Bobbi C. Sternheim
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Client |
102
Very Strong
|
211 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
29
Very Strong
|
34 | |
|
person
CHRISTIAN EVERDELL
|
Business associate |
19
Very Strong
|
19 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Client |
11
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
70 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Professional |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
CHRISTIAN EVERDELL
|
Co counsel |
7
|
7 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Laura Menninger
|
Business associate |
6
|
6 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIM
|
Professional employment |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
ANDREW ROHRBACH
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
John M. Leventhal
|
Professional succession |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ALISON J. NATHAN
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Unknown |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Laura Menninger
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MARK S. COHEN
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeff Pagliuca
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
government counsel
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Professional opposing counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Co counsel |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Curcio client
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Counsel of record
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Pagliuca
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Pretrial conference | A pretrial conference was held where counsel for the government and defendant made their appearan... | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Pretrial conference | A final pretrial conference was held to discuss outstanding issues and the plan for jury selection. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Detention | Ms. Maxwell is being held at the MDC under problematic conditions, including over-management and ... | MDC | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | An ongoing legal case involving Ms. Maxwell, where her conditions of confinement are a point of c... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The ongoing criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States Courthouse, 4... | View |
| 2022-08-22 | N/A | Sentencing Hearing in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-07-15 | Legal document service | Bobbi C. Sternheim certified the service of a legal motion with an exhibit to multiple parties in... | N/A | View |
| 2022-07-15 | Legal filing | Bobbi C. Sternheim executed a declaration requesting to be relieved as counsel for Ghislaine Maxw... | N/A | View |
| 2022-07-15 | Legal filing | Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim filed a Motion Information Statement to be relieved as continued coun... | UNITED STATES COURT OF APPE... | View |
| 2022-07-15 | Legal filing | Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim filed a declaration in support of a motion to be relieved from repres... | UNITED STATES COURT OF APPE... | View |
| 2022-07-15 | N/A | Court Order issued granting Bobbi C. Sternheim's motion to be relieved as counsel for Ghislaine M... | Thurgood Marshall United St... | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Legal filing | Bobbi C. Sternheim filed a Notice of Appeal for Ghislaine Maxwell. | N/A | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Legal filing payment | Payment of a $505.00 fee for a 'Notice of Appeal/Docketing Fee' for case 20CR330-1 AJN. | U.S. District Court, New Yo... | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Legal filing | Payment of a $505.00 fee for a 'Notice of Appeal/Docketing Fee' in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. | U.S. District Court, New Yo... | View |
| 2022-07-07 | Legal filing | A Notice of Appeal was filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-07-07 | N/A | Payment of Notice of Appeal/Docketing Fee | U.S. District Court, Manhattan | View |
| 2022-07-07 | N/A | Notice of Appeal Filed | SDNY | View |
| 2022-06-28 | Sentencing | Sentencing hearing for the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-28 | Legal proceeding | A sentencing proceeding for Ghislaine Maxwell is scheduled for Tuesday, which may need to be post... | United States District Court | View |
| 2022-06-25 | Meeting | Bobbi C. Sternheim met with her client, Ghislaine Maxwell, at the detention facility. | MDC | View |
| 2022-06-24 | N/A | Filing of Document 672 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE | Court Record | View |
| 2022-06-24 | N/A | Filing of Document 672 (Submission Under Seal) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-24 | Legal filing | Document 672 was filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| 2022-06-21 | N/A | Filing of legal document regarding sentencing procedures. | Court Docket | View |
| 2022-06-15 | Legal filing | Document 662 was filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00005231.jpg
This is page 3 of a legal filing (Document 346) from the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The attorney argues that incompetence at the MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center) is hindering Maxwell's ability to review vital trial materials and prepare for her defense. Sternheim characterizes the detention conditions as 'extraordinary and onerous' for a nearly 60-year-old non-violent detainee and warns that inaction may erode constitutional rights and delay the trial.
DOJ-OGR-00005230.jpg
This legal filing from Ms. Maxwell's defense counsel, Bobbi C. Sternheim, argues that Ms. Maxwell's right to prepare her defense has been compromised. The document details how the Government refused to hand-deliver a hard drive of evidence to the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC), instead using FedEx, and how the MDC then delayed giving the materials to Ms. Maxwell for several days. Counsel requests the Court's intervention due to the MDC's alleged inefficiency and mishandling of legal mail.
DOJ-OGR-00005229.jpg
A letter dated October 14, 2021, from defense attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan requesting a court order to compel the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) to deliver legal mail to Ghislaine Maxwell within 24 hours of receipt. Sternheim details specific incidents of delay, including a hard drive withheld for two days and legal mail deposited on October 2 that was not discovered until October 7. The letter also alleges potential evidence tampering, noting a 'questionable bar code sticker' found on legal mail that the MDC Unit Manager eventually returned to counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00005222.jpg
This document is the signature page (page 17 of 17) of a legal filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, dated October 13, 2021. The text requests the Court to grant individual sequestered voir dire due to the sensitive nature of the charges and pervasive pretrial publicity. The document is signed by attorneys Bobbi C. Sternheim, Christian R. Everdell, Jeffrey S. Pagliuca, and Laura A. Menninger on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00005206.jpg
This document is the cover page of a legal filing, specifically a Memorandum of Law, submitted to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on October 13, 2021. It is filed by the legal team for defendant Ghislaine Maxwell in the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The motion seeks an individual and sequestered jury selection process (voir dire) to be partially conducted by the defense counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00005205.jpg
This is a Notice of Motion filed on October 13, 2021, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York for the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense attorneys for Maxwell are formally notifying the court and prosecution of their intent to request a specific jury selection process, namely 'individual sequestered juror voir dire and limited counsel-conducted voir dire'. The motion is to be brought before Judge Alison J. Nathan.
DOJ-OGR-00020118.jpg
This document is the signature page (page 11 of the document, marked as page 10 of 15 in the filing header) of a legal submission dated December 18, 2020, for Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It lists the defense team representing Ghislaine Maxwell, comprising attorneys from three different law firms: Cohen & Gresser LLP, Haddon, Morgan & Foreman P.C., and the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim.
DOJ-OGR-00008822.jpg
This is a legal letter dated January 19, 2022, from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter serves to inform the court that Maxwell's counsel has filed a Motion for a New Trial and requests that all materials concerning Juror No. 50 be kept under seal until the court rules on the motion.
DOJ-OGR-00008806.jpg
This legal document, dated January 5, 2022, is a filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, addressed to The Honorable Alison J. Nathan. It indicates that Ms. Maxwell (Ghislaine Maxwell) suggests examining deliberating jurors to evaluate their conduct and is in the process of drafting a Rule 33 motion. The document lists several attorneys and their respective law firms representing Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00002715.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on February 4, 2021. It identifies Laura A. Menninger and Bobbi C. Sternheim as the attorneys representing Ghislaine Maxwell. The document provides the names, law firms, addresses, and phone numbers for both attorneys.
DOJ-OGR-00020357.jpg
This legal document, filed by the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim, details the allegedly abusive and overly restrictive detention conditions of Ms. Maxwell at the MDC. It claims she is subjected to constant, invasive surveillance, has been physically abused by guards, had property damaged, and had private information leaked to the press. The filing argues that these conditions are unwarranted and that her monitored communications with family demonstrate strong ties to the U.S., contradicting claims that she is a flight risk.
DOJ-OGR-00020348.jpg
A letter from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter raises concerns about Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the MDC, specifically sleep deprivation caused by guards checking her with flashlights every 15 minutes. It also reports a recent incident where Maxwell developed a 'black eye' of unknown origin, leading to threats of punishment (SHU) by MDC staff if she did not explain the injury.
DOJ-OGR-00011666.jpg
This document is the cover page for the court transcript of the jury trial in the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell, held on November 29, 2021. The trial took place in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan. The document lists the appearances of the legal counsel for both the prosecution and the defense, as well as other individuals present.
DOJ-OGR-00011622.jpg
This document is the cover page for a court hearing transcript from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated November 23, 2021. The case is United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell, with Hon. Alison J. Nathan presiding as the District Judge. The page lists the appearances of the legal counsel for both the prosecution, led by U.S. Attorney Damian Williams, and the defense, including attorneys from the firm Haddon Morgan and Foreman.
DOJ-OGR-00005766.jpg
This document is the cover page for a Motion in Limine filed on October 29, 2021, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The motion, submitted by Maxwell's defense team, seeks to preclude the prosecution from referring to accusers as 'victims' or 'minor victims' during the trial. It lists the defense attorneys representing Maxwell from three different law firms.
DOJ-OGR-00005764.jpg
This document is the signature page of a legal filing (Document 394) from the court case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on October 29, 2021. It lists the names and contact information for the attorneys representing Ghislaine Maxwell from three law firms: Haddon, Morgan & Foreman, P.C.; Cohen & Gresser LLP; and the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim. The document is electronically signed by attorney Jeffrey S. Pagliuca.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-07-07 | Paid | Bobbi C. Sternheim | U.S. District Cou... | $505.00 | Notice of Appeal/Docketing Fee for Case 20CR330... | View |
Re: Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509
Rebuttal arguing Maxwell is compliant despite 'invasive conditions' and blaming inconsistent rules/guard hostility.
Re: Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509
Defense of Maxwell's compliance with rules despite inconsistent enforcement by guards.
Re: Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509
Response acknowledging VTC concerns and explaining storage for protection. States Maxwell must obey officers. Notes Maxwell declines daily medical care. Requests photo of ear buds.
Re: Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509
Complaint about VTC room modifications causing blurry video and distorted audio. Complaint about guard behavior towards Maxwell (threatening discipline, barking orders, laughing).
Re: Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509
Response regarding VTC unit storage, offer of medical care, and request for photo of ear buds.
Re: Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509
Initial complaint about VTC audio/video quality and inappropriate guard behavior (mocking, threatening discipline).
Problematic conditions and interference with attorney-cli...
A letter from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to the Court complaining about the recurring problematic conditions, over-management, and hyper-surveillance of her client, Ms. Maxwell, at the MDC. The letter argues these issues negatively impact Ms. Maxwell's ability to prepare for trial and interfere with privileged attorney-client communication, and it cites strong criticism of the prison system by Judge McMahon from another case.
Response to MDC Conditions Update
Response regarding confinement conditions
Re: US v. Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - MDC Conditions Update
Good afternoon- Attached is the conditions letter with requested redaction highlighted.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Response to government's June 7 letter regarding detention conditions; complaint about sewage, vermin, and document access.
RE: US v. Maxwell -Trial Start Date
Confirming the letter regarding the trial date was filed on ECF.
US v. Maxwell -Trial Start Date
Following up on status of conferral emails as joint letter is due.
Re: US v. Maxwell -Trial Start Date
Stating parties agree on Nov 2021 but disagree on the week. Government refuses Nov 8th due to counsel continuity and witness availability.
Re: US v. Maxwell -Trial Start Date
Asking for an ETA on the letter.
US v. Maxwell - Trial Start Date
Follow up on status of conferral emails as joint letter is due.
US v. Maxwell - Trial Start Date
Government rejects Nov 8 date due to counsel continuity and witness unavailability. Agrees on Nov 2021 but disagrees on the week.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Strongly arguing for Nov 8 date. States Nov 29 disrupts holidays and prejudices the defense. Offers Nov 15 as accommodation but refuses later. Suggests bail would solve scheduling flexibility.
Re: US v. Maxwell -Trial Start Date
Arguing against Nov 29 date due to holiday interference and negative impact on defense. Proposing Nov 15 as accommodation but preferring Nov 8. Refusing speedy trial exclusion beyond 11/8.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Stating availability to begin Nov 8 and conclude by end of year. Notes Laura Menninger has civil trial Dec 13.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Proposing trial date of Nov 29, 2021. Discussing deadlines for victim identity disclosure (3 months prior) and expert disclosures (2 months prior).
MDC flashlight security checks
Letter regarding MDC flashlight security checks
U.S. v. Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Attached is a courtesy copy of today's ECF filing.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Asking for availability separated from preferences.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Reiterating Nov 8 preference due to Maxwell's health/detention. Suggests release pending trial would offer flexibility.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Asking for full picture of available dates after Nov 8.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity