Chambers
PersonRelationship Network
EFTA00019404.pdf
An email dated November 22, 2021, from the law firm Cohen & Gresser LLP (representing Ghislaine Maxwell) to Judge Alison J. Nathan's chambers. The email submits a letter regarding proposed limiting instructions related to a Court Opinion and Order from November 19, 2021, noting that the submission is temporarily under seal.
DOJ-OGR-00001802.jpg
This page from a legal filing argues against the defense's position that a co-conspirator committing similar crimes without the defendant constitutes exculpatory evidence under Brady. The Government cites multiple Second Circuit precedents to establish that evidence of a defendant's non-participation in other criminal events or lawful conduct on other occasions is irrelevant to disproving specific charged crimes.
DOJ-OGR-00001000.jpg
This document is page 15 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell based on the case number) dated June 15, 2020. It provides a string citation of legal precedents from the Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.) where judges denied pre-trial bail to defendants during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the defendants citing various health conditions like asthma and diabetes. The text argues that health risks alone have not been sufficient grounds for release in recent comparable cases.
DOJ-OGR-00020629.jpg
This document, dated February 28, 2023, details court orders and filings from July 2020 concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's case. It outlines the scheduling of her remote arraignment, initial conference, and bail hearing for July 14, 2020, including protocols for video appearances, public access, and COVID-19 courthouse entry requirements. The document also references letters from both defense and prosecution counsel regarding scheduling and highlights crime victims' rights under 18 U.S.C. ยง 3771.
DOJ-OGR-00002367.jpg
This page from a court filing argues that the court has the inherent authority to suppress evidence obtained through government misrepresentation. It cites multiple legal precedents to support the claim that sanctions can be applied even if the misconduct occurred in a different venue, provided it is related to the current case.
DOJ-OGR-00002367(1).jpg
This legal document, filed on February 4, 2021, argues that the court has the inherent authority to suppress evidence obtained through the government's misrepresentation. It cites multiple legal precedents to establish that this power is not limited to misconduct within the immediate courtroom but can extend to related actions in other proceedings. The core argument is that the government's deception was essential to obtaining the factual basis for certain counts, and therefore, the resulting evidence should be suppressed.
DOJ-OGR-00002350.jpg
This document is a Table of Authorities from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on February 4, 2021. It lists numerous legal cases from various U.S. courts, including District Courts, Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the Supreme Court, which are cited as legal precedent in the associated document. The cases span from 1972 to 2020 and cover a range of civil and criminal matters.
DOJ-OGR-00002350(1).jpg
This document is a Table of Authorities from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on February 4, 2021. It lists numerous court cases that are cited as legal precedent within the larger document. The cases span from 1972 to 2020 and involve various individuals and corporate entities.
DOJ-OGR-00003009.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues against the admissibility of certain evidence in the case against Epstein. It cites multiple legal precedents establishing that proof of lawful conduct on some occasions is irrelevant to disproving a specific criminal charge. The document applies this to the Epstein case, asserting that a prior investigation's findings about his conduct in the 2000s are irrelevant to the current charges from 1994-1997, and notes that two key victims were only interviewed for the first time in late 2019.
DOJ-OGR-00002947.jpg
This document is page 13 (pagination xii) of a court filing (Document 204) in Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on April 16, 2021. It is a 'Table of Authorities' listing previous legal cases (legal precedents) cited elsewhere in the full brief, predominantly from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the Southern District of New York.
DOJ-OGR-00005515.jpg
This legal document, filed on October 29, 2021, is part of the case against Ms. Maxwell. It argues that evidence of Jeffrey Epstein acting alone or without Ms. Maxwell's knowledge should be admissible to counter the government's conspiracy charge. The filing distinguishes Ms. Maxwell's case from several other legal precedents cited by the government, claiming they are inapplicable to the current situation.
DOJ-OGR-00002891.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing (Document 195) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on April 5, 2021. The text presents legal arguments regarding the limitations of Rule 17 subpoenas in criminal cases, arguing they cannot be used for broad discovery or to find leads, unlike in civil procedure. The text heavily cites legal precedents including *Bowman Dairy Co. v. United States*, *United States v. Purin*, and *United States v. Tagliaferro* to establish the standard for requiring document production.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023384.jpg
This document appears to be page 24 of a legal opinion (2012 WL 257568) regarding 'In re: Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2001.' It discusses the Second Circuit's review of a district court's dismissal of claims under the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA), Alien Tort Statute (ATS), and Torture Victims Protection Act (TVPA). The text critiques the lower court for applying incorrect legal standards regarding 'material support' to al-Qaeda. While the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023384' suggests this was part of a congressional investigation (possibly included in a larger production of documents), the specific text on this page contains no mention of Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, or their specific activities.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_023366.jpg
This document is a page from a Table of Authorities, likely from a legal brief or court opinion related to litigation surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks (specifically 2012 WL 257568). It lists various legal precedents (case law) alphabetically from 'Abrahams' to 'Chambers', including high-profile cases such as 'Ashcroft v. Iqbal' and several cases involving 'Obama' regarding detainees. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production to the House Oversight Committee, though the page itself contains no direct references to Jeffrey Epstein.
Accommodation requests for victims or family
The court order states that counsel for both parties may contact Chambers by email to request accommodation for alleged victims or family members of the Defendant.
Information regarding alleged victims
The United States Attorney's Office was instructed to email Chambers with information about alleged victims who wish to be heard at the bail hearing.
Request to accommodate alleged victims or family members
Counsel for both parties may email Chambers to request accommodation for alleged victims or family members of the Defendant.
Potential communication about significant information
Ms. Brune confirms she had a BlackBerry with immediate e-mail access and could have communicated with the court's chambers.
Potential communication about significant information
The witness, Ms. Brune, confirms she had a BlackBerry with immediate e-mail access and could have communicated with chambers.
Information on alleged victims
The court ordered the United States Attorney's Office to email the Judge's Chambers with information about any alleged victims who wished to be heard at the bail hearing.
Video conference access information
Chambers will email counsel with information on how to access the video conference for the July 14, 2020 proceeding.
Request to accommodate alleged victims or family members ...
The document states that Counsel for the Defendant and the Government may contact Chambers by email with requests for seating accommodations.
Information regarding alleged victims
The U.S. Attorney's Office is instructed to email Chambers with information about alleged victims who wish to be heard at the bail hearing.
Request to accommodate alleged victims or family members
Counsel may contact Chambers by email to request accommodation for alleged victims or family members of the Defendant.
Information regarding alleged victims
The United States Attorney's Office was instructed to email Chambers with information about alleged victims who wish to be heard at the bail hearing.
Request to accommodate alleged victims or family members
Counsel for both sides may contact Chambers by email to request accommodation for alleged victims or family members of the Defendant.
US v. Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Anticipated order of wi...
Submission of a letter regarding the Government's anticipated order of witnesses, with a request to file it under seal.
US v. Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Proposed Redactions
Submission of proposed redactions referenced in the letter at Dkt. No. 486.
RE: US v. Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) - Joint Proposed Juro...
Providing attached Word document versions of the questionnaire and voir dire as requested.
Alleged Victims
Information regarding any alleged victims who are entitled to be heard at the bail hearing.
Video conference access information
Instructions on how to access the video conference for the July 14 hearing.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity