Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00032004DOJ Data Set 8Correspondence

EFTA00032004

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 8
Reference
efta-efta00032004
Pages
0
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available
Loading PDF viewer...

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
From: (USANYSY' To: 1.c. IMIMlrr" " )" Subject: Notes from 11/25/20 Call with GM Counsel Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 18:05:21 +0000 11/25/20 Call with Chris Everdell and Bobbi Sternheim Have call scheduled with MDC legal counsel; hope we can raise with them whatever issues come out of conversation Most productive to understand what specific asks you have of the Warden so we can convey them and see what can be done Sternheim Think you know how much appreciate you intervening; don't think it necessarily is your job or our job, that's why helpful to hear from warden himself If warden is one making decision, better if he reports to the court Would rather at least try to come up with particular list Sternheim In history of dealing with MDC/MCC, only time progress made when court makes someone from MDC/MCC go to court Hope that you made request and judge issued order to meet and confer immediately will be enough to get things done Sternheim Clear that they cannot put her in general population; that is not an unwise decision; will be a problem for her personally for a variety of reasons, and I don't just mean physically Gap between not being in general population (GP) and being in the situation that she is in; certain things that GP inmate is allowed that she is not o GP: Lights out at 9:30; GM is locked in at 8 pm o GP: not continually searched when moved; GM: searched to the point of invasion; understand she is searched every time she goes from one space to another; variety of searches, seems excessive - including strip searches after visits, open mouth, fingers through hair, touching her body Understand that stopped putting fingers in her mouth Routine to do strip search after visit Sternheim Know they did COVID test and required that move mask to look in her mouth Redundancy to over management of GM Now she has her cup in her room, successful in getting a toothbrush (before your help she had for one day) Entitled to every opportunity barring congregation with other inmates that is afforded to inmates in GP b/c of COVID — allowed outside of cell only for 3 hours a day (to shower in shared shower, shared call, computer, television) EFTA00032004 GM has shower to herself, phone to herself, computer, laptop, TV to herself; in MDC view, client is getting more than every other inmate during COVID; she is out of her cell for 13 hours Sternheim Difficulty with that statement is that flags how deficient treatment of inmates is Equal treatment is create situation where put her in a general population Given amount of discovery in this case if she had to share computer, would go to trial in 2023 Got her accommodation b/c she has significant amount of discovery to review Sternheim Not going to deny that given more time to review than other inmates are Understand I can't just say give her everything, make exactly same as GP, but there are clients in GP that have own computer, tablets, and allowed to review discovery endless hours a day Don't think that's right; understand that If 13 hours not enough, then let us know what will be Everdell Constant surveillance; camera on her all times; woken up every 15 minutes to make sure breathing; treated as if on suicide watch; disruptive to her health and to her ability to concentrate on preparing a defense Going forward, things to address sounds like normalizing amount of searches to be consistent with what other inmates experience and minimizing amount of disruption, particularly to her sleep at night, consistent with what other inmates experience Surveillance — understanding is that second camera is meant to capture the same area in case there is a malfunction in BOP camera system; camera in area outside in wall or ceiling that already captures and records same area Sternheim Why is camera facing me and my client in a visiting room? Understand that there are no cameras inside the room, but cameras outside the room showing who goes in and out Sternheim That is a distinction; camera pointed into the room Pass up the ask that camera not be pointed anywhere that cameras not already pointed Everdell Other inmates have handheld camera following them around 24 hours a day? Includes lawyers/legal visits; Understanding that there is not another inmate with backup camera system; reason for backup is that sometimes BOP camera fails and decision made to have backup camera that covers same area covered by normal area Happy to go back to MDC and say should not record anything not recorded by normal cameras Sternheim 3 officers watching 2 people in room where no one else, and camera pointed on us Everdell Already in a cage, not particularly pleasant; add stress of having handheld camera pointed directly at you; someone has camera up in your face, all the time; very invasive If cameras already recording, then why is it needed if just redundant; causes real disruption and distress in some ways Sternheim Invasive, maybe they will read lips; going far in my example; BOP overusing their authority EFTA00032005 What I'm taking away from this is that unless MDC stops entirely with second camera, that want warden brought before Judge Nathan Sternheim Want explanation directly from Warden why this is being done and why being done to GM; why degree of surveillance and searches on GM Any searching and surveillance beyond what is done to other inmates Why locked in at 8 pm? Sternheim Not saying GP is good for her; not using day room which would eliminate a lot of these issues; but have elected not to do that Let warden explain why From MDC perspective, client gets more benefits than many inmates, gets special treatment given all access she has Sternheim Given other treatment, where she is virtually in solitary confinement; don't view giving her more time to review discovery that ameliorates fact that she is being treated differently Client is first had where did not go to SHU, but went to own wing of jail where has access to computer, TV, etc., that would have in GP; treated differently than someone who would ordinarily go to protective custody Everdell Feel like there has to be some recognition from the Government that GM finds herself in position she is in b/c of who she is; To hear that getting perks, from defense side, starts b/c she is put in solitary Not fair to say she is better off than other inmates In solitary, recorded 24 hours a day — b/c of who she is Want to make sure she is in her chair at trial b/c of what happened with Epstein Sternheim Advocates of our client; putting you in role for being lawyer for BOP which is not correct Let warden say what he needs to say before the judge To recap, areas would like to see improved, surveillance — asking that second camera be removed entirely? Or is there any modification that would be acceptable to you? Sternheim don't have firm answer; don't think when meeting with her or every step of the way Will convey to BOP reducing use of camera and certainly not pointing into room where attorney meetings take place Other issue is amount of searching — reduced to amount of searching that other inmates experience Waking her up at night — ask that do nothing differently than what do to check on other inmates at night Everdell One other point on searches; when moves from isolation cell to day room to do discovery review, etc., that involves a bunch of searches too; our understanding was plan was for her to be housed in day room Need to keep her in certain room when would limit movement and searches if housed in day room Will raise day room again Sternheim Not allowed to maintain any food that she doesn't eat Think same for everyone; so that don't make hooch EFTA00032006 How much time she needs to review discovery? We understand a lot of discovery; have been over-inclusive in what we have given you; we have given you material that we don't anticipate using at trial, that doesn't relate to your client; 1.2 million documents is searchable to help expedite review If think client needs more than 13 hours a day, please let me know; when pushed MDC to allow for time to review discovery, have been responsive Everdell Only get extension cord after laptop dies; don't know if has gotten better Assistant United States Attorney United States Attorney's Office Southern District of New York One St. Andrew's Plaza New York, New York 10007 Tel: EFTA00032007

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' " To: "M., (NY) (FBI)" <I Subject: FW: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies] Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2021 23:01:57 +0000 See below. Would you please make sure that the drives that were made available for Maxwell's counsel to review in the spring are preserved? If you could please send me an email confirming their preservation and where they will be stored, that would be great. Thanks, From: Laura Menninge Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 6:30 PM To: Cc: >; Jeff Pagliuca (USANYS) [Contractor) (USANYS) Subject: RE: US v. Maxwell - [conferral re photo and other discovery deficiencies) Thank you for the follow up. Given that the FBI's records do not match mine, I would ask that you please preserve the two disks that I reviewed in New York in the event they are necessary for future litigation or production at trial. Best, Laura From: Sent: Tuesday, August 31 2021 3:23 PM To: Laura Menninger < Cc: Pagliuca [Contractor] •z: >; (USANYS

15p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

U.S. Department of Justice

U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of New York The Silvio I. Motto Building One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York. New York 10007 October 20, 2020 BY ELECTRONIC MAIL Christian Everdell, Esq. Mark Cohen, Esq. Cohen & Gresser LLP 800 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 Laura Menninger, Esq. Jeffrey Pagliuca, Esq. Haddon, Morgan and Foreman, P.C. 150 East Tenth Avenue Denver, CO 80203 Bobbi Sternheim, Esq. Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim 33 West 19th Street-4th Fl. New York, NY 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Dear Counsel: In recognition of the Government's ongoing discovery obligations, today we are producing copies of the materials listed in the below index, which materials are stamped with control numbers SDNY_GM_00328070 through SDNY_GM_00356148. The password for the drive is "USAOsdnyl!". The materials are available for pickup at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Manhattan. Please note that both this l

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

LBUCmaxl

120 LBUCmaxl UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. Before: 20 CR 330 (AJN) Jury Trial New York, N.Y. November 30, 2021 8:50 a.m. HON. ALISON J. NATHAN, APPEARANCES DAMIAN United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York BY: Assistant United States Attorneys HADDON MORGAN AND FOREMAN Attorneys for Defendant BY: JEFFREY S. PAGLIUCA CHRISTIAN R. EVERDELL LAURA A. MENNINGER -and- BOBBI C. STERNHEIM -and- RENATO STABILE Also Present: District Judge , FBI NYPD Sunny Drescher, Paralegal, U.S. Attorney's Office Ann Lundberg, Paralegal, Haddon Morgan and Foreman SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00068582 121 LBUCmaxl 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (Jury not present) THE COURT: Looks like we have everybody. Matt

287p
DOJ Data Set 8CorrespondenceUnknown

EFTA00020978

0p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

From: '

From: ' y• < To: BOBBI Cc:' Subject: RE: Ghislaine Maxwell 02879-509 Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 18:06:58 +0000 (USANYS)" Bobbi, Thank you for including me on this email. I understand from my conversation with MDC legal counsel today that MDC staff is continuing to monitor temperatures throughout the facility, including in the area where Ms. Maxwell is housed. My understanding is that the temperature where Ms. Maxwell is housed remains within the limits prescribed by BOP policy and that the MDC does not expect this week's activities to affect the temperature in Ms. Maxwell's cell. That said, they will continue to monitor the temperature and take appropriate action if it falls below prescribed limits. As has previously been conveyed via letter from the Government to defense counsel dated October 8, 2020, the MDC's assessment continues to be that Ms. Maxwell's current cell is the most appropriate placement for Ms. Maxwell both for her safety and the security of the institution.

3p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x MS. MAXWELL'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER AUTHORIZING A SUBPOENA PURSUANT TO FED. R. CRIM. P 17(c)(3) Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP Bobbi C. Stemheim Law Offices of Bobbi . Stemheim Attorneys for Chislaine Maxwell EFTA00040126 Defendant Ghislaine Maxwell requests that the Court enter an Order authorizing her counsel to issue a subpoena under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 17(c) to Administrator, Epstein Victim's Compensation Program, for certain items identified in Attachment A to the proposed Subpoena, together attached as Exhibit 1 to this Motion, for the following reasons: I. Background On October 11, 2021, the government began producing 3500 material to the defense. These rolling productions confirmed that the four Accusers referenced in the

9p

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.