MDC (Metropolitan Detention Center)
OrganizationRelationship Network
EFTA00015753.pdf
This document contains a chain of email correspondence between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (Menninger, Everdell) and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding the logistics of reviewing evidence for case 20 Cr. 330. The discussions focus on scheduling physical evidence reviews at an FBI warehouse in the Bronx and electronic evidence reviews at the 500 Pearl Street courthouse. Key evidence items discussed include massage tables, plaster busts, cash, shredded paper, and thousands of 'highly confidential' nude or partially nude images seized from Jeffrey Epstein's devices and residences.
EFTA00015738.pdf
This document is a chain of email correspondence between Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (led by Laura Menninger) and the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) regarding the logistics of reviewing evidence for the case US v. Maxwell. The emails discuss the scheduling of Maxwell's transport by Marshals to 500 Pearl Street to review 'Highly Confidential' materials, including 2,100 nude/partially nude images seized from Jeffrey Epstein's electronic devices. The correspondence also details disputes over the transport of physical evidence from an FBI warehouse in the Bronx, specifically mentioning 'bulky' items like massage tables, plaster busts of female torsos, and a stuffed dog, which the government argued were difficult to transport.
EFTA00013342.pdf
This document is an email chain within the US Attorney's Office (SDNY) discussing a legal challenge in the case United States v. Rivera. The judge and defense counsel questioned why Ghislaine Maxwell (at MDC) received significantly greater access to laptops (13 hours/day vs 3) and video counsel visits than Justin Rivera (at MCC). The correspondence outlines the Bureau of Prisons' justification, attributing the disparity to Maxwell's protective custody status and massive discovery volume versus Rivera's general population housing.
EFTA00010294.pdf
This document is a Memorandum Opinion and Order by Judge Alison J. Nathan dated August 25, 2020, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The Judge denied Maxwell's requests to immediately disclose the identities of three alleged victims and to order the Bureau of Prisons to release her into the general population, deeming the former premature and the latter unnecessary given current accommodations. However, the Court ordered the Government to provide written status updates every 90 days regarding Maxwell's access to legal materials and ability to communicate with counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00001871.jpg
This legal document, a letter from the law office of Bobbi C. Sternheim, argues that their client, Ghislaine Maxwell, is being subjected to "draconian" and punitive pretrial detention conditions. The letter posits that these harsh measures are not related to Maxwell's own conduct but are a direct result of the government's attempt to repair its reputation following the suicide of Jeffrey Epstein in federal custody. The attorney details failed attempts to resolve these issues through internal prison channels and claims the conditions are impeding Maxwell's ability to prepare her legal defense.
DOJ-OGR-00001427.jpg
This is a court order filed on May 14, 2021, by Judge Alison J. Nathan in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The document addresses complaints from Maxwell's defense counsel regarding sleep deprivation caused by guards shining flashlights into her cell every 15 minutes. The Government responded that these checks are routine safety measures, though Maxwell receives more frequent checks due to being housed alone and the nature of her charges.
DOJ-OGR-00001000.jpg
This document is page 15 of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell based on the case number) dated June 15, 2020. It provides a string citation of legal precedents from the Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.) where judges denied pre-trial bail to defendants during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the defendants citing various health conditions like asthma and diabetes. The text argues that health risks alone have not been sufficient grounds for release in recent comparable cases.
DOJ-OGR-00000852.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from late 2020 detailing procedural updates in the case USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell. Key events include the dismissal of an appeal by the Second Circuit, extensions of discovery deadlines, and disputes over the disclosure of materials and Maxwell's conditions of confinement at the MDC. Judge Nathan issued orders requiring the parties to confer regarding Maxwell's request for Warden Heriberto Tellez to address her detention concerns.
DOJ-OGR-00020691.jpg
This document is a page from the court docket for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering filings from November 13 to November 15, 2021. It details procedural orders regarding jury questionnaires and voir dire logistics (including COVID protocols), the filing of transcripts for previous conferences, and a sealed document. It also lists correspondence from both the prosecution (regarding exhibits) and the defense (regarding late disclosures to the MDC).
DOJ-OGR-00020682.jpg
This document is a page from the court docket for United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, covering proceedings from November 1-3, 2021. It details a pretrial conference where Maxwell was present and remanded, as well as various filings including motions for reconsideration regarding bond and juror disclosure. The Judge also issued orders regarding voir dire instructions and scheduled a hearing for November 10, 2021, to discuss evidentiary rules (Rule 412 and 702/Daubert).
DOJ-OGR-00020652.jpg
This document is a section of a court docket from the Southern District of New York in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, covering dates from April 7, 2021, to April 16, 2021. It details procedural events including the rescheduling of an arraignment on a superseding indictment, the denial of a request regarding materials in courthouse cellblocks due to US Marshal policy, and a motion to continue the trial date. The document also includes judicial orders regarding redactions and the unsealing of specific legal memorandums.
DOJ-OGR-00020510.jpg
This document is a court docket sheet from the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, covering filings between February 4, 2021, and March 1, 2021. It details various legal maneuvers, including Maxwell's third motion for bond, motions for a bill of particulars, and disputes regarding her confinement conditions at the MDC. The docket also records correspondence between the defense (Cohen, Sternheim, Everdell) and the prosecution (Comey, Moe, Pomerantz) addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan, as well as the sealing of multiple documents.
DOJ-OGR-00002340.jpg
This document is page 2 of a legal filing by Ghislaine Maxwell's defense counsel, Bobbi C. Sternheim, filed on February 1, 2021. It details severe technical difficulties Maxwell faces in reviewing terabytes of discovery material at the MDC, including frequent computer crashes, slow processing, and damaged hard drives allegedly mishandled by staff. The filing also alleges that Maxwell is subjected to stricter isolation than other inmates, physical and psychological abuse by guards, and reprisals for reporting mistreatment.
DOJ-OGR-00002729.jpg
A letter from defense attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim to Judge Alison J. Nathan disputing the government's characterization of Ghislaine Maxwell's confinement conditions at the MDC. The letter details excessive searches, lack of access to discovery materials, and argues that the strict surveillance is a reaction to BOP negligence regarding Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00020117.jpg
This document is page 14 of a defense motion filed on December 23, 2020, arguing for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. The defense argues that flight risk concerns regarding the UK and France are overstated and that the recent arrest of associate Jean-Luc Brunel in France diminishes her incentive to flee there. Additionally, the motion highlights a COVID-19 surge at the MDC (113 cases) and restrictive prison conditions, including mouth inspections and potential suspension of legal calls, as further justification for bail.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity