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-00010526.jpg
This is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on June 21, 2022, in the criminal case of the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order establishes the procedure for victims who wish to make a statement at sentencing, requiring them to submit a written statement via email to the Victim Witness Unit by noon on June 23, 2022. The Government is also ordered to inform the Defendant of any anticipated victim impact statements by 2:00 p.m. on the same day.
DOJ-OGR-00010524.jpg
A court order filed on June 17, 2022, by Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell. The order schedules the sentencing for June 28, 2022, at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse in New York and outlines logistics for press, public, and victim access, while prohibiting electronic devices and telephone dial-in access.
DOJ-OGR-00010516.jpg
This document is a letter dated August 24, 2021, from Dr. Alexander S. Bardey of Fifth Avenue Forensics to Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys, Laura Menninger and Bobbi Sternheim. Dr. Bardey outlines the process of an ongoing forensic psychiatric evaluation of Ms. Maxwell, conducted to assess her mental state and flight risk in relation to a pending bail application. The evaluation included 14 meetings with Maxwell, a review of her history and legal documents, and a collateral interview with her counsel and acquaintance, Leah Saffian.
DOJ-OGR-00010510.jpg
This document is a character reference letter written by Harriett Jagger to Judge Alison J. Nathan on May 5, 2022, in support of Ghislaine Maxwell. Jagger describes a 45-year friendship beginning at school when they were 15, characterizing Maxwell as kind, engaging, and supportive during Jagger's personal hardships, such as a marital separation. Despite acknowledging Maxwell's conviction, Jagger affirms her unchanged support and regular correspondence with Maxwell during her imprisonment.
DOJ-OGR-00010507.jpg
This document is a letter of support dated April 24, 2022, from Catherine Vaughan-Edwards to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell. Vaughan-Edwards describes her long-standing relationship with Maxwell, which began when Maxwell employed her in 1988 and evolved into a close, personal friendship. The letter aims to provide a positive character reference for Maxwell by highlighting their enduring bond, including Maxwell's role as godmother to one of Vaughan-Edwards' sons, to be considered by the court during sentencing.
DOJ-OGR-00010501.jpg
This is a letter of support from Ian Maxwell to Judge Alison J. Nathan, written on April 29, 2022, regarding his sister, Ghislaine, who has been found guilty of unspecified charges. Maxwell attests to his sister's good character over their 60+ year relationship, highlighting her generosity through donations, paying for family members' education, and providing financial and housing support to friends and family, including himself. He also notes her personal achievements and courage during her incarceration, appealing to the judge to consider these positive aspects of her character.
DOJ-OGR-00010490.jpg
This document is a character reference letter submitted to Judge Alison J. Nathan by James 'Jamie' Martin Hollomon, a psychotherapist and lawyer, on May 2, 2022, regarding the sentencing of Ghislaine Maxwell. Hollomon details a long-standing family friendship between the Hollomons and the Maxwells dating back to the 1950s through their fathers, Dr. Herbert Hollomon and Robert Maxwell. The author recounts staying with the Maxwell family in Oxford in 1966 when Ghislaine was five years old and returning for work experience in 1980.
DOJ-OGR-00010486.jpg
This is a joint letter dated May 3, 2022, from Ghislaine Maxwell's siblings, Anne Holve and Dr. Philip Maxwell, to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The authors express concern that the legal process may not fully account for Ghislaine's traumatic background, specifically citing a 1961 car accident that left their brother Michael in a coma for seven years, an event which occurred when Ghislaine was three days old and deeply impacted the family.
DOJ-OGR-00010416.jpg
The U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York submitted a letter motion to Judge Alison J. Nathan in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The motion, dated May 11, 2022, requests the exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act for two counts until Maxwell's scheduled sentencing on June 28, 2022. The government intends to dismiss these counts but seeks the exclusion as a precaution, noting that the defense counsel consents to the request, which was granted by the judge.
DOJ-OGR-00010414.jpg
This document is a letter from the United States Attorney to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter concerns the government's motion for the exclusion of time for Counts Seven and Eight under the Speedy Trial Act until June 28, 2022, the scheduled date of sentencing.
DOJ-OGR-00010413.jpg
Defense attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim submitted a letter to Judge Alison J. Nathan on May 10, 2022, requesting a two-day extension for Ghislaine Maxwell's sentencing submission due to a pre-existing travel commitment. Although the government consented to the request, Judge Nathan explicitly denied the extension via an order stamped on the document dated May 11, 2022. The sentencing remained scheduled for June 28, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00010411.jpg
This document is the final page of a court order from April 2022 in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (referenced by case number 1:20-cr-00330). Judge Alison J. Nathan denies the defendant's motion regarding pre-indictment delay but grants the motion regarding multiplicity, ruling that Counts One and Five overlap with Count Three. Consequently, the conviction is formally entered on Counts Three, Four, and Six only, with sentencing scheduled for June 28, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00010367.jpg
This legal document is an Opinion & Order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, dated April 29, 2022, concerning the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The document, authored by Judge Alison J. Nathan, provides background on Maxwell's 2020 indictment for sex trafficking with Jeffrey Epstein, the subsequent thirteen-day trial, and the jury's guilty verdict on five of six counts. It introduces the defendant's post-trial motions, which argue for vacating some or all of her convictions.
DOJ-OGR-00010366.jpg
This is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on April 26, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell in the Southern District of New York. The order sets a new, advanced schedule for sentencing submissions from both the prosecution and defense, following a letter from the Government. The schedule outlines several deadlines in May and June 2022, culminating in the final sentencing hearing on June 28, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00010364.jpg
This is a letter dated April 25, 2022, from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The Government requests that the court order the Probation Office to complete its revised Presentence Investigation Report (PSR) earlier than the currently scheduled date of June 21, 2022. The letter argues that the current schedule, which has the revised PSR due on the same day as the defendant's sentencing submission, does not allow the parties sufficient time to incorporate the report's findings into their own submissions before the June 28 sentencing.
DOJ-OGR-00010363.jpg
In this court order dated April 1, 2022, Judge Alison J. Nathan denies the Defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell) motion for a new trial, concluding that Juror 50 harbored no bias and the selection process was not deliberately flawed. The Court orders a presentence investigation report and confirms that sentencing remains scheduled for June 28, 2022. Additionally, time is excluded under the Speedy Trial Act regarding specific counts through April 22, 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00010324.jpg
This document is the first page of an Opinion & Order filed on April 1, 2022, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order addresses the defendant's motion for a new trial based on the allegation that 'Juror 50' provided inaccurate information regarding a history of sexual abuse during jury selection. The text outlines the legal standards for impartial juries and notes that an uncommon post-trial hearing was conducted to investigate the juror's conduct.
DOJ-OGR-00010321.jpg
Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim writes to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell case on April 1, 2022. The letter informs the court of a new Paramount Plus interview with 'Juror 50' that promises a 'bombshell revelation,' which may impact Maxwell's pending motion for a new trial. Sternheim requests a stay of any ruling until the defense and court can review the content of this interview.
DOJ-OGR-00010319.jpg
This legal document is a letter dated April 1, 2022, from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The government requests an extension, specifically an exclusion of time under the Speedy Trial Act, until April 22, 2022, for Counts Seven and Eight in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. This extension is sought to allow parties to continue researching and briefing pending post-trial motions, which the government argues is in the interests of justice.
DOJ-OGR-00010307.jpg
This is a letter dated March 15, 2022, from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The attorney argues for a new trial for Maxwell, claiming that a juror, identified as 'Juror 50', provided false answers on his juror questionnaire by failing to disclose his own history of sexual abuse. The letter asserts that the juror's testimony at a subsequent hearing was not credible and that his presence on the jury was improper, warranting a retrial.
DOJ-OGR-00009775.jpg
This document is a portion of a juror questionnaire for case 20-cr-000389-AEN, filed on March 24, 2022. The respondent, identified as Juror ID 50, attests that they do not personally know and have had no dealings with any of the listed defense attorneys or the presiding judge, Alison J. Nathan. The juror's negative responses indicate no known conflicts of interest with the key legal figures in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00009691.jpg
This is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on March 9, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order confirms that, following a hearing, the court has docketed several case documents, including an Opinion & Order and a signed immunity order, with limited redactions to protect juror anonymity. The judge further orders that the unredacted versions of these documents will be filed under seal.
DOJ-OGR-00009677.jpg
This document is a portion of a juror questionnaire from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on March 9, 2022. Juror ID 50 attests that they do not know and have no past or present dealings with any of the listed defense attorneys (Christian Everdell, Jeffrey Pagliuca, Laura Menninger, Bobbi Sternheim) or the presiding judge, Alison J. Nathan. The responses indicate no declared conflicts of interest between the potential juror and the key legal figures in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00009658.jpg
This document is page 21 of a legal filing in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, dated March 1, 2022, and addressed to The Honorable Alison J. Nathan. It consists of a series of questions directed at a juror from the trial, focusing on their reasons for speaking publicly after the verdict. The questions probe the juror's statements to the media, their social media posts revealing their role, and their perspective as a survivor of childhood sexual abuse serving on the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00009656.jpg
This document, a page from a legal filing dated March 1, 2022, argues that jurors in high-profile trials often seek to profit from their experience, becoming 'instant celebrities'. It cites numerous examples from the Michael Jackson, O.J. Simpson, Scott Peterson, Derek Chauvin, and Robert Durst trials where jurors sold trial materials, received book advances, gave paid interviews, and secured employment as consultants. The filing suggests that the proliferation of media has increased the opportunities and incentives for jurors to capitalize on their service, potentially influencing their behavior.
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