Event Details

This document is a page from a court transcript dated April 1, 2021, regarding United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell. The court is addressing defense arguments for release, comparing her situation to United States v. Friedman, but distinguishing it because Maxwell allegedly did not provide her whereabouts to the government despite staying in contact. The judge argues that Maxwell may not have realized the severity of the charges or the likelihood of prosecution until her actual indictment.

This document is a page from a court transcript (dated April 1, 2021) in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. The court is addressing a defense argument for release, distinguishing Maxwell's case from 'United States v. Friedman.' The judge notes that while Maxwell stayed in contact with the government, she did not provide her whereabouts and the circumstances of her arrest suggest she may have been hiding, driven by a realization of the severity of the charges and potential sentence.

This document is page 117 of a court transcript from Case 21-770, dated April 1, 2021. Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues before the Court that his legal team (including Haddon Morgan) had informed the government they were available for the voluntary surrender of their client, Ms. Maxwell, should an indictment occur. Cohen expresses frustration that the government arrested Maxwell without contacting them first and criticizes the government's reply brief for attempting to 'throw dirt' on his client.

This document is page 54 of a court transcript filed on December 10, 2020, in the case of USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). Defense attorney Mr. Cohen argues that the defense had previously urged the government not to indict and had made it clear they were available for voluntary surrender, yet the government arrested Maxwell without prior contact. Cohen notes that the government was fully aware that his firm and Haddon Morgan represented Maxwell, and he criticizes the prosecution for trying to 'throw some more dirt' on his client in a reply brief.

This document is a page from a legal filing (Case 21-58) dated April 1, 2021, detailing Ghislaine Maxwell's attempts to secure bail. It outlines the court's reasons for detaining her—flight risk due to foreign citizenship (France, Britain) and unclear finances—and the defense's counter-arguments, including an offer to renounce her foreign citizenship and the assertion that witness testimony related to Jeffrey Epstein rather than her. The text notes that despite these arguments, the judge denied bail for a second time.