Brown
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
GHISLAINE MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
5 | |
|
person
MAXWELL
|
Legal representative |
10
Very Strong
|
6 | |
|
person
Unnamed Questioner
|
Professional |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
Craven
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
Gilchrist
|
Professional |
6
|
1 | |
|
person
MR. ROHRBACH
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Government Exhibit 22
|
Subject of testimony |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
ROHRBACH
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
organization
DMV/DL (Department of Motor Vehicles/Driver's License)
|
Employee |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal case | Civil case cited as 'Brown v. Maxwell', where the Court released summary judgment material. | N/A | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Court testimony | Direct examination of witness Brown regarding the New York State DMV 'compass database' and the a... | Courtroom (implied) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Direct examination of witness Brown in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | Court (Southern District) | View |
| 2022-08-10 | N/A | Court testimony authenticating Government Exhibit 21 | Courtroom (Southern Distric... | View |
| 2022-08-10 | Legal testimony | Direct examination of a witness named Brown regarding the procedures of the Department of Motor V... | Courtroom or legal proceeding | View |
| 2021-01-11 | Legal decision | Certiorari denied for United States v. Brown, 800 F. App’x 455 (9th Cir. 2020). | U.S. Supreme Court | View |
| 2019-01-01 | Legal proceeding | In Brown v. Maxwell, third-party intervenors, including members of the press, appealed an order d... | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2019-01-01 | Legal case | The case of Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 2019) is cited as a reference for the nature o... | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2019-01-01 | Legal case | The case of Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41, 50 (2d Cir. 2019) is cited. | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2019-01-01 | Legal case | Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 2019) | 2d Cir. | View |
| 2019-01-01 | Legal ruling | A ruling was made in the case of Brown v. Maxwell. | Second Circuit | View |
| 2019-01-01 | Legal case | Legal case cited: Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41 (2d Cir. 2019). | N/A | View |
| 2008-01-16 | Legal case | Citation for United States v. Brown, 2008 WL 161146. | U.S. District Court for the... | View |
| 2002-04-26 | Legal case | Citation for United States v. Brown, 2002 WL 34244994. | U.S. Court of Appeals for t... | View |
| 2002-04-26 | Legal case decision | Decision in the case of U.S. v. Brown. | 2d Cir. | View |
| 1990-01-01 | Legal case | Citation for United States v. Brown, 744 F. Supp. 558. | U.S. District Court for the... | View |
| 1981-01-01 | Legal case | The Second Circuit declined to follow a Ninth Circuit precedent in the case United States v. Brown. | Second Circuit | View |
| 1981-01-01 | Court case | United States v. Brown, where the Second Circuit declined to follow Ninth Circuit precedent and r... | Second Circuit | View |
EFTA00037104.pdf
This document is a legal letter dated October 19, 2023, from a coalition of 17 State Attorneys General (led by New Mexico AG Raúl Torrez) to Judge Jed S. Rakoff regarding the case Doe v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. The Attorneys General object to Section 1.25 of the proposed settlement, which attempts to release 'sovereign or government' claims. They argue this language improperly interferes with their authority to bring parens patriae actions under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) on behalf of trafficking victims, contrasting this with the Deutsche Bank settlement which did not contain such a release.
EFTA00034944.pdf
This is a Daily Activity Report from the Metropolitan Correctional Center in New York dated July 27, 2019, covering activities from the previous day. It documents that Jeffrey Epstein (#76318-054) was on suicide watch with an inmate companion and notes media presence outside the facility regarding a 'possible suicide attempt.' The report also highlights staff shortages affecting correctional assignments in unit 10-South and lists various inmate admissions, releases, and internal movements.
EFTA00034860.pdf
This document is a Daily Activity Report from the Metropolitan Correctional Center (MCC) New York dated July 9, 2019, covering activities from the previous day, July 8, 2019. It notes a significant staff shortage resulting in the vacation of correctional assignment '10-South #2' during both day and evening shifts, and reports that the fire suppression system was inoperative. Crucially, it records that inmate Jeffrey Epstein (#76318-054) was placed on 'Psych Obs' (Psychological Observation) during the Evening Watch shift.
EFTA00033707.pdf
Bureau of Prisons Daily Lieutenant's Log for MCC New York dated August 5, 2019. The log notes critical infrastructure failures including an inoperable fire alarm/pump system and a malfunctioning public address system just days before Jeffrey Epstein's death. It lists inmate movements, counts, and notes that an inmate named Benjamin (not Epstein's ID) was on suicide watch with an inmate companion.
EFTA00032738.pdf
This document is a Law360 email newsletter from June 17, 2021, summarizing various legal news stories in New York. A key item reports that Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys complained to a judge about prison conditions, specifically alleging that feces rained down in her cell and guards listened to privileged conversations. Other stories cover Greenberg Traurig lobbying for a bill aiding a Russian oligarch, various financial settlements, and legal industry news.
EFTA00032732.pdf
This document is an email newsletter from White Collar Law360 dated June 17, 2021, providing summaries of various legal news stories. Key articles include updates on Biden's anti-corruption push, a Russian oligarch client of Greenberg Traurig, and a specific report on Ghislaine Maxwell complaining about prison conditions, including 'raw sewage' and guards monitoring her legal calls. The document also lists numerous law firms, companies, and government agencies involved in current legal proceedings.
DOJ-OGR-00001863.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing to Judge Alison J. Nathan, dated November 25, 2020, arguing for the sealing of certain court documents. The filing cites extreme harassment and violent threats against Ms. Maxwell on social media as a reason to protect the identities of sureties. It also mentions a confidential financial report on Ms. Maxwell prepared by Macalvins Limited and discusses legal precedents regarding the presumption of public access to court records.
DOJ-OGR-00001769.jpg
This document is a Notice of Appeal filed on behalf of Ghislaine Maxwell in the case of United States of America v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Dated September 3, 2020, it formally notifies the court of her intent to appeal the district court's September 2, 2020 decision, which denied her motion to modify a protective order. The appeal is directed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
DOJ-OGR-00001753.jpg
This is page 2 of a legal filing from August 17, 2020, in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The document concerns a dispute over materials designated as 'Confidential' by the government, arguing that under Second Circuit precedent, they are 'judicial documents' with a right to public access. It states that Ms. Maxwell has objected to the designation and seeks to provide the materials under seal to judicial officers to resolve pending issues.
DOJ-OGR-00021088.jpg
This page from a legal document argues that the Court's precedents do not require applying the 'Annabi' canon to agreements formed outside its Circuit. It cites several cases to support the position that federal plea agreements should be analyzed under general choice-of-law principles for contracts, highlighting a magistrate judge's questioning of the current practice.
DOJ-OGR-00021085.jpg
This document is page 38 of a legal brief (Case 22-1426, dated Feb 28, 2023) filed in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. It contains legal arguments attempting to distance the current case from the precedent set in *U.S. v. Annabi*, arguing that *Annabi* is an outlier regarding whether a plea agreement in one district binds another. The text consists primarily of extensive footnotes citing various Second Circuit decisions (*Prisco*, *Ashraf*, *Salameh*, etc.) that limited plea agreements to specific US Attorney's Offices, supporting the government's position against the Appellant (identified by case number as Ghislaine Maxwell).
DOJ-OGR-00020988.jpg
This document is page 5 of a 45-page legal filing (Document 657) from the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on April 29, 2022. It outlines the 'Applicable law' regarding the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment, specifically discussing 'multiplicitous' indictments and how courts determine if multiple conspiracy charges constitute the same offense. It cites various Second Circuit and Supreme Court precedents to establish the legal standard for reviewing such claims.
DOJ-OGR-00016235.jpg
This document is a page from the transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It features the direct examination of Supervisory Investigator Brown by Mr. Rohrbach regarding Government Exhibit 21. The testimony establishes that a photo was taken and a nondriver ID was issued on April 28, 2004, for an unnamed individual born in 1985, highlighting that this person would have been 11 years old in 1996.
DOJ-OGR-00016234.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Maxwell) featuring the direct examination of a witness named Brown. Prosecutor Rohrbach introduces Government Exhibit 22, identified as an image from the DMV database, which the Court admits under seal to protect the witness's identity. The proceedings also reference a Defense Exhibit LV3A located in the jurors' binders.
DOJ-OGR-00016233.jpg
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing the direct examination of Supervisory Investigator Brown by an attorney, Mr. Rohrbach. The court admits Government Exhibit 21 under seal, and Brown then identifies Government Exhibit 22 as a DMV image capture of the same person from Exhibit 21, explaining that the record is stored in a photosystem database.
DOJ-OGR-00016232.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) dated August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness named Brown by prosecutor Mr. Rohrbach regarding the authentication of Government Exhibit 21, identified as a report from the New York State DMV 'compass database' containing ID cards and driver's licenses.
DOJ-OGR-00016231.jpg
This document is page 15 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on August 10, 2022. It features the direct examination of a witness named Brown, a supervisor/investigator familiar with Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) practices. The testimony details the standard procedure for obtaining an identification card, including the requirement to provide original documentation such as social security cards, passports, and birth certificates for verification.
DOJ-OGR-00002420.jpg
This document is page 11 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) dated February 4, 2021. It outlines Counts Five and Six of the indictment against Ghislaine Maxwell, citing specific testimony from April and July 2016 depositions alleged to be perjury regarding her knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein's recruitment of underage girls and the presence of sex toys at his Palm Beach home. The text also notes a potential violation of a protective order by Giuffre's lawyers in sharing confidential deposition contents with the government.
DOJ-OGR-00002358(2).jpg
This legal document describes the aftermath of a 2017 defamation case settlement between Giuffre and Maxwell, noting Maxwell's unsuccessful attempts to have confidential information returned by the law firm Boies Schiller. It then alleges that in August 2020, Maxwell discovered the government had improperly obtained a file related to the case through an ex parte proceeding, violating a Protective Order that required notice to all parties.
DOJ-OGR-00002355(2).jpg
This legal document describes the contentious discovery phase of a lawsuit between Giuffre and Maxwell. It highlights that Giuffre's law firm, Boies Schiller, attempted to use the lawsuit as a 'proxy prosecution of Epstein' and sought to include a 'law enforcement' exception in the protective order to share information with the government, a proposal Maxwell rejected. The document emphasizes the vast and sensitive nature of the information exchanged, citing a related case to describe the discovery as 'hard-fought' and 'extensive'.
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-00002286.jpg
This document is Page 8 of a legal filing (Document 120) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on January 25, 2021. The text presents legal arguments regarding the 'joinder' (combining) and 'severance' (separating) of criminal charges, citing various precedents to argue that offenses separated by time, location, or circumstance should not be tried together. It specifically addresses the standards for joining perjury or false statement counts with substantive crimes.
DOJ-OGR-00002286(1).jpg
This document is page 8 of a legal filing (Document 120) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on January 25, 2021. The text presents legal arguments and case citations regarding the severance of charges and 'joinder,' specifically arguing that perjury counts should not be joined with substantive crimes if they are not sufficiently connected physically, temporally, or transactionally. The document cites precedents such as *United States v. Rivera*, *Randazzo*, and *Potamitis* to support the argument that unrelated offenses should be tried separately.
DOJ-OGR-00002281.jpg
This document is page 'ii' (3 of 19) of a legal filing from January 25, 2021, related to Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It is a 'Table of Authorities' section listing various legal precedents (cases) cited in the main document, including United States v. Halper and United States v. Burke. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR-00002281'.
Process for obtaining an identification card from the Dep...
A witness named Brown, a supervisor/investigator, is questioned about the procedures for getting a DMV identification card. Brown explains that applicants must visit a DMV office, fill out an application, provide original documents (like social security cards, passports, or birth certificates), and have their photograph taken. The DMV verifies the information by checking the security features of the original documents.
Direct Examination Testimony
Testimony regarding the verification process for obtaining identification cards at the DMV.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity