Trial Judge
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal case/trial | Marshall's trial for a drug-related transaction, which included a four-day adjournment to address... | N/A | View |
| N/A | Legal proceeding | Discussion of the legal doctrine of 'inferred bias' in the context of jury selection and dismissa... | N/A | View |
| 2021-04-01 | N/A | Denial of Ms. Maxwell's bail motion. | Trial Court | View |
| 2020-07-02 | N/A | Arraignment and bond hearing | Zoom (virtual) | View |
DOJ-OGR-00000921.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (Procedural History) dated April 1, 2021, detailing the arrest and bail applications regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. It outlines her arrest on July 2, 2020, the government's allegations that she groomed minors for Jeffrey Epstein, and the subsequent legal motions leading to her detention order following a Zoom hearing where no accusers testified.
DOJ-OGR-00021014.jpg
This legal document details a dispute between the Defendant and the Court regarding how to respond to a deliberating jury's note. The Defendant's initial proposed responses were deemed erroneous, and she later conceded a point about a return flight's potential connection to illegal sexual activity. The document outlines the Defendant's attempts to influence the jury's understanding through specific instructions and supplemental proposals.
DOJ-OGR-00010397.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 29, 2022, details a dispute during a trial over how to respond to a note from a deliberating jury. The Defendant proposed several responses, which the Court deemed legally erroneous, including a simple 'no' and later a request to direct the jury to specific lines of an instruction. The core issue revolves around the Defendant's argument concerning the purpose of a return flight in relation to illegal activity and the Court's discretion in guiding the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00020327.jpg
This legal document is a renewed motion for bond on behalf of appellant Ghislaine Maxwell, dated May 17, 2021. The motion argues against the harsh conditions of her confinement, specifically citing sleep deprivation caused by flashlight checks every 15 minutes for over 318 days. The document refutes the government's justifications for these measures—such as suicide risk or the high-profile nature of the case—as nonsensical and abusive.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017303.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a manuscript or memoir (possibly by Alan Dershowitz) discussing the moral conflict of a defense attorney. The author recounts a specific legal victory involving the 'Hurok bombing' where he utilized the status of an informant, Sheldon Seigel, and an unlawful wiretap to secure the release of clients he knew were guilty of killing a woman named Iris Kones. The text details the judge's anger directed at the attorney and the attorney's lingering guilt over the 'legally proper' but unjust result.
Release of Defendants
Judge expresses anger at the release of guilty parties and blames the attorney.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity