A letter dated August 12, 2021, from U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss (SDNY) to the Legal Department of the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn. The letter provides a password (which is redacted) for a hard drive containing discovery materials related to the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell.
A letter dated November 6, 2021, from U.S. Attorney Damian Williams (SDNY) to the Legal Department of the Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC) in Brooklyn. The letter encloses witness materials relevant to the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (20 Cr. 330) and requests that the inmate, Ghislaine Maxwell (ID 02879-509), be granted access to these materials. The specific names of the Assistant U.S. Attorneys signing the document are redacted.
This document contains a letter dated July 2, 2020, from Acting US Attorney Audrey Strauss to Judge Katharine H. Parker requesting the unsealing of Indictment 20 Cr. 330 against Ghislaine Maxwell. It includes the subsequent court order signed by Judge Parker granting the unsealing. The final page lists the relevant U.S. Code violations including sex trafficking (18 U.S.C. 2422, 2423) and perjury (1623).
A letter dated October 29, 2020, from Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss (SDNY) to the Legal Department of the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn. The letter provides a password (which is redacted in the document) for a CD containing discovery materials related to the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell.
This is page 6 of 10 from a defense motion filed on October 29, 2021, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). The document argues that specific witnesses (whose names are redacted) should be precluded from offering 'overview' testimony or expert opinions because the government failed to provide the required pretrial disclosures under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(1)(G). The text cites *United States v. Brooks* to argue that overview testimony by government agents can improperly influence the jury by introducing credibility assessments or hearsay not in evidence.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity