United States District Court FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Murray
|
Professional court reporter |
6
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | The district court issued a judgment of conviction against Ghislaine Maxwell. | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | Judgment of conviction for Ghislaine Maxwell. | Southern District of New York | View |
DOJ-OGR-00017269.jpg
This document is page 3082 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It contains the judge's charge to the jury, instructing them to reach a verdict based solely on evidence and the law, without being swayed by sympathy or consequences. The text also outlines the protocol for deliberations, emphasizing that every juror should be heard, no one should dominate the room, and jurors should be open to changing their views while maintaining honest convictions.
DOJ-OGR-00013859.jpg
This is a legal notice filed on August 10, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330). The document announces the filing of an official transcript for a conference held on December 10, 2021, and outlines the 7-day procedure for parties to request redactions of personal information before the transcript is made public.
DOJ-OGR-00013591.jpg
Court document filed on August 10, 2022, notifying parties that an official transcript for a conference held on December 9, 2021, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell has been filed. The document outlines the deadlines and procedures for requesting redactions of personal data identifiers before the transcript becomes publicly available.
DOJ-OGR-00010737.jpg
This document is a legal motion filed on June 26, 2022, in the Southern District of New York regarding the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. A victim identified as 'Jane Doe' (who testified under the pseudonym 'Kate') is requesting permission to deliver an oral victim impact statement at Maxwell's sentencing scheduled for June 28. The motion cites 18 U.S.C. § 3661 to support the inclusion of victim statements.
DOJ-OGR-00010266.jpg
This legal document is a "Notice of Filing of Official Transcript" filed on March 11, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20 CR 330). It announces that the official transcript for a conference held on March 8, 2022, has been filed by the court reporter. The notice informs the parties that they have seven days to file a notice of intent to request redactions of personal data before the transcript is made publicly available.
DOJ-OGR-00009903.jpg
This document is the cover page for Volume XVI of a legal appendix filed on February 24, 2022, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for case number 13-1388-cr. The case is an appeal by Defendant-Appellant David Parse and others against the United States of America. The document identifies the parties involved and lists the legal counsel for both the government (Appellee) and the appellant David Parse.
DOJ-OGR-00009628.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated March 7, 2022, from the U.S. Department of Justice's Office of the Assistant Attorney General to Damian Williams, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The letter grants authorization to seek a court order to compel a witness, whose name is redacted, to testify in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. This order would provide the witness with immunity, overcoming any refusal to testify based on the privilege against self-incrimination.
DOJ-OGR-00009614.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated March 1, 2022, from attorney Todd A. Spodek of Spodek Law Group to District Judge Alison J. Nathan. The letter concerns the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York. Spodek informs the court that his client, identified only as Juror 50, will invoke their Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination at a court-ordered hearing scheduled for March 8, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00009565.jpg
This document is page 3 of a legal filing (Document 621) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 25, 2022. It contains the 'Preliminary Statement' and 'Legal Standard' sections of the Government's opposition to the defendant's post-trial motions for acquittal or a new trial. The text outlines the legal standards for Rule 29 (acquittal based on insufficient evidence) and Rule 33 (new trial in the interest of justice), citing various legal precedents.
DOJ-OGR-00014747.jpg
This document is a 'Notice of Filing of Official Transcript' filed on August 10, 2022, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330) in the Southern District of New York. It notifies parties that a transcript for a conference held on December 29, 2021, has been filed and outlines the procedures and deadlines for requesting redactions. The document is signed by court reporter 'Speer'.
DOJ-OGR-00014733.jpg
This legal document is a 'Notice of Filing of Official Transcript' for the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Filed on August 10, 2022, it announces that the court reporter, Speer, has filed the official transcript for a conference held on December 28, 2021. The notice informs the parties that they have seven days to request redactions of personal information before the transcript is made publicly available.
DOJ-OGR-00014716.jpg
This is a legal notice filed on August 10, 2022, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York for the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330). The document, submitted by court reporter 'speer', announces the filing of the official transcript for a conference that occurred on December 27, 2021. It also outlines the procedure and seven-day deadline for the case parties to request redactions of sensitive personal information before the transcript is made publicly available.
DOJ-OGR-00014686.jpg
This is a legal notice filed on August 10, 2022, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York regarding the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330). The document announces the filing of an official transcript of a conference held on December 22, 2021. It also outlines the procedure for the parties involved to request redactions of personal information from the transcript within seven days.
DOJ-OGR-00014678.jpg
This document is a 'Notice of Filing of Official Transcript' filed on August 10, 2022, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330). It notifies parties that a transcript for a conference held on December 21, 2021, has been filed and outlines the seven-day deadline for requesting redactions of sensitive personal information before public release.
DOJ-OGR-00011772.jpg
This document is a Notice of Filing of Official Transcript filed on August 10, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330) in the Southern District of New York. The notice confirms that a transcript for a conference held on November 29, 2021, has been filed by court reporter 'speer'. It outlines the deadlines and procedures for requesting redactions of personal data identifiers from the transcript.
DOJ-OGR-00020339.jpg
This document is the cover page for Ghislaine Maxwell's Appendix to her Renewed Motion for Pretrial Release, filed on May 17, 2021, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. It lists the legal counsel representing Maxwell (Leah S. Saffian and David Oscar Markus) and references the underlying case in the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00020326.jpg
This document is the cover page for a legal filing dated May 17, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It is a 'Renewed Motion for Pretrial Release' filed by Maxwell's attorneys, Leah S. Saffian and David Oscar Markus, to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The motion is an appeal of a decision from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00002863.jpg
This document is page 21 of a legal indictment (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on March 29, 2021. It details 'Count Eight' against Ghislaine Maxwell for Perjury regarding a deposition she gave on July 22, 2016, in a civil case (15 Civ. 7433). The indictment alleges she knowingly gave false testimony when she denied knowledge of sex toys or devices at Jeffrey Epstein's Palm Beach house.
DOJ-OGR-00002862.jpg
This document is page 20 of a legal indictment (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on March 29, 2021. It details Count Seven, a perjury charge against Ghislaine Maxwell, alleging she gave false testimony during a deposition on April 22, 2016. The indictment specifically quotes her denial of any knowledge regarding Jeffrey Epstein's alleged scheme to recruit underage girls for sexual massages.
DOJ-OGR-00002824.jpg
This document is page 3 of a court filing (likely an opinion or order) in the case of United States v. Schulte (Case 1:17-cr-00548). It discusses Schulte's motion to dismiss his indictment regarding the alleged transmission of national defense information to WikiLeaks. Schulte argues that the White Plains grand jury venire violated his constitutional rights by failing to represent a fair cross-section of African American and Hispanic American populations. Note: While the prompt identifies this as 'Epstein-related,' the text exclusively concerns Joshua Schulte; however, this document may be part of a larger FOIA production covering SDNY cases or MCC New York issues.
DOJ-OGR-00002890.jpg
This legal document is a letter from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated April 5, 2021, concerning the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The prosecution requests that the court compel Maxwell's defense to share a copy of a proposed subpoena for records from the law firm Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, and to also share any documents produced as a result. The letter notes that the government has already provided over 2.7 million pages of discovery to the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00011665.jpg
This is a Notice of Filing of Official Transcript filed on August 10, 2022, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case No. 20-cr-330) in the Southern District of New York. The document notifies parties that a transcript for a conference held on November 23, 2021, has been filed by court reporter 'speer'. It outlines the standard legal procedures and deadlines for requesting redactions of personal identifiers before the transcript becomes publicly available.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023371.jpg
This document is a preliminary statement from a legal appeal (cited 2012) concerning the 'In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' litigation. The Plaintiffs-Appellants (victims' families) are appealing a district court's dismissal of claims against five defendants, including Al Rajhi Bank, Saudi American Bank, and Saleh Abdullah Kamel, whom they allege knowingly provided material support to al-Qaeda. The text argues that the lower court applied improper pleading standards and misinterpreted statutes such as the Alien Tort Statute and the Anti-Terrorism Act. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production to the U.S. House Oversight Committee.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023361.jpg
This document is a 2012 Appellate Brief filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit regarding the 'In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001' litigation. It lists numerous attorneys representing the Plaintiffs-Appellants and includes a Corporate Disclosure Statement detailing the corporate structures and name changes of various entities involved, primarily related to Cantor Fitzgerald and BGC Partners. The document bears a House Oversight Committee stamp (HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023361), suggesting it was part of a congressional investigation.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity