Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00080400Other

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 260 Filed Off1/00/21 Page 1 of 2

Date
Unknown
Source
Reference
EFTA 00080400
Pages
2
Persons
6
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 260 Filed Off1/00/21 Page 1 of 2 COHEN & GRESSER LLP BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 USDC SONY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC 0: DATE FILED: 5/3/21 April 30, 2021 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (MN) Dear Judge Nathan: S00 Thad Avenue New York, NY 10022 ♦1 212 957 7600 phone wenecohengessercom Counsel for the MDC may submit any objection to the Defendant's request by May 4, 2021. SO ORDERED. We write to respectfully request the Court to issue an order to the MDC directing it to accept two hard drives from defense counsel that contain the non-Highly Confidential discovery in this case for Ms. Maxwell's use at the MDC. In an effort to facilitate Ms. Maxwell's review of the discovery, defense counsel have created a master set of two hard drives that contain a complete set of the disc

Tags

eftadataset-9vol00009
Ask AI about this document

Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 260 Filed Off1/00/21 Page 1 of 2 COHEN & GRESSER LLP BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, NY 10007 USDC SONY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED DOC 0: DATE FILED: 5/3/21 April 30, 2021 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (MN) Dear Judge Nathan: S00 Thad Avenue New York, NY 10022 ♦1 212 957 7600 phone wenecohengessercom Counsel for the MDC may submit any objection to the Defendant's request by May 4, 2021. SO ORDERED. We write to respectfully request the Court to issue an order to the MDC directing it to accept two hard drives from defense counsel that contain the non-Highly Confidential discovery in this case for Ms. Maxwell's use at the MDC. In an effort to facilitate Ms. Maxwell's review of the discovery, defense counsel have created a master set of two hard drives that contain a complete set of the discovery produced by the government so far, excluding the materials marked Highly Confidential, which Ms. Maxwell is not permitted to possess in the MDC pursuant to the terms of the Protective Order. The master drives are easier to use than her existing hard drives because they collect all of the material in one place and organize the documents in a more user-friendly format. For example, the November 18, 2020 production containing roughly 2.2 million pages was produced in load file format, which contains images of individual pages of documents in native file format, image file format, and other formats. The hard drives organize these files by document, as opposed to by page, and eliminate duplicative file formats so that Ms. Maxwell will not have to add countless hours to her review. Defense counsel would like to send these hard drives to Ms. Maxwell for her to use in the MDC. We were informed by the MDC Legal Department that they are only permitted to accept hard drives that are loaded and certified by the U.S. Attorney's Office. We have conferred with the government, which has advised that it does not object to the defense making an application to the Court to issue an order directing the MDC to accept the hard drives. The government requested, however, that the Court allow MDC legal counsel the opportunity to note their objections to the Court. EFTA00080400 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 260 Filed 06/00/21 Page 2 of 2 The Honorable Alison J. Nathan April 30, 2021 Page 2 Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Court issue an order directing the MDC to accept the master hard drives either from defense counsel or from the government. We will send a copy of this letter to the MDC Legal Department so that they can note any objections they may have. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely, Is/ Christian Everdell Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP 800 Third Avenue, 21st Floor New York, New York 10022 cc: All Counsel of Record (By ECF) MDC Legal Department EFTA00080401

Related Documents (6)

DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GIIISLAINE MAXWE 'S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON. M R AN & FOREMAN P.C. Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP Bobbi C. Sternheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim Attorneys for Chislaine Maxwell EFTA00155901 Table of Contents Table of Contents ii Table of Authorities iv Introduction 1 Factual Background 2 I. Jury Selection. 2 A. The jury questionnaire. 2 B. Juror No. 50's questionnaire. 5 C. Juror No. 50's voir dire 6 D. The final composition of the jury. 9 II. Juror No. 50's admissions that he wasn't truthful with the Court 11 A. Juror No. 50's statements to the media. 12 1. The interview with the Independent. 12 2. The interview with the Daily Mail. 13 3. The interview with Reuters 14 4. The partial video of the interview with the Daily Mail. 1

66p
OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x 20 Cr. 330 (MN) REPLY MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTION UNDER THE DUE PROCESS CLAUSE TO SUPPRESS ALL EVIDENCE OBTAINED FROM THE GOVERNMENT'S SUBPOENA TO BOLES SCHILLER AND TO DISMISS COUNTS FIVE AND SIX Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue Denver, CO 80203 Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP 800 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022 Bobbi C. Stemheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim 33 West 19th Street - 4th Floor New York, NY 10011 Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00077571 Table of Contents Table of Contents Table of Authorities ii Table of Exhibits iv Introduction and Summary of the Argument 1 I. The Facts 2 II. The Government's Response to Maxwell's Motion. 6 A. The Government's Defenses Are Not Credible. 7 B. Assuming the Government's De

34p
OtherUnknown

k7e2MaxC kjc

k7e2MaxC kjc 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: New York, N.Y. 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) x Teleconference Arraignment Bail Hearing July 14, 2020 3:05 p.m. HON. ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge APPEARANCES AUDREY STRAUSS United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York BY: Assistant United States Attorneys COHEN & GRESSER, LLP Attorneys for Defendant BY: MARK S. COHEN CHRISTIAN R. EVERDELL HADDON MORGAN & FOREMAN, P.C. Attorneys for Defendant BY: JEFFREY S. PAGLIUCA LAURA A. MENNINGER SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 EFTA00066216 k7e2MaxC kjc THE COURT: Good afternoon, everyone. This is Judge Nathan presiding. This is United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 330. I will tak

91p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. x S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF HER MOTIONS IN LIMINE Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. Denver Phone: Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP New York NY Phone: Bobbi C. Stemheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim Attorneys for Chislaine Maxwell EFTA00090721 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. A. B. C. D. THIS COURT SHOULD PRECLUDE INTRODUCTION OF ALLEGED CO- CONSPIRATOR STATEMENTS AS A SANCTION FOR GOVERNMENTS FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THIS COURT'S SEPTEMBER 3, 2021 ORDER 1 The Court's Order was Neither Ambiguous Nor Misread by the Defense 1 The Court Has the Authority to Require Disclosure 2 There Should Be a Sanction 4 There are Substantial Issues with the Government's Anticipated Position 5 II. GOVERNMENT CONCEDEDLY FAILED TO GIVE NOTICE OF THE BASIS OR REASONING TO ADMIT ANY

52p
OtherUnknown

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 78 Filed 12/01/20 Page 1 of 2

Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 78 Filed 12/01/20 Page 1 of 2 U.S. Department of Justice United States Attorney Southern District of New York The Silvio J. Malin Building One Saint Andrew's Plaza New York. New York 10007 December 1, 2020 BY ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York United States Courthouse 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) Dear Judge Nathan: The parties jointly submit this letter in response to the Court's November 24, 2020 order directing the parties to meet and confer regarding the defendant's request that the warden of the Metropolitan Detention Center ("MDC") report directly to the Court and counsel on the defendant's conditions of detention. (Dkt. No. 76). Over the past week, the Government has spoken with MDC legal counsel regarding the defendant's conditions of confinement and has tried to gather additional information regard

12p
DOJ Data Set 9OtherUnknown

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant. : 20 Cr. 330 (MN) x GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S MOTION TO EXCLUDE ANY EVIDENCE OFFERED BY THE GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO FED. R. EVID. 404(b) FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE RULE'S NOTICE REQUIREMENT Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue Denver CO 80203 Phone: Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP 800 Third Avenue New York, Phone: Bobbi C. Sternheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim 225 Broadway, Suite 715 New York, NY 10007 Phone Attorneys for Chislaine Maxwell EFTA00105954 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND 1 I. 2020 Amendments to Rule 404(b) 1 II. Rule 404(b) Notice in This Case 2 ARGUMENT 4 I. By Failing to Comply with the Rule 404(b) Notice Requirement, the Government Has Waived the Admission of Any Evidence Pursuant to the Rule 4 II. Should the Government's Failure Be Excused, Ms.

12p

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.