Court of Appeals
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-12-03 | N/A | Scheduled oral argument for rehearing. | 11th Circuit | View |
| 2020-08-07 | N/A | Court granted petition for rehearing en banc. | 11th Circuit | View |
| 2020-08-07 | N/A | Court granted petition for rehearing en banc and vacated panel opinion. | 11th Circuit | View |
| 2020-04-14 | N/A | Court of Appeals denied Jane Doe 1's petition. | 11th Circuit | View |
066.pdf
This document is a Government Memorandum filed on July 29, 2025, in the Southern District of New York, responding to Court Orders regarding the unsealing of grand jury transcripts in the Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell cases. The Government supports the disclosure of these transcripts due to significant public interest, noting that Epstein is deceased and Maxwell is incarcerated, but requests redactions to protect victim identities. The memo analyzes the 'In re Craig' factors for unsealing grand jury records and confirms that the key law enforcement witnesses are still active.
063.pdf
This document is a Court Order dated July 22, 2025, from the Southern District of New York in the case United States v. Jeffrey Epstein. Judge Richard M. Berman addresses a motion filed by the Government to unseal grand jury transcripts. The Judge declines to rule immediately, instead ordering the Government to provide a memorandum of law justifying the disclosure based on specific legal factors, and to submit the transcripts and proposed redactions for review. The order notes a DOJ/FBI memo stating Epstein harmed over 1,000 victims and sets deadlines for submissions from the Government, Epstein's representatives, and victims.
061.pdf
This document is a motion filed on July 18, 2025, by U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi and Deputy AG Todd Blanche, requesting the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to unseal grand jury transcripts related to Jeffrey Epstein. The motion follows a July 6, 2025, DOJ/FBI memorandum that concluded a review of Epstein's case found no evidence to predicate investigations into uncharged third parties. Citing significant public interest and historical importance, the government argues for transparency while ensuring victim identities remain redacted.
EFTA00031609.pdf
A letter from the U.S. Department of Justice to attorney Mark Manley regarding his client's anonymity in the *United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell* case. The government states they do not intend to call the client as a witness but cannot guarantee the client's name will not appear in public trial exhibits or testimony. The letter notably asserts that UK privacy laws do not apply in this jurisdiction and clarifies that the client is not considered a victim of child sexual exploitation in this specific case.
EFTA00030910.pdf
Court order from Judge Alison J. Nathan dated December 3, 2020, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The court approves the defendant's proposed redactions for letters dated November 25 and 30 regarding a renewed bail motion, citing the privacy interests of individuals mentioned in the letters. The court denies the request for an in camera conference but allows written submissions with tailored redactions and orders the parties to schedule briefing for the renewed bail motion.
EFTA00029847.pdf
This document is a legal filing by the Government opposing defense motions in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It primarily addresses Count Six (perjury), arguing that Maxwell's answers in a July 2016 deposition regarding 'sexual activities,' 'sex toys,' and 'massages' were false and not fundamentally ambiguous. The document also addresses and rejects defense requests for discovery regarding a victim's personal diary from 1996 and broad subpoenas for defendant's records.
EFTA00029466.pdf
This document is an email header dated February 5, 2019. The sender and recipient are redacted. The subject line refers to an 'Epstein Oral Argument' taking place in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. The email contains an attachment labeled 'unnamed'.
EFTA00027169.pdf
Defense attorney Jeffrey Pagliuca writes to Judge Alison Nathan arguing against the government's request to defer ruling on Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to suppress evidence until after the trial on non-perjury counts. The defense contends that an evidentiary hearing is necessary immediately because the government's alleged misconduct (misleading a judge to obtain a subpoena) constitutes a due process violation that could suppress all 90,000 pages of evidence and any derivatives ('fruit of the poisonous tree'). Furthermore, the defense argues that Maxwell cannot knowingly decide whether to testify without knowing the admissibility of this evidence, as the government has only promised not to use it in its case-in-chief but reserved rights for impeachment.
EFTA00024831.pdf
This document is an email chain dated August 1, 2019, between US Attorneys in the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. The emails discuss a significant Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision in *United States v. Boustani*, which ruled that wealthy defendants cannot use their financial resources to pay for 'private jails' (home confinement with private security) to secure bail when poorer defendants would be detained. This legal precedent was highly relevant to the Jeffrey Epstein case, as Epstein had attempted to secure bail under similar conditions shortly before this date.
EFTA00022960.pdf
This document is a legal filing by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team objecting to the unsealing of specific docket entries (143, 173, 199, 164, and 230) in the civil case brought by Virginia Giuffre. The defense argues that these documents contain sensitive information regarding non-parties ('Does'), inadmissible hearsay, and prejudicial materials such as flight logs and police reports that were improperly filed to bias the court. The filing emphasizes the need to protect the privacy of non-parties and the integrity of ongoing criminal investigations into Jeffrey Epstein's conduct.
EFTA00022041.pdf
This document is a printout of a 'Law360 White Collar' email newsletter dated October 14, 2020. It highlights a legal development where a Second Circuit panel offered support for Ghislaine Maxwell's attempt to keep a deposition sealed. The majority of the document (5 out of 6 pages) is completely redacted.
EFTA00020085.pdf
This document is a formal letter from U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman to Judge Richard Berman arguing two main points following Jeffrey Epstein's death. First, the Government asserts that the indictment must be dismissed (abated) because Epstein died before a conviction became final. Second, the Government argues that the Court lacks the constitutional authority to conduct its own independent investigation into Epstein's suicide, noting that the FBI and DOJ-OIG are already conducting active Grand Jury investigations into the matter.
EFTA00019882.pdf
This document is an internal email chain from December 23, 2019, among staff and contractors at the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS). They are discussing the location and existence of deposition transcripts from the 'Roberts v. Maxwell' civil suit stored on an 'Epstein share drive.' Specifically, they confirm that a redacted female individual was deposed but 'invoked 5 throughout' (referring to the Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination).
EFTA00018504.pdf
This document is an email dated October 8, 2020, likely from the U.S. Attorney's Office, summarizing upcoming oral arguments before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. It highlights the case 'United States v. Maxwell' (referring to Ghislaine Maxwell), scheduled for October 13, 2020, concerning an appeal regarding a protective order. The email also lists arguments for 'Farhane v. United States' and 'United States v. Louis McIntosh'.
EFTA00018294.pdf
This document is a Memorandum & Order from Judge Loretta Preska dated July 29, 2020, denying Ghislaine Maxwell's request to reconsider the unsealing of her deposition transcripts and those of 'Doe 1'. Maxwell argued that her recent arrest and indictment were new developments requiring secrecy, but the court ruled these risks were already considered ('plowed ground') and that she failed to raise these specific objections in a timely manner after her arrest. The court granted a brief stay until July 31, 2020, to allow Maxwell to appeal, with unsealing scheduled for August 3, 2020, absent further orders.
EFTA00017074.pdf
This document is a legal response filed on June 24, 2020, by Intervenors Julie Brown and the Miami Herald Media Co. arguing against Ghislaine Maxwell's objections to unsealing specific court documents (Dkt. Entries 143, 164, 172, 199, and 230). The Intervenors argue that Maxwell's privacy claims are unsubstantiated and do not outweigh the public interest in disclosure, particularly regarding allegations of sex trafficking and abuse of minors. The filing explicitly mentions that the documents in question include a 'Flight Log Summary Chart' and 'flight logs', police reports, and deposition transcripts, arguing that these should be made public.
EFTA00017070.pdf
Judge Loretta Preska denied Ghislaine Maxwell's request to reconsider the unsealing of her deposition transcripts, ruling that her recent arrest was not a valid new ground for reconsideration as she had failed to raise it during the weeks prior to the court's original decision. The court noted that the potential for criminal charges had already been weighed in the original unsealing order. A short stay was granted until August 3, 2020, to allow Maxwell to appeal to the Court of Appeals before the documents are released.
EFTA00010466.pdf
This document is an internal email from the Public Affairs division of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, dated July 3, 2019. It circulates a link to a PDF hosted on DocumentCloud regarding a Second Circuit Court decision to unseal files related to Jeffrey Epstein. The sender's specific identity is redacted, though their role and office are visible.
DOJ-OGR-00000225.tif
This document outlines the conviction and sentencing of a petitioner for their role in Jeffrey Epstein's sexual abuse network between approximately 1994 and 2004. The petitioner was found guilty of conspiring to transport minors for sexual activity, transporting minors for sexual activity, and sex trafficking of a minor, receiving a 240-month prison sentence. The document details the pattern of abuse involving identifying vulnerable girls, isolating them, and paying them for sexualized massages, which took place at Epstein's residences in Palm Beach, Florida, and New York City.
DOJ-OGR-00015048.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing (Document 789) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on July 22, 2025. It outlines the legal standards and 'special circumstances' under which grand jury records may be released, citing precedents like *In re Craig* and *Laws. 'Comm. for 9/11 Inquiry, Inc. v. Garland*. The text lists specific factors a district court must weigh when considering disclosure, such as the status of principals, privacy of families, and whether witnesses are still alive.
DOJ-OGR-00008364.jpg
A letter dated December 13, 2021, from defense attorney Jeffrey S. Pagliuca to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The letter informs the court of the defense's intention to question attorneys Jack Scarola, Brad Edwards, and Robert Glassman and argues that these questions do not violate attorney-client privilege. The document cites legal precedents regarding the burden of proof for privilege claims.
DOJ-OGR-00001593.jpg
This page is from a legal memorandum filed on July 10, 2020, arguing for the pretrial release of Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense contends that the government has failed to prove she is a flight risk or that no conditions exist to assure her appearance, citing the Bail Reform Act and Supreme Court precedent (Salerno) establishing liberty as the norm and detention as an exception. A footnote references a separate letter regarding poor prison conditions, including lack of visitation and legal access, which the defense argues are 'compelling reasons' for release.
DOJ-OGR-00001456.jpg
This legal document, dated May 27, 2021, addresses post-conviction bail proceedings concerning 'Maxwell.' It clarifies that an Order regarding security checks at the MDC is not a bail determination and that Maxwell's 'renewed motion' for bail is substantively meritless. The document affirms Judge Nathan's prior findings that Maxwell is a risk of flight and that no bail conditions could reasonably assure her appearance in court.
DOJ-OGR-00001455.jpg
This document is page 15 of a legal filing (likely a government opposition brief) from May 27, 2021, regarding case 21-770. It argues that there are no grounds to overturn Judge Nathan's denial of Ghislaine Maxwell's bail, noting that MDC security protocols do not interfere with her trial preparation. It also argues that Maxwell's 'renewed motion' is procedurally improper and untimely under appellate rules.
DOJ-OGR-00001276.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing dated March 22, 2021, discusses the legal standard for a defendant's third motion for release on bail. The central issue is whether the court has jurisdiction to decide the motion while the defendant's separate bail appeal is pending, with the document citing case law and the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure to outline the court's authority in such a situation.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity