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-00001359.jpg
This document is a letter from the U.S. Attorney to Judge Alison J. Nathan providing an update on Ghislaine Maxwell's confinement conditions at the MDC. The Government asserts that Maxwell receives exceptional access to discovery materials (13 hours/day, 7 days/week) via both a laptop and desktop. A footnote addresses complaints regarding missing emails, stating that an investigation revealed Maxwell deleted or archived them herself, with no evidence of MDC staff misconduct.
DOJ-OGR-00001357.jpg
This legal document is a letter from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated February 4, 2021. The letter provides an update on the conditions of confinement for the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell, at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The Government reports that Maxwell has more time to review discovery materials than any other inmate (13 hours daily via computer) and has regular, private communication with her attorneys through video and phone calls, despite the suspension of in-person visits due to COVID-19.
DOJ-OGR-00001355.jpg
A letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated February 1, 2021, regarding the conditions of Ghislaine Maxwell's confinement at the MDC. The Government addresses a dispute over Maxwell's access to a laptop for reviewing over two million pages of discovery materials on weekends and holidays. While the Government does not object to the access, they defer to MDC management protocols, noting that Maxwell already receives more review time (13 hours/day, 7 days/week) than any other inmate.
DOJ-OGR-00001353.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated January 25, 2021, from the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The MDC requests the court to vacate a January 15, 2021 order concerning inmate Ghislaine Maxwell, arguing that her access to discovery materials and legal counsel is already extensive and sufficient. A stamped court order dated February 2, 2021, shows that Judge Nathan considered the request and responses from the Government and Defendant, and ultimately denied the MDC's request.
DOJ-OGR-00001352.jpg
This legal document is the second page of a letter dated January 14, 2021, from attorney Christian R. Everdell to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The letter requests that the court order the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to grant his client, Ms. Maxwell, laptop access on weekends and holidays to review millions of discovery documents for her defense. The document includes a signed order from Judge Nathan, dated January 15, 2021, granting this unopposed request.
DOJ-OGR-00001351.jpg
A letter from defense attorney Christian R. Everdell to Judge Alison J. Nathan requesting a court order for the Bureau of Prisons to allow Ghislaine Maxwell access to a government-provided laptop on weekends and holidays. The letter argues that current restrictions hinder her ability to review voluminous discovery before her July 2021 trial, noting that the government does not object to the request and that she previously had full access during a COVID quarantine period.
DOJ-OGR-00001349.jpg
A court order from Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, dated December 8, 2020. The Judge denies Maxwell's request to summon Warden Heriberto Tellez to answer questions about her confinement conditions. However, the Court orders the Government to provide written status updates every 60 days regarding Maxwell's access to legal materials, counsel, and the frequency of searches conducted on her.
DOJ-OGR-00001347.jpg
This document is a letter dated December 4, 2020, from the Federal Bureau of Prisons (MDC Brooklyn) to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the confinement conditions of Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter addresses the judge's concerns about Maxwell's safety, detailing her housing assignment, daily access to common areas and legal materials, and her ability to use the commissary. It notes that staff use flashlights for overnight checks and that Maxwell has been instructed on how to use the Administrative Remedy Program for complaints.
DOJ-OGR-00001345.jpg
This legal document is a joint letter dated December 1, 2020, from the prosecution and defense to Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter details a disagreement between the two parties regarding how to address the defendant's concerns about her conditions of confinement at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The Government proposes a written response from MDC's legal counsel, while the defense insists on a personal court appearance by the warden, Heriberto Tellez.
DOJ-OGR-00001343.jpg
This letter, dated November 23, 2020, is from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It provides an update on the confinement conditions of defendant Ghislaine Maxwell at the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC). The letter details that Maxwell was placed in quarantine after a potential COVID-19 exposure from a staff member, outlines the quarantine protocols, and confirms that she has been provided with a laptop to review discovery materials and can still make private legal calls.
DOJ-OGR-00001287.jpg
A legal letter from defense attorney Bobbi Sternheim to Judge Alison Nathan regarding United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter disputes government claims about Maxwell's confinement conditions at the MDC, highlighting excessive physical searches (approx. 1400 times), lack of legal access, and intense surveillance measures. Sternheim explicitly links these harsh conditions to BOP negligence surrounding the death of Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00001285.jpg
This is a court order dated March 22, 2021, from Judge Alison J. Nathan of the United States District Court. The order denies Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell's third motion for release on bail and instructs the parties to confer about redactions to a reply brief by March 24, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00001274.jpg
This document is page 1 of a Court Order from the Southern District of New York, filed on March 22, 2021, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text outlines the charges against Maxwell (including sex trafficking of minors and perjury) and summarizes the procedural history of her multiple denied attempts to secure bail due to being deemed a flight risk. The document serves as an introduction to a ruling on her third motion for release filed in February 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00001243.jpg
This document is a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice to Judge Alison J. Nathan dated March 9, 2021, opposing Ghislaine Maxwell's third motion for release on bail. The Government argues that the Court lacks jurisdiction due to a pending appeal with the Second Circuit and reiterates that Maxwell poses an extreme flight risk that no conditions can mitigate. The letter references previous denials of bail on July 14, 2020, and December 28, 2020.
DOJ-OGR-00001231.jpg
This legal document is a court order issued by United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan on December 28, 2020. The order explicitly denies the renewed motion for release on bail filed by the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell. The court's decision references a precedent from the 2018 case United States v. Raniere.
DOJ-OGR-00001210.jpg
This document is page 1 of an Opinion and Order filed on December 28, 2020, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the Southern District of New York. The document denies Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed motion for release on bail, reiterating that she poses a significant flight risk and that arguments presented were largely addressed in the previous July 14, 2020 hearing. It lists the specific federal charges against Maxwell, including conspiracy to entice minors and perjury.
DOJ-OGR-00001179.jpg
This legal document, a letter dated December 15, 2020, from Boies Schiller Flexner LLP, contains a statement from Annie Farmer opposing Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed motion for bail. Farmer, a victim of Maxwell, details Maxwell's history of abuse, manipulative behavior, and flight risk, arguing that Maxwell is a psychopath who lacks remorse and would flee to avoid justice. The statement emphasizes the need for Maxwell to stand trial to ensure justice for her victims.
DOJ-OGR-00000900.jpg
This document is a page from a court docket sheet (Case 21-770) covering March 22–24, 2021. It details the denial of Ghislaine Maxwell's third motion for bail by Judge Alison J. Nathan and Maxwell's subsequent notice of appeal. Additionally, it contains a significant order regarding a defense subpoena directed at a law firm representing alleged victims, outlining the procedural requirements for victim notification and privacy protection under Rule 17(c)(3).
DOJ-OGR-00000899.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from Case 21-770 covering February 23, 2021, to March 18, 2021. It details Ghislaine Maxwell's third motion for bond, the Government's opposition to it, and various scheduling orders regarding pretrial motions. A significant order on March 18, 2021, addresses the redaction and sealing of documents, specifically denying the Government's request to completely seal 'Exhibit 11' because portions of the transcript are already public record in the *Giuffre v. Maxwell* civil case.
DOJ-OGR-00000898.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from Case 21-770 (related to Ghislaine Maxwell) covering filings between February 4, 2021, and February 16, 2021. It details numerous defense motions filed by Maxwell's legal team (Cohen, Pagliuca) to dismiss charges, suppress evidence, and strike surplusage, alongside multiple sealed documents. The log also records correspondence to Judge Nathan regarding conditions at the MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center) from both the prosecution (USA) and the defense.
DOJ-OGR-00000897.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering entries from Jan 26 to Feb 4, 2021. It details significant pre-trial activity, including the filing of twelve pre-trial motions by the defense, disputes over laptop access at the MDC Brooklyn involving the Bureau of Prisons, and specific motions to suppress evidence and dismiss charges (counts 1-6). The document highlights the involvement of various AUSAs, defense attorneys, and Judge Alison J. Nathan in managing redactions and discovery disputes.
DOJ-OGR-00000896.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from January 2021 detailing procedural events in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. Key events include the granting of laptop access for discovery review, a subsequent request by the Bureau of Prisons to vacate that order, and the filing of multiple defense motions to dismiss charges or separate trials. The document lists attorneys Christian Everdell, Mark Cohen, and Jeffrey Pagliuca acting on Maxwell's behalf before Judge Alison J. Nathan.
DOJ-OGR-00000895.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from late 2020 and early 2021 detailing proceedings in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It records Judge Alison J. Nathan's denial of Maxwell's bail application due to flight risk, citing specific charges including conspiracy to entice minors for illegal sex acts and perjury. The docket tracks correspondence between the prosecution (USA) and defense (Everdell), sealed documents, and Maxwell's subsequent filing of a Notice of Appeal after a request for an extension of time was denied.
DOJ-OGR-00000893.jpg
This document is a page from the court docket for Case 21-770 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), listing entries from December 10 to December 18, 2020. It records the filing of transcripts from a July 2020 conference, an order by Judge Alison J. Nathan approving redactions for Maxwell's sealed bail application based on privacy interests and judicial efficiency, and the submission of Maxwell's renewed bail motion with numerous exhibits. Additionally, it notes the appearance of attorney Andrew Rohrbach for the government and the government's subsequent opposition to the bail application.
DOJ-OGR-00000892.jpg
This document is a log of court filings from Case 21-770, dated March 24, 2021, detailing events from early December 2020 concerning the defendant, Ghislaine Maxwell. The entries consist of letters from Maxwell's legal team and subsequent orders from Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding procedural matters such as briefing schedules, sealing documents, a renewed motion for bail, and Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the Metropolitan Detention Center. A key event is the Court's denial of Maxwell's request to summon the prison warden to testify about her confinement, instead ordering the Government to continue providing written updates.
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