District Court
OrganizationRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008-01-01 | N/A | Assignment of civil case caption 9:08-CV-80736. | District Court | View |
| 2006-10-06 | N/A | Grand Jury subpoena issued by US District Court, Southern District of Florida | Southern District of Florida | View |
EFTA00024664.pdf
This document is an email thread between the defense team for Ghislaine Maxwell (led by Bobbi Sternheim) and US Government prosecutors regarding the scheduling of the trial start date in 'US v. Maxwell'. The defense advocates strongly for a November 8, 2021 start date, citing Maxwell's health in detention and holiday conflicts, while the Government proposes November 29, 2021, citing witness availability. The defense suggests that consenting to bail would resolve the scheduling flexibility issues.
EFTA00024527.pdf
This document is an email invitation dated July 2, 2020, providing ZoomGov connection details for Ghislaine Maxwell's removal hearing (Case 20mj132-01). It includes strict warnings against sharing the invitation or recording the proceedings pursuant to Local Rule 83.8. The email provides specific meeting IDs, passwords, and dial-in numbers for the remote court proceeding.
EFTA00024170.pdf
This document is an email chain dated October 29, 2021, related to the US v. Maxwell case (S2 20 Cr 330). Defense attorney Bobbi C. Sternheim circulates a courtesy copy of an ECF filing (a legal mail delivery request) to co-counsel (Everdell, Menninger, Pagliuca) and potentially opposing counsel. The top email discusses the filing and attempts to schedule a call regarding an issue to be addressed at the final pretrial conference scheduled for the following Monday at 11 a.m.
EFTA00016726.pdf
This document is an email chain from October 2021 regarding the 'US v. Maxwell' case (20cr330). Defense attorney Bobbi Sternheim provides a list of attendees, including legal counsel and Maxwell's family members (Ian, Kevin, Pandora, Philip, Isabel, Christine), for an October 21 teleconference and a November 1 in-person pretrial conference. The email responds to a request from Judge Alison J. Nathan's chambers regarding logistics, COVID-19 protocols, and speaking rules for the upcoming hearings.
EFTA00016031.pdf
An email dated December 18, 2020, from an Assistant US Attorney (SDNY) to Ghislaine Maxwell's defense counsel. The email provides replacement discovery materials to correct documents that were inadvertently labeled with incorrect Bates numbers in a previous production. It notes that a physical copy on disc is being sent to the MDC for Maxwell.
EFTA00011095.pdf
This document is a redacted email dated October 13, 2021, regarding the case 'US v. Maxwell'. The sender is transmitting courtesy copies of Electronic Case Files (ECF) filings related to jury selection (Voir Dire) and juror questionnaires. The sender and recipient identities are obscured.
EFTA00010019.pdf
This document is an email from the Chambers of Judge Alison J. Nathan dated November 11, 2021, regarding the case US v. Maxwell (20cr330). The email informs counsel that the judge has granted additional time for supplemental briefing and refers to an attached order.
DOJ-OGR-00017961.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It details the cross-examination of Dr. Rocchio, where the defense asks about the impact of traumatic brain injury, alcohol, and controlled substances on memory recall and the concept of 'confabulation.' Ms. Pomerantz (prosecution) successfully objects to several questions regarding memory and abuse disclosure, but an objection regarding the definition of confabulation is overruled.
DOJ-OGR-00017904.jpg
This document is page 31 of 228 from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). It features the direct examination of a clinical psychologist named Rocchio. The witness testifies to having 30 years of experience specializing in traumatic stress and interpersonal violence, specifically treating 'hundreds upon hundreds' of victims of childhood sexual abuse, including teenagers and adolescents aged 12 and up.
DOJ-OGR-00017653.jpg
This document is page 44 (internal pagination 450) of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (US v. Ghislaine Maxwell). A witness identified as 'Jane' is under cross-examination regarding an initial meeting ('tea') with Jeffrey Epstein attended by Jane and her mother. The questioning highlights that Jane previously told the government (in Oct 2021) that Maxwell was not present at this specific meeting, and that Epstein referred to his philanthropic activities (scholarships/mentoring) using singular pronouns ('he') rather than plural.
DOJ-OGR-00015076.jpg
This document is a legal declaration filed on August 1, 2025, by Christian R. Everdell of Cohen & Gresser LLP in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It details the transition of legal counsel, confirming that Maxwell has retained David Markus and Melissa Madrigal of Markus Moss PLLC specifically to handle a government unsealing motion. The document confirms Maxwell's consent to Cohen & Gresser's withdrawal and notes that the withdrawing firm asserts no liens and will transfer files to the new counsel.
DOJ-OGR-00008603.jpg
This document is page 65 of a court filing (Document 563) from Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 18, 2021. It contains jury instructions regarding the evaluation of witness credibility, specifically highlighting how to weigh the testimony of a witness with a prior felony conviction (highlighted text). It also instructs the jury on the use of pseudonyms or first names to protect the privacy of certain witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00008601.jpg
This document is page 63 (internal page 62) of a court filing dated December 18, 2021, from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. It contains specific jury instructions regarding the burden of proof and 'guilt by association,' explicitly instructing the jury that they cannot convict Maxwell solely based on her association with other criminals or her knowledge of their wrongdoing.
DOJ-OGR-00008558.jpg
This document is page 20 of 167 from a court filing (Document 563) dated December 18, 2021, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains Jury Instruction No. 11 regarding 'Multiple Counts,' instructing the jury to consider each of the six counts separately. The text shows specific edits replacing the generic term 'Defendant' with 'Ms. Maxwell' and outlines the burden of proof required by the Government.
DOJ-OGR-00008554.jpg
This document is page 16 of 167 from a court filing dated December 18, 2021, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains 'Instruction No. 8,' which defines the legal concept of 'Reasonable Doubt' for the jury, explaining the standards required to either convict or acquit Ms. Maxwell.
DOJ-OGR-00008536.jpg
This document page contains the final jury instructions from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330), filed on December 17, 2021. The judge instructs the jury that their verdict must be unanimous, explains the role of the foreperson in filling out the verdict form and notifying the marshal, and urges courtesy during deliberations. The transcript concludes with the judge pausing proceedings for a brief sidebar conference with counsel and the court reporter before officially submitting the case to the jury.
DOJ-OGR-00008531.jpg
This document is page 75 of 82 from a court filing (Document 562) dated December 17, 2021, associated with Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains Jury Instruction No. 56, which explains the definition of 'Redacted' items and instructs the jury to disregard reasons for redactions and focus only on admitted evidence.
DOJ-OGR-00008524.jpg
This document is page 68 of 82 from a court filing (Document 562) dated December 17, 2021, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains Jury Instruction No. 49, which explicitly instructs the jury that Ms. Maxwell exercised her Constitutional right not to testify, that the burden of proof rests solely with the Government, and that no adverse inference can be drawn against her for not taking the witness stand.
DOJ-OGR-00008518.jpg
This document is page 62 of a court filing (Document 562) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 17, 2021. It contains Jury Instruction No. 44 regarding the 'Credibility of Witnesses,' advising jurors on how to evaluate testimony based on demeanor, consistency, potential bias, and common sense. The text outlines the jurors' right to accept or reject testimony if they believe a witness has lied or is mistaken.
DOJ-OGR-00008517.jpg
This document is page 61 of a court filing (Document 562) from December 17, 2021, in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It contains jury instructions regarding the standard of proof, specifically warning jurors not to infer guilt based solely on association with others who committed wrongdoing or knowledge of others' wrongdoing. The document bears the Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00008517.
DOJ-OGR-00008515.jpg
This document is page 59 of 82 from a court filing dated December 17, 2021, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It contains Jury Instruction No. 42, which explains the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence using an analogy about rain and umbrellas. The instruction concludes by reminding the jury that they must be satisfied of Ms. Maxwell's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt before convicting her.
DOJ-OGR-00008505.jpg
This document contains page 49 (marked as page 48 internally) of a court filing from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated December 17, 2021. It outlines jury instructions regarding the legal definition of conspiracy participation, clarifying that 'mere presence' or 'knowledge' is insufficient for conviction without intent and participation. It also notes that receiving a financial benefit is not required to prove conspiracy, though it can be a factor.
DOJ-OGR-00008473.jpg
This is page 17 of 82 from a legal filing (Document 562) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on December 17, 2021. The text clarifies that Count Six of the indictment charges the Defendant with sex trafficking of minors specifically regarding an individual named Carolyn during the time period of 2001 to 2004.
DOJ-OGR-00008471.jpg
This document is page 15 of a court filing (Document 562) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on December 17, 2021. It contains 'Instruction No. 9: The Indictment,' in which the judge instructs the jury that the indictment is merely an accusation, not evidence, and that Maxwell retains the presumption of innocence.
DOJ-OGR-00008463.jpg
This page contains Jury Instruction No. 2 ('Role of the Jury') filed on December 17, 2021, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The text instructs the jury that they are the sole judges of facts and credibility, and clarifies that statements made by lawyers or rulings made by the judge do not constitute evidence.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity