Event Details

This document is page 4 of a legal filing (Document 134 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on February 4, 2021. The page is a table of authorities, citing two newspaper articles, a federal rule of civil procedure, and a constitutional amendment. The articles reference a 1980 piece by Norman Mailer and a 2020 report that Manhattan federal prosecutors declined to pursue a case against Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell in 2016.

This document is a Table of Authorities from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on February 4, 2021. It lists numerous court cases that are cited as legal precedent within the larger document. The cases span from 1972 to 2020 and involve various individuals and corporate entities.

This document is a Table of Authorities from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on February 4, 2021. It lists numerous legal cases from various U.S. courts, including District Courts, Circuit Courts of Appeals, and the Supreme Court, which are cited as legal precedent in the associated document. The cases span from 1972 to 2020 and cover a range of civil and criminal matters.

This document is page 15 of a legal filing (Document 134) from the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on February 4, 2021. The text argues that the government colluded with a redacted third party (likely civil plaintiffs) starting in 2016 to engineer perjury charges against Maxwell. It contrasts two judicial rulings: one granting a government ex parte request and another rejecting an identical request in a different civil case, characterizing the government's actions as an attempt to deprive Maxwell of due process.

This document is page 9 (filed as page 14 of 23) of a legal filing in United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It discusses David Boies' frustration that the government initially failed to pursue perjury charges against Maxwell despite his belief they had her 'dead to rights.' The filing argues that a redacted individual (likely a judge, referred to as 'she') modified a protective order based on misrepresentations made by an Assistant U.S. Attorney. A large portion of the page is redacted.

This document is page 7 of a legal filing (Motion to Suppress) from February 4, 2021, in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense argues that the government made untrue representations regarding a redacted source who was instrumental in the prosecution and provided information before the investigation began. The text asserts that Maxwell would not have agreed to civil depositions in the 'Giuffre v. Maxwell' case without the Protective Order, and argues the court should suppress the fruits of the government's misrepresentation, specifically the perjury counts arising from those depositions.

This document is page 18 of a court filing (Document 134) from the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on February 4, 2021. The text argues that the government/prosecutor engaged in misconduct similar to the 'Chemical Bank' precedent, specifically by misleading the court regarding previous meetings with a firm and encouraging an investigation despite protective orders. The document contains significant redactions regarding the judge's specific comments and rulings.

This is page 14 of a legal filing (Document 134) from the Ghislaine Maxwell criminal case (1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on February 4, 2021. The text argues that the government previously failed to act on perjury charges despite attorney David Boies claiming they had Maxwell 'dead to rights.' The filing alleges that a judicial officer (name redacted) was misled by an Assistant U.S. Attorney's misrepresentations, leading to the modification of a Protective Order. A large portion of the page is redacted.

This document is a 'Table of Authorities' page (page iii) from a court filing (Document 134) in the case USA v. Maxwell (1:20-cr-00330-AJN), filed on February 4, 2021. It lists legal authorities and articles referenced in the main brief, including a New York Daily News article about federal prosecutors declining to pursue Epstein and Maxwell in 2016, and a New York Times piece by Norman Mailer. It also cites Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 1 and the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.