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-00002875.jpg
This legal document, dated March 29, 2021, is a filing from the Government to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It clarifies the role of the FBI New York Office in an investigation conducted by the FBI Florida Office, stating that the New York office provided only 'ancillary support' by interviewing four witnesses between 2007 and 2008. The document asserts that this assistance did not make the New York office part of the prosecution team and that such inter-office cooperation is common.
DOJ-OGR-00002872.jpg
A court order filed on March 29, 2021, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Judge orders that specific pages (129–134) of the Government's brief be unredacted because the information is already public record in a superseding indictment. The Judge also addresses proposed redactions related to the civil case Giuffre v. Maxwell, requiring separate justification for maintaining those seals.
DOJ-OGR-00002748.jpg
This document is a letter from the U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated March 9, 2021, opposing Ghislaine Maxwell's third motion for release on bail. The Government argues that the motion should be denied because the Court lacks jurisdiction due to a pending appeal with the Second Circuit, and because Maxwell continues to pose an extreme flight risk as previously established in July and December 2020 rulings.
DOJ-OGR-00020129.jpg
This document is page 2 of a court order (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) denying Ghislaine Maxwell's renewed motion for release on bail. The court cites her substantial resources, foreign ties (including citizenship in a non-extradition country), history of living in hiding, and lack of candor regarding finances as reasons for considering her a flight risk. The background section outlines the timeline of her indictment in June 2020, arrest in New Hampshire in July 2020, and the previous denial of bail on July 14, 2020.
DOJ-OGR-00008829.jpg
This legal letter, dated January 25, 2022, from Nathan Siegel of Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, on behalf of ABC News and NBCUniversal News Group, is addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan of the U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York. It requests to join other news organizations in opposing the sealing of the Defendant's motion for a new trial and supporting exhibits, and specifically asks for Juror 50's motion to be unsealed, citing its relevance as a "judicial document" to the judicial process.
DOJ-OGR-00008822.jpg
This is a legal letter dated January 19, 2022, from attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter serves to inform the court that Maxwell's counsel has filed a Motion for a New Trial and requests that all materials concerning Juror No. 50 be kept under seal until the court rules on the motion.
DOJ-OGR-00008821.jpg
A letter motion filed by the U.S. Department of Justice on January 18, 2022, requesting Judge Alison J. Nathan to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act for Counts 7 and 8 of the Ghislaine Maxwell case until April 1, 2022. The document includes a handwritten endorsement and order signed by Judge Nathan on January 19, 2022, granting the request to allow parties to research and brief post-trial motions. The filing indicates that defense counsel consented to the request.
DOJ-OGR-00008819.jpg
This document is the second and final page (signature page) of a court filing (Document 577) from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It was signed by United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan on January 14, 2022, in New York.
DOJ-OGR-00008818.jpg
This court order, issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on January 14, 2022, addresses scheduling in the criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order sets Maxwell's sentencing for June 28, 2022, delays the presentence investigation report until April 2022, and defers proceedings on severed perjury counts until post-verdict motions are resolved. The government and defense are instructed to submit a joint letter by January 18, 2022, regarding the Speedy Trial Act.
DOJ-OGR-00008817.jpg
This is a court order from United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated January 14, 2022, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The order reminds the involved parties that they must comply with Second Circuit law requiring court notice and permission before any contact with jurors post-trial. It explicitly states that any failure to follow this precedent must be reported to the Court immediately.
DOJ-OGR-00008815.jpg
This is a court order from United States District Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated January 12, 2022, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The order states that if a future submission from 'Juror 50' is allowed, the Court will grant the juror's legal counsel access to the ECF (Electronic Case Files) docketing system.
DOJ-OGR-00008811.jpg
This legal document is a joint letter dated January 10, 2022, from the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter proposes a schedule for sentencing and the resolution of severed perjury counts as directed by the court. The Government's position is to schedule the sentencing proceeding approximately three to four months from the date of the letter to allow time for a Presentence Investigation Report and resolution of post-trial motions.
DOJ-OGR-00008810.jpg
This is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell on January 5, 2022. The order states that because Juror Number 50 has secured their own legal representation ("retained counsel"), the court will not appoint CJA (Criminal Justice Act) counsel for them. The juror's counsel is directed to review a previous docket entry.
DOJ-OGR-00008808.jpg
This document is the second page of a court order from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on January 5, 2022. Judge Alison J. Nathan sets a specific briefing schedule for upcoming motions, establishing deadlines for the Defense motion, Government opposition, and Defense reply in February and March 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00008807.jpg
This document is a Court Order filed on January 5, 2022, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order establishes a briefing schedule for the Defense's motion for a new trial and addresses the appointment of counsel for a juror regarding potential inquiries into juror conduct. The document also notes that the court will not adjourn post-trial briefing on other issues.
DOJ-OGR-00008806.jpg
This legal document, dated January 5, 2022, is a filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, addressed to The Honorable Alison J. Nathan. It indicates that Ms. Maxwell (Ghislaine Maxwell) suggests examining deliberating jurors to evaluate their conduct and is in the process of drafting a Rule 33 motion. The document lists several attorneys and their respective law firms representing Ghislaine Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00008804.jpg
This document is a letter dated January 5, 2022, from attorney Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Pagliuca argues against the government's request for a hearing concerning a juror who revealed post-trial that they were a victim of sexual assault. He contends the request is premature and that, based on publicly available information and legal precedent, the court should order a new trial without an evidentiary hearing.
DOJ-OGR-00008803.jpg
This document is the final page (Page 3 of 3) of a court filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains the closing details of a letter addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The filing date in the header is January 5, 2022, though the text date reads 'January 5, 2021' (likely a typographical error common in early January). It lists a New York address and phone number, indicates copies were sent to all counsel of record, and bears a DOJ bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00008798.jpg
The U.S. Department of Justice submitted a letter to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter informs the court that a juror has given multiple press interviews, revealing that he was a victim of sexual abuse and asserted that he "flew through" the juror questionnaire. The government brings these statements to the court's attention as they may have implications for the integrity of the jury selection process.
DOJ-OGR-00008797.jpg
This is a court order issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan on January 3, 2022, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The order directs the prosecution and defense to submit a joint letter by January 10, 2022, proposing schedules for post-trial motions and sentencing. The order also addresses the defense's inquiry about a COVID-19 booster shot for Maxwell, instructing her counsel to follow the procedures of the MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center).
DOJ-OGR-00008795.jpg
This legal document, dated December 27, 2021, is a filing to Judge Alison J. Nathan arguing that the jury in Ms. Maxwell's trial is confused. The author contends that the court's response to a jury note improperly allows them to consider conduct that occurred in New Mexico as a basis for conviction on counts requiring a violation of New York law. The filing cites legal precedent to argue that New York lacks jurisdiction over conduct occurring entirely out-of-state and that this issue could warrant vacating a potential conviction.
DOJ-OGR-00008794.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing from December 2021, presents an argument from Ms. Maxwell's defense to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The defense contends that a supplemental jury instruction given by the court was incorrect and prejudicial, citing multiple Second Circuit precedents to argue that confusing or misleading instructions at a critical stage of deliberation can be grounds for reversal. The filing asserts that this error applies to multiple counts and requests a curative instruction.
DOJ-OGR-00008793.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal submission to Judge Alison J. Nathan (dated Dec 27, 2021) in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The text argues that the jury must be instructed not to convict Maxwell on Count Four based on the victim 'Jane's' travel to New Mexico, as the indictment specifically charged travel to New York. The defense contends that a conviction based on the New Mexico events would constitute a 'constructive amendment' or 'variance' from the indictment, which is reversible error.
DOJ-OGR-00008791.jpg
This legal document, dated December 27, 2021, is a filing addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the trial of Ms. Maxwell. The filing argues that without specific jury instructions, there is a risk of the jury convicting Ms. Maxwell based on a 'constructive amendment' to the indictment, which would be a per se violation of her constitutional rights. The argument is supported by citing several legal precedents from the Second Circuit and the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00008788.jpg
This document is a final verdict sheet from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, filed on December 19, 2021, for the criminal case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The sheet, presided over by Judge Alison J. Nathan, lists three counts against Maxwell related to conspiracy and enticement of minors for illegal sexual activity. It provides spaces for a jury to indicate a verdict of "Guilty" or "Not Guilty" for each count.
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