| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Adversarial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
prison lawyer
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Custodial adversarial |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Alleged abuse | Ms. Maxwell alleged she was abused by prison guards. | prison | View |
| N/A | N/A | In-person legal visit where guards read legal notebooks, denied water, and monitored conversation... | MDC Conference Room | View |
| 2021-06-17 | N/A | Guards removed two blankets from Maxwell claiming they were not authorized, leaving her cold and ... | MDC Cell | View |
| 2021-06-14 | N/A | Guards awoke Maxwell again due to shaking/shivering and gave her a blanket. | MDC Cell | View |
| 2021-06-14 | N/A | Guards awoke Maxwell because she was shaking; determined she was shivering from cold. | MDC Cell | View |
| 2019-08-10 | N/A | Report that prison guards skipped mandatory checks before Jeffrey Epstein's death | Prison (implied) | View |
| 1971-01-01 | N/A | Attica Prison Uprising | Attica Prison | View |
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues on behalf of Ms. Maxwell against the Government's handling of her abuse allegations. The defense claims the Government's conclusion that the abuse was 'unfounded' is a 'self-serving proclamation' based on a Bureau of Prisons video review that neither the prosecutors, court, nor defense have seen. The document demands the video be produced for review and accuses the Government of hypocrisy and a desire to humiliate Ms. Maxwell.
This document is a legal filing from the Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim dated June 15, 2021, detailing complaints regarding the confinement conditions of Ghislaine Maxwell at the MDC. It outlines specific incidents of alleged harassment and obstruction by prison guards, including the reading of privileged legal materials, denial of water, excessive monitoring during legal visits, and technical interference with video conferencing that compromises attorney-client privilege.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity