ALISON J. NATHAN
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judge defendant |
54
Very Strong
|
90 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Defendant judge |
24
Very Strong
|
33 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial |
21
Very Strong
|
66 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Defendant judge |
19
Very Strong
|
19 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
12
Very Strong
|
40 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
46 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Judicial |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Christian R. Everdell
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
7 | |
|
person
Bobbi C. Sternheim
|
Professional |
10
Very Strong
|
11 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Judicial |
9
Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
Paula Speer
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
AUDREY STRAUSS
|
Professional |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
organization
U.S. government
|
Legal representative |
8
Strong
|
4 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Prosecutor judge |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial authority |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Judicial |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judicial assignment |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
United States Government
|
Professional |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Judge defendant |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
the defendant
|
Judge defendant |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
Juror 50
|
None |
6
|
2 | |
|
organization
The government
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 | |
|
person
defendant
|
Professional |
6
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Court proceeding | Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell will move the Court for an Order regarding jury selection procedures. | United States Courthouse at... | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | The court denied the Defendant's motion for a new trial based on the current record, but consente... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Sentencing hearing | The document pertains to procedures for victims to speak at an upcoming sentencing hearing for Gh... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Proposed meeting | Request for an in camera conference to discuss filing procedures for the bail motion. | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Legal case | Ongoing criminal case, Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, against Ms. Maxwell. | Court | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A four-and-a-half-week jury trial for Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | A thirteen-day trial was held for Ghislaine Maxwell. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Sentencing | A future sentencing hearing is planned, which victims Kate and Annie intend to attend. | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Court proceeding | The court denied the Defendant's motion for a new trial based on the current record but consented... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Upcoming pre-trial proceedings and trial for the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Ma... | courthouse | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The ongoing criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States Courthouse, 4... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Ms. Maxwell's sentencing hearing, during which Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein have requested t... | United States District Court | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The Court granted the request for Annie Farmer, Kate, and/or Virginia Giuffre to make oral statem... | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | The District Court imposed concurrent terms of imprisonment of 60 months, 120 months, and 240 mon... | United States District Cour... | View |
| N/A | Court hearing | A court hearing is mentioned where Virginia Giuffre was expected to be present to give a statement. | courtroom | View |
| 2025-11-18 | N/A | Charging conference | Courtroom | View |
| 2022-08-22 | Court filing | Transcript of Proceedings for the sentencing held on 6/28/2022 was filed. | SDNY Court | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court filing | Transcript of Proceedings for the trial held on 12/29/21 was filed. | SDNY Court | View |
| 2022-06-29 | N/A | Judgment of conviction entered following a four-and-a-half-week jury trial. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | Judgment of conviction for Ghislaine Maxwell. | Southern District of New York | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | Judgment in a criminal case was imposed and filed for Ghislaine Maxwell. | UNITED STATES DISTRICT COUR... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | A judgment of conviction was entered against Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal judgment | A judgment was entered in the action against Ghislaine Maxwell. | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | Legal proceeding | Ghislaine Maxwell's judgment of conviction was entered in the United States District Court for th... | United States District Cour... | View |
| 2022-06-29 | N/A | Imposition of Judgment | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00001805.jpg
This document is a legal letter filed on October 23, 2020, by attorney Jeffrey Pagliuca on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The defense argues that the Government has failed to meet discovery deadlines promised during the July 14, 2020, initial conference, particularly regarding investigative files from the Southern District of Florida. The letter criticizes the Government's recent production as lacking substance, noting it consists largely of civil litigation documents and old records related to Jeffrey Epstein rather than the charged conspiracy.
DOJ-OGR-00001799.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated October 14, 2020, from attorney Christian R. Everdell to Judge Alison J. Nathan. Everdell argues against the government's request to delay the disclosure of evidence to his client, Ms. Maxwell, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. He asserts the government has not provided sufficient legal justification, such as risks to an ongoing investigation or witness safety, and asks the court to order the immediate production of the materials to the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00001795.jpg
A legal letter dated October 14, 2020, from Ghislaine Maxwell's attorney, Christian R. Everdell, to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The defense opposes the government's request to delay the disclosure of evidence (photographs and documents) related to alleged victims of Jeffrey Epstein. The defense argues that these materials are exculpatory under Brady v. Maryland because the witnesses allege abuse by Epstein but do not accuse Maxwell of participation.
DOJ-OGR-00001794.jpg
This document is the conclusion page (page 8) of a legal filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), dated October 7, 2020. Submitted by Acting US Attorney Audrey Strauss and Assistant US Attorneys Comey, Moe, and Pomerantz to Judge Alison J. Nathan, the text affirms the Government's commitment to its disclosure obligations following representations made at an initial conference.
DOJ-OGR-00001789.jpg
This document is Page 3 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated October 7, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The text outlines legal precedents determining the scope of the 'prosecution team' for discovery purposes (Rule 16 and Brady), arguing that the prosecution is not obligated to produce records from other government agencies (like the SEC or components of the DOJ/FBI) unless a specific 'joint investigation' occurred. It cites various cases (Middendorf, Collins, Stein) to establish the criteria for what constitutes a joint investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00001788.jpg
This document is Page 2 of a court filing (likely from United States v. Maxwell based on the case number) dated October 7, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The Government updates the court on discovery progress, committing to a November 9, 2020 deadline for electronic discovery and outlining schedules for producing witness statements (Brady/Giglio materials) 4 to 8 weeks before trial. The document also argues the legal scope of the prosecution's obligations, citing case law (Avellino, Quinn) to assert that the prosecution is not responsible for knowledge held by other government agencies (like the FBI) not directly involved in the investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00001779.jpg
This is a letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding 'United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell'. The Government requests permission to delay the disclosure of sensitive photographs and documents related to victims of Jeffrey Epstein to the defense until eight weeks before trial, citing risks to an ongoing investigation and victim privacy. The defense counsel has objected to this request.
DOJ-OGR-00001768.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated August 24, 2020, from Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan. Pagliuca argues on behalf of his client, Ms. Maxwell, for a limited request to present sealed materials to other judicial officers, asserting that the materials are judicial documents and that disclosure would not compromise grand jury secrecy. The letter contends that the government has failed to provide a sufficient reason to prevent this limited disclosure.
DOJ-OGR-00001767.jpg
This document is page 5 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated August 24, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It argues that Protective Orders can be modified as circumstances change and asserts that Ms. Maxwell did not waive her right to seek modification. The text claims the government circumvented Second Circuit processes regarding civil materials for grand jury use and cites various case laws supporting the court's power to modify protective orders.
DOJ-OGR-00001766.jpg
This legal document, dated August 24, 2020, is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The filing argues against the government's opposition to sharing sealed materials with two arbiters, dismissing the government's concerns about dissemination as 'hyperbole'. It also criticizes a government suggestion for unsealing materials in other courts as 'baffling' and improper, citing American Bar Association standards against ex parte communications.
DOJ-OGR-00001762.jpg
This is the signature page (page 3 of 3) of a legal document submitted by Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to The Honorable Alison J. Nathan on August 24, 2020. The document is part of case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN and was officially filed on September 8, 2020. A copy was also sent via email to the Counsel of Record.
DOJ-OGR-00001759.jpg
This document is the final page of a letter motion dated August 17, 2020, from Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The motion, filed on September 2, 2020, formally requests on behalf of Ms. Maxwell that the court modify an existing Protective Order. The modification would permit Ms. Maxwell to refer to and file specific, redacted material under seal.
DOJ-OGR-00001758.jpg
This legal document, dated August 17, 2020, is a filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan on behalf of Ms. Maxwell. It argues for the court's discretion in handling certain materials, citing legal precedent from the Second Circuit for staying civil proceedings during a related criminal case to protect Fifth Amendment rights. The filing also discusses the proper jurisdiction for interpreting a protective order from a separate civil case, suggesting the government has previously agreed that the civil court, not this criminal court, is the appropriate forum.
DOJ-OGR-00001757.jpg
This is page 6 of a legal document dated August 17, 2020, filed in a case before Judge Alison J. Nathan. The filing argues on behalf of Ms. Maxwell for the modification of a Protective Order, claiming that secrecy surrounding a government investigation and grand jury subpoena has undermined the fairness of the adversarial process and unfairly disadvantaged her.
DOJ-OGR-00001756.jpg
This legal document is page 5 of a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated August 17, 2020. The filing argues that the government has violated the spirit of a Protective Order by its handling of discovery materials, particularly in relation to their potential use in civil litigation and a grand jury investigation. The defense cites previous assurances from the government and a letter from Alex Rossmiller, which the Court relied upon, to argue that a new request should be granted by the Court.
DOJ-OGR-00001755.jpg
This is a page from a legal filing dated August 17, 2020, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of Ghislaine Maxwell. The document discusses the government's ex parte applications dating back to February 2019, Maxwell's arrest on July 2, 2020, and the superseding indictment filed on July 8, 2020, which alleges she facilitated Epstein's abuse of minors and committed perjury in 2016. A footnote details the timeline of discovery materials being transferred to the defense counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00001754.jpg
Page 3 of a legal letter addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated August 17, 2020, filed in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The majority of the page is heavily redacted. The visible text under the heading 'The Material' discusses the government contacting an unnamed party prior to February 2019 and serving a subpoena to produce materials, noting that Ms. Maxwell was not served with something specific.
DOJ-OGR-00001753.jpg
This is page 2 of a legal filing from August 17, 2020, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The document concerns a dispute over materials designated as 'Confidential' by the government, arguing that under Second Circuit precedent, they are 'judicial documents' with a right to public access. It states that Ms. Maxwell has objected to the designation and seeks to provide the materials under seal to judicial officers to resolve pending issues.
DOJ-OGR-00001752.jpg
This document is a letter motion dated August 17, 2020, from attorney Jeffrey Pagliuca on behalf of his client, defendant Ghislaine Maxwell, to Judge Alison J. Nathan of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The motion requests a modification of the existing protective order to allow Maxwell's defense to refer to and file under seal certain discovery materials provided by the government on August 5 and August 13, 2020. The defense argues this is necessary for the fair determination of issues in what is referred to as the "Other Matters".
DOJ-OGR-00001747.jpg
This document is a Memorandum Opinion and Order from the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, dated September 2, 2020. It addresses Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to modify a protective order to file discovery materials under seal in civil cases. The Court adopts the Government's proposed redactions, citing the need to balance public access with factors like an ongoing grand jury investigation, and orders the parties to confer on further redactions.
DOJ-OGR-00001746.jpg
This is the final page (4 of 4) of a court order from United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The judge denied the defendant's requests (Dkt. No. 38) without prejudice and ordered the Government to submit status updates every 90 days regarding Maxwell's confinement conditions, specifically focusing on her ability to access legal materials and communicate with counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00001743.jpg
A court order from Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated August 25, 2020. The judge denies Maxwell's requests to immediately disclose the identities of three alleged victims and to order the BOP to move her to the general population, citing that the request for identities is premature as discovery has just begun.
DOJ-OGR-00001742.jpg
This is the second and final page of a court filing (Document 48) dated August 24, 2020, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains the signature block of attorney Laura A. Menninger of Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C., addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan, with a copy sent to all counsel of record.
DOJ-OGR-00001741.jpg
This document is a letter motion dated August 24, 2020, from attorney Laura A. Menninger to Judge Alison J. Nathan of the Southern District of New York. The attorney requests permission to file documents under seal on behalf of her client, Ghislaine Maxwell, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The justification for the request is that the documents contain information designated as confidential by the Government under the terms of the existing Protective Order in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00001740.jpg
This document is the final page of a legal filing from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated August 21, 2020. The Government respectfully requests that the Court schedule a date approximately 180 days in the future for them to provide an update on their position regarding the sealing of documents in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. The filing is submitted by Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss and her assistants Maurene Comey, Alison Moe, and Lara Pomerantz.
Response Deadline
Order to respond to Defendant's letter by 5:00 p.m. on Oct 15, 2021.
Order on Redactions
Judge adopts proposed redactions for specific motions.
Order referenced as Dkt. No. 89
A previous court order from December 7, 2020, which the Defendant's filing was in accordance with.
Endorsement on Letter Motion
The Court sees no basis for sealing this letter. Defendant must justify sealing by Dec 2, 2020, or file publicly.
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN
Legal arguments regarding 'The Material' and subpoena service issues.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity