Bobbi C. Sternheim
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Conrad
|
Client |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sophia Papapetru
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
John Wallace
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Sophia Papapetru
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Laura Menninger
|
Co counsel |
5
|
5 | |
|
person
Assistant United States Attorney
|
Opposing counsel |
3
|
3 | |
|
person
CHRISTIAN EVERDELL
|
Co counsel professional |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Government Counsel (Redacted)
|
Opposing counsel |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeff Pagliuca
|
Co counsel |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISAINE MAXWELL
|
Represented by |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
[Redacted Recipient]
|
Professional adversarial |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Catherine M. Conrad
|
Client |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Redacted Recipient
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
MARK S. COHEN
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeff Pagliuca
|
Business associate |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
USANYS Staff
|
Opposing counsel |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
[Redacted BOP Official]
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
AJN (Judge Nathan)
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Laura Menninger
|
Co counsel professional |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
CHRISTIAN EVERDELL
|
Legal representative |
1
|
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 |
Unknown
Standard legal disclaimer and Covid-19 office closure notice found in an email signature/footer.
Foregoing motion with exhibit
Bobbi C. Sternheim served a legal motion via email to Maurene Comey (maurene.comey@usdoj.gov) and Andrew Rohrbach (andrew.rohrbach@usdoj.gov).
Foregoing motion with exhibit
Bobbi C. Sternheim served a legal motion via U.S. mail (postage prepaid) to Ghislaine Maxwell at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn.
Foregoing motion with exhibit
Bobbi C. Sternheim served a legal motion via email to Hon. John M. Leventhal (judgeleventhal@aidalalaw.com).
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter opposing the motion filed by counsel for Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein to give oral victim impact statements at Ghislaine Maxwell's sentencing hearing. The letter argues that neither individual qualifies as a statutory crime victim under the CVRA.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim informs Judge Nathan that her client, Ghislaine Maxwell, has been unjustifiably placed on suicide watch by the MDC, preventing her from preparing for her sentencing. Sternheim states Maxwell is not suicidal and warns that she will move for an adjournment if the situation persists.
No Subject
This is the signature page of a letter or legal filing from Bobbi C. Sternheim, indicating that attachments are included and that Counsel of Record have been copied.
Challenge to standing under CVRA
No preview available
Sentencing Procedures / Victim Statements
Request regarding the manner of sentencing and opposition to impact statements from individuals not identified as victims in the charged offenses.
Defense counsel letter regarding sealing of certain docum...
No preview available
Defense counsel writes regarding sealing of certain docum...
Letter dated 6/17/2022 entered on 6/21/2022.
2-day extension to file sentencing submission
Request for extension (Denied by court on 05/11/2022).
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request for a two-day extension to file sentencing submission due to attorney travel.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Requesting a stay of ruling pending review of a new interview given by Juror 50 to Paramount Plus.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter arguing for a new trial for Ghislaine Maxwell based on the assertion that Juror 50 gave false answers on a juror questionnaire regarding his own past sexual abuse, which should have disqualified him from the jury.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from Ghislaine Maxwell's counsel requesting a proffer from Juror 50's counsel to explain the basis for the juror's assertion of the Fifth Amendment, in light of the juror's public statements and the government's consideration of immunity.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request regarding Juror 50's assertion of Fifth Amendment privilege and government immunity.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from the defense proposing limited redactions to an attached Opinion and Order, in response to a Court Order (Dkt. 610) from the same day.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from the defense proposing limited redactions to an attached Opinion and Order in response to a Court Order (Dkt. 610).
Response to Dkt. 605
Letter in response to Order 605.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Discussion regarding proposed redactions to documents related to Juror 50's conduct and motion for a new trial.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter submitting documents under seal with proposed redactions concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The redactions are intended to protect the integrity of an inquiry into the conduct of Juror 50 during the voir dire process.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter submitting documents under seal with proposed redactions concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The redactions are intended to protect the integrity of an inquiry into the conduct of Juror 50 during the voir dire process.
Letter in Response to Dkt. 596
Letter in Response to Dkt. 596
Response to Dkt. 596
Letter in response to a previous docket entry.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity