New York Law Journal
OrganizationRelationship Network
055.pdf
A letter from Fordham Law Professor Bruce A. Green to Judge Richard Berman clarifying the record regarding a previous court hearing. Green asserts that contrary to comments made in court, he has never served as legal counsel for Jeffrey Epstein or his estate, although he did serve as an expert witness for Alan Dershowitz in a separate defamation case (Giuffre v. Dershowitz).
EFTA00019994.pdf
This document is a court transcript from a hearing on August 27, 2019, concerning the government's motion to dismiss the indictment against Jeffrey Epstein following his death on August 10, 2019. Judge Richard M. Berman presides over the hearing, emphasizing the importance of transparency and victim involvement despite the defendant's death. The proceedings cover appearances by attorneys for both the government and the defense, and the judge's rationale for holding a public hearing on the matter.
EFTA00018735.pdf
Internal email correspondence within the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (USANYS) dated May 6, 2020. Staff members are circulating news articles from the New York Law Journal ('The Prince and the Proffer') and NY Daily News regarding Judge Berman's critical comments on DOJ policies and investigations 'post-Epstein'.
DOJ-OGR-00001637.jpg
This legal document, dated July 21, 2020, is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell arguing that recent public statements by the government have been prejudicial to her right to a fair trial. It specifically cites a press conference held by Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss on July 2, 2020, following Maxwell's arrest, quoting her statements from the New York Law Journal and the Washington Post as evidence of improper commentary on Maxwell's credibility and guilt.
DOJ-OGR-00000726.jpg
Fordham law professor Bruce A. Green writes to Judge Richard M. Berman to correct a misunderstanding from an August 27, 2019, hearing in the case *United States v. Epstein*. Green clarifies that, contrary to the court's apparent understanding, he has never served as counsel for Epstein or his estate. He explains that his only involvement in a related matter was serving as an expert witness for Professor Dershowitz in a separate defamation case, a role that concluded in June 2019 and did not involve representation or advocacy.
DOJ-OGR-00000642.jpg
This document is a page from a court transcript where an unidentified speaker critiques an article from the New York Law Journal. The speaker refutes the opinions of two professors who argued against holding a public hearing and allowing victims to speak in the Jeffrey Epstein case, calling their suggestions 'incredulous' and incorrect as a matter of law.
DOJ-OGR-00019492.jpg
This legal document, dated July 21, 2020, is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell arguing that her right to a fair trial has been prejudiced by public statements made by the prosecution. It specifically cites a press conference held by Acting U.S. Attorney Audrey Strauss following Maxwell's July 2, 2020 arrest, quoting her statements to the New York Law Journal and the Washington Post as evidence of prejudicial commentary on Maxwell's credibility and guilt.
DOJ-OGR-00010151.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a Curriculum Vitae or bibliography for Stephen Gillers, filed as an exhibit in a legal case (Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP). It lists publications authored by Gillers between February 1999 and April 2000, covering topics such as legal ethics, impeachment, Kenneth Starr, and professional responsibility. The document was produced by the DOJ (DOJ-OGR-00010151) and contains headers indicating it was filed in 2012 and re-filed in a 2020 case.
DOJ-OGR-00010150.jpg
This document appears to be a page from the Curriculum Vitae or publication list of legal ethics expert Stephen Gillers, filed as a court exhibit in 2012. It lists articles authored by Gillers between 1997 and 1999, primarily focusing on the legal and ethical aspects of the Clinton impeachment, Kenneth Starr's investigation, and the Monica Lewinsky scandal. The document contains Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00010150.
DOJ-OGR-00010149.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing, specifically a bibliography of publications by Stephen Gillers from 1993 to 1997. The listed articles, published in various legal journals and newspapers, cover topics such as legal ethics, political controversies like Whitewater and Filegate, and the Clinton administration. The document also references a mock legal appeal based on Shakespeare's Hamlet.
DOJ-OGR-00010147.jpg
This document is page 22 of a legal filing (Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP) dated April 6, 2012. It contains a numbered list of publications authored by Stephen Gillers between 1986 and 1988. The articles, published in various newspapers and law journals, cover topics such as legal ethics, lawyer discipline, and commentary on legal figures like Bernhardt Goetz, Meese, and Roy Cohn.
DOJ-OGR-00010146.jpg
This document is a biographical summary for Stephen Gillers, filed as part of a legal case on April 6, 2012. It details his educational background, including his J.D. from NYU Law School in 1968 and B.A. from City University of New York in 1964, along with his date of birth. The document also provides a selected bibliography of articles he authored between 1978 and 1985 for publications such as The Nation, New York Times, and New York Law Journal.
DOJ-OGR-00009472.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a Curriculum Vitae or bibliography for legal scholar Stephen Gillers, filed as an exhibit in a legal case (Case 1:20-cr-00330, likely US v. Maxwell). It lists publications authored by Gillers between 1999 and 2000 in various legal and news outlets such as The New York Times and The American Lawyer, covering topics like legal ethics, impeachment, and professional responsibility. The page contains a DOJ Bates stamp at the bottom.
DOJ-OGR-00009471.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a bibliography or curriculum vitae for Stephen Gillers, filed as an exhibit in legal proceedings (specifically Case 1:20-cr-00330, the Ghislaine Maxwell case). The page lists publications from 1997 to 1999, the majority of which focus on legal ethics and analysis surrounding the investigation, perjury accusations, and impeachment of President Bill Clinton. The document lists 18 specific articles published in major newspapers and legal journals.
DOJ-OGR-00009469.jpg
This document is a page from a bibliography or Curriculum Vitae for Stephen Gillers, filed as Exhibit A-5865 in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (1:20-cr-00330) on Feb 24, 2021. It lists 19 publications authored by Gillers between 1988 and 1993 in various legal journals and newspapers, covering topics such as legal ethics, prosecutorial conduct, and constitutional rights. The document appears to be part of expert witness credentials submitted to the court.
DOJ-OGR-00009468.jpg
This document appears to be a page from the curriculum vitae or bibliography of Stephen Gillers, filed as an exhibit in court cases (including Case 1:20-cr-00330). It lists numbered publications (items 15 through 34) written by Gillers between January 1986 and June 1988, published in various legal and news outlets such as the New York Law Journal and The New York Times. The articles cover topics regarding legal ethics, lawyer discipline, and specific public figures like Bernhardt Goetz and Roy Cohn.
DOJ-OGR-00009467.jpg
This document is a page from the Curriculum Vitae of legal scholar Stephen Gillers, filed as Exhibit A-5863 in court case 1:20-cr-00330 (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It details his legal education at NYU Law School and undergraduate degree from CUNY, his date of birth (Nov 3, 1943), and provides a selected bibliography of 14 articles he authored between 1978 and 1985 for publications such as The Nation, The New York Times, and the New York Law Journal. The document bears a DOJ Bates stamp indicating it was part of a production by the Department of Justice.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017325.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a manuscript or legal review (likely authored by Alan Dershowitz given the style and context of House Oversight documents) analyzing the Mike Tyson rape trial. The text harshly criticizes the Indiana judicial system and Judge Gifford for alleged bias, unethical media lobbying, and procedural errors. It also details and questions the account of the accuser, Desiree Washington, highlighting her behavior leading up to the event to cast doubt on her testimony.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity