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 |
DOJ-OGR-00002352(3).jpg
This document is the 'Table of Exhibits' page (page 5 of 23) from a legal filing (Document 134) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on February 4, 2021. It lists nine exhibits (A through I), including a Civil Protective Order, a Giuffre Protective Order Proposal, and two transcripts from 2019. Exhibits C, F, G, H, and I are heavily redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00002266.jpg
This document is a court exhibit filed on January 13, 2021, in the case US v. Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It consists of a printout from the Bureau of Prisons website displaying COVID-19 inmate testing statistics, showing 95,830 completed tests and 38,569 positive tests at that time. The document bears a 'DOJ-OGR' Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00002241.jpg
Page 9 of a court order filed on December 30, 2020, in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). The Court rejects the Defendant's renewed motion for bail, maintaining that no conditions of release can assure her appearance in court, despite the Government not proving she poses a danger to the community. The text discusses the weight of evidence, with the defense arguing the case relies too heavily on the uncorroborated recollections of three unidentified accusers.
DOJ-OGR-00002164.jpg
This document is a 'Table of Authorities' from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on December 18, 2020. It lists numerous U.S. federal court cases, dating from 1985 to 2019, that are cited as legal precedent in the main document. The cases cover various federal districts and circuits, with a significant number originating from courts in New York.
DOJ-OGR-00001984.jpg
This document is page 12 of a legal filing (dated Dec 14, 2020) arguing for Ghislaine Maxwell's release on bail. The text argues that Maxwell has been subjected to unprecedented negative media coverage (more than Weinstein or El Chapo) but remains committed to fighting the charges in the US rather than fleeing. It emphasizes her strong ties to her spouse (whose name is redacted) and argues that continued detention under 'oppressive conditions' impairs her ability to prepare her defense.
DOJ-OGR-00001975.jpg
This document is page 'ii' (page 3 of 45 in the PDF) of a court filing dated December 14, 2020, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It contains the final entries of a Table of Contents, specifically referencing an argument regarding 'Oppressive Conditions' of confinement affecting Maxwell's health and legal defense, followed by the Conclusion section.
DOJ-OGR-00021991.jpg
This is the final page (page 15) of a court transcript filed on December 19, 2019, for Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT. The judge rules to exclude time under the Speedy Trial Act until April 20, 2020, to allow for discovery production and motion preparation. The hearing is adjourned, and the defendants' bail status remains unchanged.
DOJ-OGR-00021933.jpg
This is page 2 of an Appearance Bond (Form AO 98) filed on November 11, 2019, in Case 1:19-cr-00830-AT (United States v. Michael Thomas). It contains the declarations and signatures of the defendant, Michael Thomas (one of the guards charged in connection with Jeffrey Epstein's death), and his surety, Alec Thomas. The bond was approved and signed by AUSA Nicolas Roos.
DOJ-OGR-00021154.jpg
This document is page 2 of a criminal judgment against Ghislaine Maxwell, filed on June 29, 2022. It lists additional counts of conviction, specifically Count 4 (Transportation of a minor with intent to engage in criminal sexual activity, ending in 1997) and Count 6 (Sex trafficking of a minor, ending in 2004). The document is marked as part of an appellate record from February 2023.
DOJ-OGR-00019236.jpg
This document is a Certificate of Service filed on July 6, 2020, for Case 1:20-mj-00132-AJ (related to the arrest of Ghislaine Maxwell). Attorney Lawrence A. Vogelman certifies that he has electronically served an 'Appearance' on all counsel of record via the court's ECF system. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00016728.jpg
This is a single page (245 of 246) from a court transcript in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. The text captures the very end of a session involving the direct examination of a witness named Hyppolite. The presiding judge adjourns the court to December 17, 2021, at 8:45 a.m., noting that the 'charge' (jury instructions) will be given 'tomorrow.'
DOJ-OGR-00013142.jpg
This document is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), featuring the direct examination of a witness named Carolyn. Carolyn testifies that someone took nude photos of her and discusses a previous lawsuit she filed, confirmng she hired a lawyer for it. The defense attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, successfully objects to questions regarding who made the decision on whom to sue. Carolyn also confirms she was deposed in 2009 but was not asked about her time working for an escort service during that deposition.
DOJ-OGR-00013054.jpg
This document is page 41 of a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It features the cross-examination of a witness named Meder, focusing on the provenance of specific photographs entered into evidence. The questioning establishes that the witness testified about photos retrieved from CDs, rather than photos physically displayed on the walls of 'the house.'
DOJ-OGR-00010518.jpg
This document is a page from a forensic-psychiatric report filed in June 2022 regarding Ghislaine Maxwell. It details an interview with her lawyer and acquaintance, Leah Saffian, who describes Maxwell's mental deterioration, sleep deprivation, and cognitive struggles due to 'quasi-solitary confinement' and hostile conditions. Saffian asserts Maxwell is not a flight risk and emphasizes her critical role in reviewing the millions of discovery documents for her own defense.
DOJ-OGR-00009188.jpg
This document is a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN) containing a printout of a Reuters article dated January 5, 2022. The article details how juror Scotty David swayed fellow jurors during the Ghislaine Maxwell trial by sharing his own history of childhood sexual abuse to validate the imperfect memories of accusers 'Jane' and 'Carolyn.' The document highlights the internal deliberations of the jury that led to Maxwell's conviction on December 29, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00009185.jpg
This document is a court exhibit (Page 11 of 12, Document 615-2) filed on February 24, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. It consists of a screenshot of a Daily Mail article dated January 26, 2022, featuring a photograph of a male juror sitting on a couch with a cat. The URL and title indicate the article discusses the juror's statement that the evidence convinced the panel Maxwell was a 'predator'.
DOJ-OGR-00009174.jpg
This document is the final page of a court exhibit filed on February 24, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It contains the end of a news article (likely from The Independent) quoting an unidentified man stating Maxwell knew what was happening, and notes that her sentencing schedule had not yet been set.
DOJ-OGR-00009157.jpg
This document is page 38 of a legal filing from February 24, 2022, in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It argues against the defendant's claim that Juror 50's questionnaire responses prevented proper voir dire, comparing the situation to Jurors 189 and 239, who also answered 'yes' to Question 48 (regarding sexual abuse) but were qualified without objection after brief questioning. The filing asserts that the record disproves the defense's theory that they were deprived of the opportunity to examine Juror 50's views.
DOJ-OGR-00009139.jpg
This document is page 20 of a court filing (Document 615) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues against the defendant's claim that 'Juror 50' deliberately lied on a jury questionnaire regarding past victimization, suggesting that laypersons may not classify their own abuse as a 'crime' in the same way legal professionals do. A significant portion of the page following this argument is heavily redacted.
DOJ-OGR-00009100.jpg
This document is page 128 (filed on 02/24/22) of a court transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It records Judge Nathan dismissing Juror No. 49 and beginning the questioning of Juror No. 50. The judge instructs Juror No. 50 on the presumption of innocence for Ms. Maxwell and strictly prohibits consuming media related to the case.
DOJ-OGR-00009087.jpg
This document is page 21 (filed as page 20 of 30) of a juror questionnaire for Juror ID 50 in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The juror indicates that they have not formed opinions about Jeffrey Epstein that would prevent them from being impartial, nor would Maxwell's association with Epstein prevent a fair verdict. The juror affirms their ability to decide the case solely based on the evidence presented at trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009078.jpg
This document is page 12 (filed as page 11 of 30) of a juror questionnaire for Juror ID 50 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The juror marked 'No' to questions asking if they or any close friends/relatives have ever been subpoenaed for an investigation or arrested/charged with a crime.
DOJ-OGR-00009007.jpg
This document is page vi of a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, Document 613), filed on February 24, 2022. It is a table of authorities, listing numerous legal cases with their citations and the page numbers where they are referenced in the main document. The cases cited span from 1936 to 2018 and involve various parties in different U.S. federal and state courts.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity