THE COURT
PersonRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00008260.jpg
This is page 16 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 8, 2021. Ms. Comey clarifies procedural questions with the Court regarding the presence of supervisors in the witness room. Mr. Everdell (Defense) raises an issue regarding a 'Touhy request' submitted several weeks prior, seeking a witness from Customs and Border Protection to authenticate border crossing records, noting there are complications but hoping for a resolution or stipulation.
DOJ-OGR-00008258.jpg
This document is page 14 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 8, 2021. Prosecutor Ms. Comey addresses the Court regarding stipulations on evidence, noting a disagreement with the defense regarding the authentication of certain birth certificates and a prior sworn statement. She also indicates the government intends to confer with the defense regarding limits on cross-examination of government witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00008255.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (filed Dec 8, 2021) discussing pre-trial motions in limine. The Court discusses the schedule for ruling on the Government's motion to exclude the testimony of defense expert witnesses Drs. Loftus and Dietz (likely Elizabeth Loftus and Park Dietz). The text also mentions disputes regarding Government Exhibit 52 and the introduction of co-conspirator statements, with a final pretrial conference scheduled for November 23.
DOJ-OGR-00008253.jpg
This court transcript from December 8, 2021, captures a discussion between a judge and attorneys regarding jury selection. The judge sets a goal of qualifying 50-60 jurors and clarifies the procedure for conducting private sidebars with jurors, which will be limited to one attorney per side to protect confidential information. The attorneys ask questions to understand these courtroom procedures.
DOJ-OGR-00008249.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 8, 2021. The judge outlines the specific logistical procedures for the upcoming jury selection (voir dire), including the advance distribution of juror lists, the daily meeting schedule, and how juror panels will be handled. Counsel for the government (Ms. Comey) and another counsel (Ms. Menninger) both affirm they have no questions about the outlined process.
DOJ-OGR-00008248.jpg
This document is page 4 of a court transcript filed on December 8, 2021, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It details a discussion between the Court and defense attorney Ms. Menninger regarding the classification of prospective jurors 226 and 404. The judge outlines the logistics for voir dire, planning to call back 231 prospective jurors in groups of 50 per day to seat a final qualified pool of 50 to 60.
DOJ-OGR-00008242.jpg
This document is page 6 of a legal filing from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330), dated December 6, 2021. It argues against the defense's claim that a witness named Jane waived her attorney-client privilege regarding advice received from her lawyer, Glassman, about cooperating with the government. The text asserts that Jane did not authorize a waiver, did not testify about privileged communications, and that any statements made by Glassman to the government do not constitute a subject matter waiver for Jane.
DOJ-OGR-00008240.jpg
This document is page 4 of a court filing from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 6, 2021. It details a judicial rejection of defense arguments that a witness named 'Jane' waived attorney-client privilege by cooperating with the government. The court rules that essential information regarding credibility does not automatically void privilege, citing Rule 403 and previous transcripts.
DOJ-OGR-00001911.jpg
This document is a transcript from a court proceeding filed on December 10, 2020. In it, a speaker identified as Ms. Moe argues that the defendant is a flight risk due to significant financial resources. Ms. Moe cites bank records from January 2019 showing the defendant's annual income is between $200,000 and $500,000, net worth is over $10 million, and that the defendant is the grantor of a trust with over $4 million in assets.
DOJ-OGR-00001910.jpg
This document is page 33 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 10, 2020. The discussion between the Court and prosecutor Ms. Moe concerns the details of the defendant's arrest, specifically confirming that the defendant ignored law enforcement commands to open the door and retreated to a separate room. The Court also notes an allegation that the defendant attempted to block location monitoring by wrapping a cell phone in foil.
DOJ-OGR-00001899.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a hearing on December 10, 2020, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. The judge rules to set a firm trial date for July 12, 2021, justifying the delay as necessary for discovery and preparation, and finding it serves the ends of justice. The court then prepares to hear arguments regarding the government's motion for the defendant's detention.
DOJ-OGR-00001898.jpg
This document is page 21 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 10, 2020. The proceedings involve Judge Nathan setting a trial date for July 12, 2021, and establishing deadlines for pretrial motions. Prosecutor Ms. Moe requests to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act to facilitate discovery review, to which the defense (represented by Mr. Cohen) does not object regarding scheduling.
DOJ-OGR-00001890.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript dated December 10, 2020, from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. A representative for the government informs the judge that they are prepared for discovery and have collaborated with defense counsel on a proposed schedule for the trial. The government representative emphasizes their commitment to a thorough review of materials, including an ongoing privilege review of electronic data, and mentions the bulk of materials will be produced by the end of summer. The judge then begins to question the representative about issues with complete disclosure seen in other cases.
DOJ-OGR-00001888.jpg
This document is page 11 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 10, 2020. In this excerpt, the Defendant (Maxwell) waives the public reading of the indictment and formally enters a plea of 'Not guilty.' The Court then transitions to a scheduling conference and asks prosecutor Ms. Moe for a status update regarding the discovery process.
DOJ-OGR-00001886.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on December 10, 2020. The judge justifies holding the proceeding with COVID-19 safety restrictions, citing a national emergency and public safety, before turning to the arraignment on an S1 superseding indictment. The judge then begins to question counsel, Ms. Moe, about the specifics of this new indictment compared to the original.
DOJ-OGR-00001883.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on December 10, 2020. It records a dialogue between defense attorney Mr. Cohen, the Judge ('The Court'), and the defendant, Ms. Maxwell. The discussion concerns Maxwell waiving her right to be physically present for the proceeding and agreeing to proceed via videoconference, with the judge confirming the waiver is knowing and voluntary.
DOJ-OGR-00001881.jpg
Page 4 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated December 10, 2020. The text records the opening of a remote arraignment and bail hearing, with the Judge (The Court) confirming the presence of counsel Ms. Moe, Court Reporter Kristen Carannante, and Pretrial Services Officer Leah Harmon. The Judge notes the proceeding is being held remotely due to the COVID-19 pandemic under the CARES Act.
DOJ-OGR-00001880.jpg
This document is a court transcript from December 10, 2020, for case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. The judge begins by confirming that the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, and counsel, Mr. Cohen, have a working audio connection. Another individual, Ms. Moe, interrupts to report that the public call-in line is full and proposes an alternative for her colleagues to listen, which the court questions due to concerns about speakerphone feedback.
DOJ-OGR-00001745.jpg
This is page 3 of a court order (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) filed on August 25, 2020, concerning Ghislaine Maxwell. The Court denies Maxwell's request for an order against the BOP regarding her surveillance and confinement conditions, citing security concerns and deference to prison administrators. However, the Court orders the Government to provide written status updates every 90 days regarding any changes to her conditions to ensure she can participate in her defense.
DOJ-OGR-00001744.jpg
This document is page 2 of a court order filed on August 25, 2020, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Court addresses the Defendant's request regarding pretrial disclosure schedules (denied without prejudice) and conditions of confinement. Specifically, the Court denies Maxwell's request for a court order mandating her release to the general population and specific discovery access, noting that the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) has already modified conditions to allow her 13 hours of access to discovery materials daily.
DOJ-OGR-00001619.jpg
This document is page 9 of a government filing (Document 22) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on July 13, 2020. The text argues that the defendant is a significant flight risk, citing her demonstrated skill at living in hiding and her steps to conceal herself after Jeffrey Epstein's indictment. The government contends that her decision to remain in the US previously does not mitigate the risk now that she faces a six-count indictment and the reality of a potential lengthy prison sentence.
DOJ-OGR-00001296.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court order filed on February 8, 2021, regarding United States v. Robertson (Case 1:17-cr-02949-MV). The court is reconsidering and granting Mr. Robertson's release to the La Pasada Halfway House due to trial delays caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the inability to hold in-person attorney-client meetings at the Albuquerque courthouse. The court cites 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e) and strict conditions as the basis for assuring community safety and the defendant's appearance.
DOJ-OGR-00001275.jpg
This document is page 2 of a court order filed on March 22, 2021 (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), denying the Defendant's (Ghislaine Maxwell, implied) third motion for release on bail. The Court rejects new proposals, including renouncing French and British citizenship and asset monitoring, citing continued flight risk, substantial resources, and foreign ties. It references previous denials from July and December 2020 and confirms her continued incarceration at the Metropolitan Detention Center.
DOJ-OGR-00001219.jpg
This document is page 10 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The court argues that the government's case is strong, citing anticipated testimony from three witnesses regarding the enticement of minors and corroborating flight records linking the Defendant to Epstein. The court concludes that the strength of the case creates a flight risk, supported by the Defendant's international ties, foreign citizenships, and significant financial resources.
DOJ-OGR-00001215.jpg
This document is page 6 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in Case 20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The text details the Court's rejection of the Defendant's arguments for release on bail, despite her offer to pay for private security guards, her claims of family ties in the US, and her offer to waive extradition rights from the UK and France. The Court concludes that no conditions can reasonably assure her appearance, dismissing arguments regarding COVID-19 prison conditions.
| Date | Type | From | To | Amount | Description | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $750,000.00 | Total fine imposed. | View |
| N/A | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $250,000.00 | Fine imposed on each count. | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $9,500,000.00 | Value of real property offered as collateral. | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | security company | THE COURT | $1,000,000.00 | Bond co-signed by a security company. | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $550,000.00 | Cash offered as collateral. | View |
| 2021-03-23 | Received | Ghislaine Maxwell... | THE COURT | $28,500,000.00 | Proposed total bond amount. | View |
| 2020-12-14 | Received | Sureties (Family/... | THE COURT | $0.00 | Meaningful pledges of cash or property in amoun... | View |
| 2020-07-13 | Received | Unidentified co-s... | THE COURT | $5,000,000.00 | Proposed bond amount by the defense, which the ... | View |
| 2020-07-10 | Received | Co-signers (Sibli... | THE COURT | $5,000,000.00 | Proposed bond amount to secure Maxwell's appear... | View |
| 2020-07-10 | Received | Defense/Co-signers | THE COURT | $3,750,000.00 | Value of real property in the United Kingdom of... | View |
| 2020-07-10 | Received | Co-signers (Sibli... | THE COURT | $5,000,000.00 | Proposed bond amount to secure appearance. | View |
| 2020-07-10 | Received | Ms. Maxwell / Ass... | THE COURT | $3,750,000.00 | Value of real property in the United Kingdom us... | View |
| 2020-01-01 | Received | GHISLAINE MAXWELL | THE COURT | $22,500,000.00 | Proposed bond amount representing all of the co... | View |
| 2019-07-18 | Received | MR. EPSTEIN | THE COURT | $0.00 | Defense offer to put up 'any amount' of collate... | View |
| 2019-07-11 | Received | Jeffrey Epstein | THE COURT | $77,000,000.00 | Valuation of Manhattan residence to be mortgage... | View |
| 2010-07-01 | Received | Epstein's counsel | THE COURT | $5,000.00 | Proposed sanction fine for discovery violations. | View |
Unknown question regarding instructions
Jury sent a note; Judge is responding by referring them to instruction number 21.
Response to Note
So I received your note. I refer you to instruction number 21 on page 28. Please consider the entirety of the instruction.
Impartiality
Asked if he had any doubt about ability to be fair; Juror 50 said 'no'.
Clarification on charges
Indicated confusion regarding Count Four and jurisdiction.
Supplemental Instruction for Count Four
Proposed language clarifying that intent must relate to activity within New York state.
Dkt. No. 270
States that MDC staff conduct flashlight checks of all inmates as a matter of course.
Dkt. No. 191
Regarding the subpoena served on BSF.
Question regarding liability and facts
A note posing a question that led to debate over accomplice liability and flight arrangements.
Jury Instructions
Requesting instruction on 'purpose of travel' and arguing lack of evidence for return flight arrangement.
Jury Selection / Voir Dire
The Court questions a juror about their exposure to case information, availability for a six-week trial starting Nov 29, and familiarity with lists of names and entities involved in the case.
Juror Screening
Document Juror 50 is seeking a copy of.
Jury Note
A note signed by the foreperson that attorneys are discussing; requires redaction of signature.
Dkt. No. 46
Publicly available letter discussing the issue.
Regarding subpoena
Referenced as Dkt. No. 191, mentioning the request for a victim's diary.
Jury Selection
False denials regarding victim status and social media usage.
Motion to Unseal
A 3.5 page motion to unseal grand jury materials filed without supporting docs.
Maxwell Post-Hearing Br. / Maxwell Br.
Arguments regarding Juror 50's bias.
Format inquiry
Inquiring if a specific format was satisfactory.
Missing Jurors
Asking if the Court has attempted to call the missing jurors.
Argument on the merits of Juror 50's motion to intervene
Previews argument regarding Juror 50's motion, claiming it is a discovery request.
Initial Bail Hearing
Proffer that testimony would be corroborated by 'significant contemporaneous documentary evidence'.
Request for Evidence
"We would like the FBI deposition 3505-005 referred to by the defense during the cross-examination of Carolyn."
Juror Screening
Written questionnaire and in-person questioning.
Sentencing Guidelines / Supervisory Role
Ms. Moe argues that trial evidence proves Maxwell supervised Sarah Kellen, satisfying the requirement for an organizer/leader enhancement.
Jury Questionnaire
Documents containing answers regarding prior experience with sexual assault.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity