Honorable Alison J. Nathan
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
AUDREY STRAUSS
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
MAURENE COMEY
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Alison Moe
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Lara Pomerantz
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
organization
United States Attorney's Office
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-08-13 | Legal filing | Filing of Document 41 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. | S.D.N.Y. | View |
| 2020-08-13 | N/A | Filing of Document 41 | Court Docket | View |
DOJ-OGR-00019338.jpg
This legal document, dated August 21, 2020, is a submission from the Acting United States Attorney and Assistant United States Attorneys to Honorable Alison J. Nathan. It argues against the defendant's application to use criminal discovery materials in civil cases, asserting that the application lacks legal justification, attempts to circumvent a protective order, and is irrelevant to the civil litigation. The document suggests the defendant's intent is to falsely accuse the Government and another party.
Request for assurances regarding client's anonymity
Referenced in the opening paragraph.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim informs Judge Nathan that her client, Ghislaine Maxwell, has been unjustifiably placed on suicide watch by the MDC, preventing her from preparing for her sentencing. Sternheim states Maxwell is not suicidal and warns that she will move for an adjournment if the situation persists.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter opposing the motion filed by counsel for Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein to give oral victim impact statements at Ghislaine Maxwell's sentencing hearing. The letter argues that neither individual qualifies as a statutory crime victim under the CVRA.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request for a two-day extension to file sentencing submission due to attorney travel.
Providing a better understanding of Ghislaine Maxwell's b...
A joint letter from Ghislaine Maxwell's siblings to the judge in her case, expressing concern that her traumatic childhood might not be fully considered. They describe a 1961 car accident involving their brother Michael that deeply affected the family during Ghislaine's infancy.
Letter of support for Ghislaine Noelle Marion Maxwell
Catherine Vaughan-Edwards writes to Judge Nathan to offer support for Ghislaine Maxwell ahead of her sentencing. She describes their long-standing friendship, beginning with her employment by Maxwell in 1988, and details their close personal bond over the years, including Maxwell being the godmother to her son.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Requesting a stay of ruling pending review of a new interview given by Juror 50 to Paramount Plus.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter arguing for a new trial for Ghislaine Maxwell based on the assertion that Juror 50 gave false answers on a juror questionnaire regarding his own past sexual abuse, which should have disqualified him from the jury.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request regarding Juror 50's assertion of Fifth Amendment privilege and government immunity.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from the defense proposing limited redactions to an attached Opinion and Order, in response to a Court Order (Dkt. 610) from the same day.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Discussion regarding proposed redactions to documents related to Juror 50's conduct and motion for a new trial.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter submitting documents under seal with proposed redactions concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The redactions are intended to protect the integrity of an inquiry into the conduct of Juror 50 during the voir dire process.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter submitting documents under seal with proposed redactions concerning Ghislaine Maxwell's motion for a new trial. The redactions are intended to protect the integrity of an inquiry into the conduct of Juror 50 during the voir dire process.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from Ghislaine Maxwell's counsel to Judge Nathan, informing her of the filing of a Motion for a New Trial and requesting that submissions related to Juror No. 50 remain under seal.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter from Ghislaine Maxwell's counsel to Judge Nathan, informing her of the filing of a Motion for a New Trial and requesting that submissions related to Juror No. 50 remain under seal.
N/A
Letter referenced in Table of Contents
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Defense counsel arguing against government limitations on Dr. Loftus's testimony and alleging suggestive questioning of witnesses by the government.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Request to release names of potential jurors for attorneys' eyes only to allow for background research.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Defense response regarding jury selection scheduling disputes with the government.
United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Defense counsel submits a response to the Court's Order regarding draft preliminary remarks for jurors. They object to the government's request to withhold prospective juror names until oral voir dire.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
A letter complaining about the delayed delivery of Ghislaine Maxwell's legal mail at the MDC, arguing the government's explanation is inadequate and that the delay is hindering her trial preparation.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Requesting court order for MDC to provide legal mail within one day; detailing delays and potential tampering.
Deadline for Filing Motion under Federal Rule of Evidence...
A letter confirming November 15, 2021, as the deadline for Ghislaine Maxwell to file a motion under Federal Rule of Evidence 412 concerning the admissibility of evidence of an alleged victim's sexual behavior. It clarifies that a Rule 412 motion is not a motion in limine and has specific procedures and deadlines.
Request for an order directed at Mr. Markus to comply wit...
The U.S. Attorney's office submitted a letter to the Court requesting an order against Mr. Markus for violating a previous order and potentially interfering with a fair trial through an Op-Ed and other comments.
Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
Response to government's June 7 letter regarding detention conditions; complaint about sewage, vermin, and document access.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity