-X.
Requesting two 2-hour video calls per week.
Upcoming submission regarding renewed bail motion.
Defendant's request for bail release.
Request for release on bail (referenced in text).
Reiterating request to summon Warden Heriberto Tellez
Letter prompting the scheduling order.
Responding to concerns raised in Nov 24 letter
Letter outlining reasons against the in camera conference request.
Letter articulating privacy concerns.
Second letter proposing redactions to Nov 25 and Nov 30 letters instead of full sealing.
A second letter request proposing redactions on both letters
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity