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-00009641.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing (Document 636) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, dated March 1, 2022, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It lists a series of questions (17-31) aimed at a respondent, focusing on grooming tactics (gifts, normalizing sexual topics), the timeline of reporting abuse, and the lasting traumatic impact of the events.
DOJ-OGR-00009580.jpg
This document is page 18 of a legal filing (Document 621) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 25, 2022. The text is a legal argument refuting the defense's interpretation of a jury note regarding accomplice liability and flight arrangements. It specifically addresses the victim 'Jane', debating whether Maxwell arranged her return flight from New Mexico and discussing corroborating evidence in flight logs versus commercial flight records.
DOJ-OGR-00009456.jpg
This document is a divider or cover page for 'Exhibit A' contained within a larger court filing. It displays header stamps for two separate legal cases: a 2022 civil filing (Case 1:20-cv-03300-ALC) and a 2012 criminal filing (Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP), indicating this exhibit was originally part of the 2012 case and resubmitted in 2022.
DOJ-OGR-00009422.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the direct examination of a witness by Mr. Schoeman. The testimony details a conversation between the witness and Ms. Trzaskoma while walking across Foley Square, concerning Juror No. 1 (Ms. Conrad). They discussed a disbarred lawyer with the same name as the juror but concluded it was a different person because the juror's educational background did not include law school.
DOJ-OGR-00009409.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring the cross-examination of a witness named Edelstein. The questioning concerns whether Edelstein was aware of an internal investigation conducted by Theresa Trzaskoma prior to receiving a specific letter, particularly focusing on knowledge possessed on May 12th regarding a 'suspended lawyer.' Edelstein denies awareness of an investigation on that date, admitting only to knowing about a suspended lawyer with a specific name.
DOJ-OGR-00009392.jpg
This document is page 331 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The testimony involves a witness named Edelstein being questioned by Mr. Okula about discussions regarding a 'Westlaw report' and email exchanges concerning 'Juror No. 1' possibly being a 'suspended attorney.' The witness confirms discussing the matter with their partner, Randy Kim, in San Francisco, who had corresponded with Theresa Trzaskoma on May 12th.
DOJ-OGR-00003321.jpg
This document is a page from a report by the DOJ's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR), filed as an exhibit in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It outlines the analytical framework and legal standards OPR uses to determine if a Department attorney has committed 'professional misconduct,' exercised 'poor judgment,' or merely made a 'mistake.' It specifically defines the thresholds for intentional violation and reckless disregard of obligations.
DOJ-OGR-00003090.jpg
This document is page 156 of a court filing (Document 204) in Case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on April 16, 2021. The text argues that a jury should decide if the defendant lied, rejecting the defendant's claims that her answers were truthful. It introduces 'Count Six,' which charges the defendant with perjury related to a 'second deposition' that occurred in July 2016, though the specific transcripts of that deposition are redacted on this page.
DOJ-OGR-00004747.jpg
This page serves as a divider or cover sheet for 'Exhibit A' within a larger legal filing. It is associated with Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on June 15, 2021, and bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00004619.jpg
This document is a cover sheet for Exhibit 2 in court case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It identifies the attached exhibit as a 'Draft Non-Prosecution Agreement' dated September 6, 2007. The page bears a Department of Justice bates stamp (DOJ-OGR-00004619).
DOJ-OGR-00014675.jpg
This page is a transcript from the trial of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330). The Court is addressing the jury regarding scheduling, specifically acknowledging a note about dismissing at 5 p.m. and offering the option to deliberate on Thursday, December 23rd. The Judge also reiterates strict instructions regarding the presence of all 12 jurors for deliberations, COVID-19 mask protocols in the courthouse, and the prohibition of discussing the case outside the deliberation room.
DOJ-OGR-00020119.jpg
This document is a cover page designated as 'Exhibit A'. It contains a court filing header indicating it is associated with Case 1:20-cv-03030-AJN. There are two overlapping filing stamps, one from December 28, 2020, and a later one from January 8, 2021. The footer indicates it was processed by the DOJ (DOJ-OGR-00020119).
DOJ-OGR-00020067.jpg
This document is page 7 of a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330) filed on August 28, 2020, regarding the detention of Ghislaine Maxwell. The text details the Court's reasoning for denying bail, citing her as a 'serious flight risk' due to the nature of the charges involving minor victims, strong government evidence, and her substantial international ties. Specifically, the Court noted her French citizenship (and France's non-extradition policy), extraordinary financial resources, lack of candor regarding her finances to Pretrial Services, and lack of significant ties to the United States.
DOJ-OGR-00005631.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) arguing to preclude Dr. Rocchio from testifying as a government expert witness. It details the government's intent to have Rocchio testify generally about the psychology of sexual abuse, grooming, delayed disclosure, and trauma, while noting she has not evaluated any specific victims in the case.
DOJ-OGR-00005564.jpg
This is page 10 (internal page 9) of a court filing (Document 383) related to Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. The content of the page is completely obscured by redactions, leaving only the court header, a horizontal separator line, a single bracket '[', the page number, and the Department of Justice Bates stamp (DOJ-OGR-00005564) visible.
DOJ-OGR-00005354.jpg
This document is Page 32 of 35 from Document 367, filed on October 22, 2021, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It is a blank continuation sheet for a Juror Questionnaire, allowing a juror to provide overflow answers by referencing the relevant question number. The page contains lines for writing but no handwritten text.
DOJ-OGR-00005306.jpg
This document is a blank page containing ruled lines, likely intended for juror notes. It is page 30 of 40 from Document 365 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 22, 2021. The page includes a header for 'Juror ID' and a footer with the page number '-29-' and a DOJ Bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00002889.jpg
This is the signature page (page 2 of 2) of a legal document filed on April 5, 2021, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The document is submitted by attorney Laura A. Menninger to Judge Alison J. Nathan. It references a date of April 19, 2021, and bears the Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00002889.
DOJ-OGR-00005737.jpg
This document is a placeholder page for 'Exhibit A' within court case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The actual content of the exhibit is not shown because it was filed under seal on October 29, 2021. The page bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp number DOJ-OGR-00005737.
DOJ-OGR-00005724.jpg
This document is a placeholder page for Exhibit 1 in the court case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It indicates that the actual content of the exhibit was filed under seal on October 29, 2021.
DOJ-OGR-00005218.jpg
This document is page 13 of a legal filing (Document 342) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 13, 2021. It presents legal arguments regarding jury selection (voir dire), specifically arguing that defense attorneys should be allowed to question jurors directly due to the case's complexity and the high risk of prejudice from extensive pretrial publicity. The text cites legal precedents (United States v. Ible, United States v. Davis, Silverthorne v. United States) to support the necessity of thorough examination to ensure impartial jurors.
DOJ-OGR-00008803.jpg
This document is the final page (Page 3 of 3) of a court filing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains the closing details of a letter addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan. The filing date in the header is January 5, 2022, though the text date reads 'January 5, 2021' (likely a typographical error common in early January). It lists a New York address and phone number, indicates copies were sent to all counsel of record, and bears a DOJ bates stamp.
DOJ-OGR-00008782.jpg
This document is Page 76 of 83 from a court filing (Document 565) dated December 19, 2021, in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains Jury Instruction No. 56, which explains the definition of 'Redaction' to the jury and instructs them to disregard the reasons for any redactions in evidentiary items.
DOJ-OGR-00008776.jpg
This document is page 70 of 83 from a court filing (Document 565) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on December 19, 2021. It contains Jury Instruction No. 50 regarding 'Uncalled Witnesses,' instructing the jury not to draw inferences from the absence of certain witnesses and reiterating that the defendant has no burden to produce evidence.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity