Judge Nathan
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
16
Very Strong
|
14 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Defendant judge |
15
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Judicial |
14
Very Strong
|
16 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial |
14
Very Strong
|
12 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
13
Very Strong
|
20 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Legal representative |
11
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
Judge Preska
|
Business associate |
11
Very Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
17 | |
|
person
Assistant United States Attorney
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
8 | |
|
person
Judge Preska
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Professional judicial |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Litigant judge |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Juror 50
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Defense counsel
|
Professional |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial oversight |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Ms. Maxwell
|
Litigant judge |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
The jury
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Defendant judge |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Unknown author
|
Juror judge inferred |
5
|
1 | |
|
organization
The Court
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Juror 50
|
Judicial |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Comey
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Pete Brush
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Ms. Sternheim
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan's first decision denying pretrial motions, with a discussion of MV-3 starting on pag... | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Maxwell intends to argue violation of Martindell before Judge Nathan. | Criminal Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Sentencing Hearing (likely for Ghislaine Maxwell) | Courtroom (Southern District) | View |
| N/A | N/A | Denial of temporary release | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Ms. Maxwell's forthcoming motion before Judge Nathan. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Denial of motions to dismiss | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan declined to modify protective order | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan denied Maxwell's second bail application. | Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan refused to modify the protective order. | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan directed the Government to confer with MDC legal counsel regarding surveillance just... | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Closing arguments in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan's ruling on bail/release conditions. | District Court | View |
| N/A | N/A | Bail Hearings/Decisions | District Court | View |
| N/A | Legal motion | Maxwell presented a motion to Judge Nathan to modify a Protective Order in her criminal case. | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | Judge Nathan ruled that Maxwell's arguments to modify a protective order failed to establish good... | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | Judge Nathan entered a 'challenged Order' denying Maxwell's request to use criminal discovery mat... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Maxwell's appeal of Judge Nathan's Order in a criminal case. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal hearing | A hearing was conducted by Judge Nathan to inquire into errors made by Juror 50 on a jury questio... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal motion | A potential future suppression motion that Maxwell could make before Judge Nathan. | N/A | View |
| N/A | N/A | Judge Nathan denied motion to modify criminal protective order. | District Court | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | Judge Nathan denied Maxwell's request for temporary release after analyzing her arguments and pro... | The District Court | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Maxwell's trial, where a jury's potential bias due to disclosure of civil case material is discus... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Trial | A criminal trial where powerful testimony was heard from victims. | Courtroom | View |
| N/A | Legal ruling | Judge Nathan denied Maxwell's request for bail after considering multiple written submissions. | N/A | View |
| N/A | Court ruling | Judge Nathan issued a written order finding Maxwell poses a flight risk and that temporary releas... | District Court | View |
EFTA00026526.pdf
This document is an email dated July 2, 2020, from an Assistant US Attorney in the SDNY to Judge Nathan regarding the case 'United States v. Maxwell'. The email submits a memorandum in support of detention for Ghislaine Maxwell and notes that a copy is being provided to the Magistrate Judge in New Hampshire for proceedings occurring that afternoon. Defense counsel Jeff Pagliuca is copied on the correspondence.
EFTA00026478.pdf
An email from an Assistant United States Attorney (SDNY) regarding a telephone conference for the Maxwell case presided over by Judge Nathan. The email follows up on previous communication from Bobbi Sternheim and provides dial-in information for the defendant, referencing an attached court order.
EFTA00026433.pdf
This document is an email header dated July 10, 2020, with the subject 'letter template'. The sender and recipient are redacted. It includes an attachment titled '2020-07-10,_GM_letter_to_Judge_Nathan_re_arraignment_overflow.docx', which relates to legal correspondence concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's arraignment before Judge Nathan.
EFTA00025282.pdf
This document is an email chain from October 2021 detailing complaints by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorney, Bobbi Sternheim, regarding conditions at the MDC. Sternheim alleges 'foul play' or a 'cover-up' regarding legal mail that went missing and reappeared with USPS markings despite being placed in an internal mailbox. Additional complaints include inadequate space and COVID safety during legal visits, denial of requests to see the Warden, and issues with food (receiving meat while on a vegetarian diet) and electricity.
EFTA00025278.pdf
This document is an email chain from October 2021 between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorney, Bobbi Sternheim, and Bureau of Prisons officials. Sternheim alleges 'foul play' regarding legal mail that went missing and reappeared with a USPS barcode despite never being mailed externally. She also complains about poor conditions at the MDC, including cramped meeting rooms violating COVID protocols, electricity/water issues, and the prison serving Maxwell a bologna sandwich despite her vegetarian diet.
EFTA00025147.pdf
This document is an email dated October 28, 2021, from Nicole Simmons of Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. to Judge Nathan's chambers in the Southern District of New York. It serves as a transmittal for the filing of 'Ms. Maxwell's Reply In Support of Her Motions in Limine' in the case U.S. v. Maxwell (Case No. 20 Cr. 330). The email was sent at the request of attorney Jeffrey Pagliuca.
EFTA00025146.pdf
An email chain from October 2021 involving an Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. The correspondence discusses a tight 48-hour deadline set by Judge Nathan to file a reply brief in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. The email specifically mentions addressing arguments regarding 'MV-4' (Minor Victim 4) and includes attachments related to motions in limine.
EFTA00025037.pdf
This document is an email chain from October 2021 between the defense team for Ghislaine Maxwell (Christian Everdell, Bobbi Sternheim, etc.) and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY). The correspondence concerns the scheduling and procedure for filing a 'request to charge' (jury instructions) with Judge Nathan. The parties discuss extensions, the possibility of filing separate requests rather than a joint one, and agree to a schedule where the Government files first, followed by the Defense's redline or separate filing in early November.
EFTA00024952.pdf
This document is an email chain dated November 22, 2021, between personnel at the Southern District of New York (SDNY) regarding the preparation of a binder for legal proceedings. The emails discuss attaching various legal documents related to the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (case 20cr330), including responses to motions, limiting instructions from Judge Nathan, and Government Exhibit 52 (GX-52).
EFTA00024931.pdf
An email dated May 5, 2021, from Assistant US Attorney Lara [Redacted] to Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (Everdell, Cohen, Sternheim, Menninger, Pagliuca). The prosecutor is sharing a draft letter regarding 'flashlight checks' (as indicated by the attachment filename) pursuant to Judge Nathan's April 29 order, asking the defense to identify any necessary redactions of private medical information before the letter is publicly filed.
EFTA00024921.pdf
An email chain from November 17-18, 2021, involving U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) staff and contractors discussing the logistics of obtaining 'courtroom connect' (internet access) for legal proceedings presided over by Judge Nathan (likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). The correspondence details the necessity of obtaining a signed order from the judge to proceed with technical installation before Thanksgiving, referencing a similar previous application made to Judge Kaplan.
EFTA00024905.pdf
This document is an email chain from November 20, 2021, concerning legal instructions for Judge Nathan. An Assistant United States Attorney from the Southern District of New York discusses providing views on proposed limiting instructions and mentions preparing two responsive letters following an order on MV-3. The chain also includes a draft response to be used as a starting point.
EFTA00024904.pdf
An email dated November 20, 2021, from an Assistant United States Attorney in the Southern District of New York to their team. The email concerns a response due to Judge Nathan regarding limiting instructions related to an order on 'MV-3' (likely referencing a minor victim in the Ghislaine Maxwell trial, case 20cr330). The sender has drafted two potential responses and requests a call to discuss.
EFTA00024788.pdf
This document is an email chain from July 6-10, 2020, between the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) and MDC staff regarding the scheduling of legal calls for Ghislaine Maxwell immediately following her arrest. The correspondence highlights urgent requests for access due to court deadlines set by Judge Nathan, the establishment of a standing 10 AM daily call schedule leading up to her arraignment on July 14, and some friction regarding whether defense counsel was following proper protocols for requesting calls.
EFTA00024437.pdf
This document is a chain of emails between the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) and prison officials (MDC) regarding Ghislaine Maxwell immediately following her arrest on July 6, 2020. The correspondence coordinates urgent legal calls for Maxwell to meet a court deadline set by Judge Nathan and establishes a schedule for daily standing calls with her defense counsel, Mr. Everdell, leading up to her arraignment on July 14, 2020. There is some friction regarding whether defense counsel followed proper protocols for requesting calls, with prison officials defending their responsiveness.
EFTA00024232.pdf
This document is an email chain from October 2021 regarding the legal case U.S. v. Maxwell. The initial email is from defense attorney Nicole Simmons to Judge Nathan's chambers, submitting Ghislaine Maxwell's reply in support of motions in limine. This email was subsequently forwarded internally within the US Attorney's Office (USANYS) with a note attaching both the defense reply and the government's final brief.
EFTA00024021.pdf
This document is an email chain from March 2021 related to the U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell case. Christian Everdell of Cohen & Gresser LLP submits reply memoranda and exhibits for pretrial motions to Judge Nathan's chambers and government prosecutors (USANYS), noting that documents are being filed under seal with redacted versions for the public docket.
EFTA00023894.pdf
This document is an email dated August 17, 2021, from Assistant US Attorney Andrew (likely Andrew Rohrbach) to redacted colleagues. It discusses a recent ruling by Judge Nathan denying Ghislaine Maxwell's supplemental motions. The email focuses on correcting the Judge's presumption that the prosecution intended to provide the defense with the identities of uncharged co-conspirators, stating clearly that they 'do not, in fact, intend to do so' and have drafted a letter to that effect.
EFTA00023692.pdf
This document is an email metadata printout dated September 28, 2020, originating from the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS). The subject concerns a draft letter to Judge Nathan regarding discovery in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. The document contains technical email headers, including a Message-ID and an embedded message reference, with most participant identities redacted.
EFTA00023365.pdf
An email from the Southern District of New York (Government) to Judge Nathan's chambers regarding the case US v. Maxwell. The email submits proposed redactions related to 'Witness-3' (also referred to as Accuser-3 in attachments) pursuant to previous court orders and motions.
EFTA00023362.pdf
This document is an email dated November 21, 2021, from an Assistant United States Attorney (SDNY) to defense attorneys Laura Menninger and Jeff Pagliuca. The email transmits attachments containing proposed redactions regarding 'Witness-3' (also referred to as Accuser-3 and MV-3 in filenames) related to case filings (Case 20cr330, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell).
EFTA00022177.pdf
This document is an email chain from November 7, 2021, discussing legal strategy related to a 'Decision on motion to strike' in an Epstein-related case. The emails focus on the legal interpretation of conspiracy and the transportation of Minor Victim-3, asserting that a conspiracy does not require the completion of a substantive crime. It also references Judge Nathan's decision denying pretrial motions and mentions the involvement of an Assistant United States Attorney from the Southern District of New York.
EFTA00021941.pdf
This document is a formal letter from the U.S. Department of Justice (SDNY) to Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team, dated October 11, 2021. It serves to notify the defense that the Government intends to refer to Jeffrey Epstein and other redacted individuals as co-conspirators during the trial, pursuant to a court order. The letter is marked as Exhibit 1 and designated as confidential under a protective order.
EFTA00021917.pdf
This document is an email thread from July 22, 2020, among a legal team discussing the urgent filing of a letter to Judge Netburn (and potentially Judge Nathan) regarding an order on unsealing and Local Rule 23.1. The team is experiencing technical difficulties, including VPN issues and Westlaw being down. Two attachments are referenced: one addressed to Judge Nathan regarding Rule 23.1 and another to Netburn regarding an unsealing order.
EFTA00021898.pdf
This document is an email chain from August 9-12, 2020, between defense attorneys (Jeff Pagliuca, Nicole Simmons, Christian Everdell, Mark Cohen) and the US Attorney's Office for the SDNY regarding a discovery dispute. The defense is pressing for a quick response to an August 9th letter, citing a tight schedule with the Circuit and threatening to advise Judge Nathan if they do not receive a response sooner than the Government's proposed date of August 13th. The correspondence also notes technical email issues at the defense firm Haddon, Morgan and Foreman.
Security Protocols
Instruction to ensure Maxwell is subjected only to necessary security protocols based on neutral factors.
Denial of request to modify nighttime monitoring
Denied request to modify schedule; noted claims were unsupported by affidavit.
Written Decision
Denying Maxwell's request to modify nighttime monitoring schedule.
MDC legal counsel's answers regarding flashlight surveill...
Conveyed MDC legal counsel's answers to District Court questions regarding flashlight surveillance policies and Maxwell's specific conditions.
MDC legal counsel's answers regarding flashlight surveill...
Confirmed flashlight checks occur for all inmates; explained frequency differences (15 mins for Maxwell vs 30 mins for SHU vs 1 hour for general pop); justified enhanced monitoring due to safety concerns.
Ms. Maxwell's sleeping conditions
Maxwell submitted a letter to Judge Nathan asking the District Court to address her sleeping conditions by directing the MDC to cease 15-minute light surveillance or justify its necessity.
Sleeping conditions and light surveillance
Requesting the court direct MDC to cease 15-minute light surveillance or justify the need for it.
US v. Maxwell - [Request for 120 or 180-day Adjournment o...
Submission of a Letter Motion for Adjournment of trial and request for redaction of other clients' names based on professional conduct rules.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
The Government informs the Court regarding victim attendance at the upcoming arraignment. Victim-2 will attend by phone; her attorneys David Boies and Sigrid McCawley will attend in person. Victims 1, 3, and 4 will not attend.
Re: Letter re: Electronic Device Permission
Initial request to bring personal electronic devices and equipment into the courthouse for upcoming evidence views.
MDC's imprecise language regarding Maxwell's eye covering
The Government sent a letter to Judge Nathan on April 6, 2021, conveying the MDC's imprecise language about Maxwell wearing an eye mask, an inaccuracy the Government later acknowledged.
MDC protocols / Eye mask usage
Conveyed MDC's imprecise language stating Maxwell wore an eye mask at night (later corrected to 'non-contraband items').
U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) -- Objections...
Submission of letter setting forth Ms. Maxwell's objections to government proposed redactions pursuant to Rule 2(B).
U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) -- Renewed Ba...
Submission of renewed bail motion and exhibits under seal pursuant to court order.
Support for Ghislaine Maxwell's bail application
The author writes to the judge to express support for Ghislaine Maxwell's bail application, attesting to her good character and stating that the person described in criminal charges is not the person they know.
Re discovery from other agencies
Referenced as 'our October 7th letter' (though filename suggests GM sent it, context 'our' might imply the sender is Prosecution referring to their own letter, or referring to the attachment which is GM's letter). Filename clarifies: 'GM_letter_to_Judge_Nathan'.
Authorization to convey facts under seal
Judge Nathan authorized Maxwell to convey facts regarding government subpoenas and court orders to the appropriate judicial officer.
Denial of Maxwell's motion
Judge Nathan issued an Order denying Maxwell's motion to modify a Protective Order.
Proposed redactions and sealing
A sealed letter sent to Judge Nathan regarding proposed redactions and sealing.
Proposed redactions and sealing (docketed)
A docketed letter sent to Judge Nathan regarding proposed redactions and sealing.
Maxwell's bail hearing
Judge Nathan heard lengthy oral argument from the parties during the bail hearing.
Bail Hearing
Lengthy oral argument and statements from two victims regarding Maxwell's detention.
United States v. Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Submission of memorandum in support of detention for Ghislaine Maxwell. Mentions filing on ECF and submitting copy to NH Magistrate Judge.
Deliberation Schedule
Asking if the jury wishes to deliberate on Thursday, December 23rd if not finished today.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity