Court Order: 686
Summary
The court has received victim impact statements from several individuals and has decided to allow some of them to make oral statements at sentencing, while others will be heard in writing only. The court has also denied the defendant's redaction requests.
This document is from the epstein-docs Archive.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (12)
Related Documents (6)
Court Filing: 682
The court allows seven individuals to submit written statements as part of the sentencing record in the Ghislaine Maxwell case, despite the defendant's objections. The court denies the defendant's request for redactions, citing the presumption of public access to court documents. The written statements will be made public without redactions.
Court Filing: 672
Ghislaine Maxwell's lawyers submit a letter objecting to the characterization of certain individuals as 'victims' of the counts of conviction, arguing they do not qualify as statutory victims under the CVRA. The letter disputes that the individuals were minors at the time of alleged abuse, that the alleged abuse occurred during the period alleged in the indictment, and that they were directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of a Federal offense.
Court Filing: 678
The document is a letter from the US Attorney's Office to Judge Alison J. Nathan, responding to a court order regarding the application by two victims, Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein, to speak at Ghislaine Maxwell's sentencing. The government defers to the court's previous order on the matter, which allowed non-direct victims to submit written statements but not speak at the hearing.
Court Order: 684
The court orders the government to docket a motion by Kate's attorney that was referenced in the defendant's letter, as it was not received by the court. The government is required to docket the motion by midnight on June 26, 2022. The order is issued by Judge Alison J. Nathan.
Court Filing - Letter to Judge: 667
The letter, written by Bobbi C. Sternheim, counsel for Ghislaine Maxwell, argues that Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein do not qualify as 'crime victims' under the CVRA because their alleged victimization occurred after the conduct underlying the offenses charged against Maxwell ended in 2004. The letter requests that the court clarify who will be permitted to speak at the sentencing proceeding.
Letter to the Court: doj-ogr-00010725
This letter, written by Bobbi C. Sternheim, counsel for Ghislaine Maxwell, opposes the motion by Sarah Ransome and Elizabeth Stein to give oral victim impact statements during Maxwell's sentencing, arguing they are not statutory crime victims under the CVRA.
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.