Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
efta-efta00095654DOJ Data Set 9Other

GG COHEN & GRESSER LLP

Date
Unknown
Source
DOJ Data Set 9
Reference
EFTA 00095654
Pages
2
Persons
3
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

GG COHEN & GRESSER LLP 1100 Thud twenue New York NY 10022 Mark S. Cohen Christian R. Eveniell +1 1212 957-7600 January 25, 2021 VIA ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) www.00hengeSSer.COM Dear Judge Nathan: On behalf of our client, Ghislaine Maxwell, we will be filing the following pretrial motions with accompanying exhibits: I. Motion to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment for Breach of the Non-Prosecution Agreement 2. Motion to Dismiss Counts One through Four of the Superseding Indictment as Time- Barred 3. Motion Under the Due Process Clause to Suppress All Evidence Obtained from the Government's Subpoena to and to Dismiss Counts Five and Six 4. Motion to Dismiss Counts Five and Six of the Superseding Indictment Because the Alleged Misstatements Are Not Penurious as a Matter of Law 5. Motion for a Severan

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.
GG COHEN & GRESSER LLP 1100 Thud twenue New York NY 10022 Mark S. Cohen Christian R. Eveniell +1 1212 957-7600 January 25, 2021 VIA ECF The Honorable Alison J. Nathan United States District Court Southern District of New York 40 Foley Square New York, New York 10007 Re: United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) www.00hengeSSer.COM Dear Judge Nathan: On behalf of our client, Ghislaine Maxwell, we will be filing the following pretrial motions with accompanying exhibits: I. Motion to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment for Breach of the Non-Prosecution Agreement 2. Motion to Dismiss Counts One through Four of the Superseding Indictment as Time- Barred 3. Motion Under the Due Process Clause to Suppress All Evidence Obtained from the Government's Subpoena to and to Dismiss Counts Five and Six 4. Motion to Dismiss Counts Five and Six of the Superseding Indictment Because the Alleged Misstatements Are Not Penurious as a Matter of Law 5. Motion for a Severance of and Separate Trial on Counts Five and Six of the Superseding Indictment 6. Motion to Strike Surplusage from the Superseding Indictment 7. Motion to Dismiss Counts One Through Six of the Superseding Indictment for Pre- Indictment Delay 8. Motion to Dismiss Either Count One or Count Three of the Superseding Indictment as Multiplicitous 9. Motion to Dismiss the Superseding Indictment as It Was Obtained in Violation of the Sixth Amendment 10. Motion for a Bill of Particulars and Pretrial Disclosures II. Motion Under the Fourth Amendment, Martindell, and the Fifth Amendment to Suppress All Evidence Obtained from the Government's Subpoena to and to Dismiss Counts Five and Six 12. Motion to Dismiss Counts One through Four of the Superseding Indictment for Lack of Specificity EFTA00095654 The Honorable Alison J. Nathan January 25, 2021 Page 2 Several of the motions reference or discuss Confidential Information produced in discovery and are therefore redacted pursuant to paragraph 15 of the Protective Order (Dkt. 36). In an abundance of caution, and to give the government the chance to review the proposed redactions, we will not file on the public docket any motions containing redactions until we are instructed to do so by the Court. Instead, we will submit by email to the Court and the government two versions of those motions—an unredacted original to be kept under seal and a version for public filing with proposed redactions-pursuant to Rule 2(B) of the Court's individual rules of criminal practice. We will file on the public docket any motions that do not contain redactions. Please contact us with any questions. Your consideration is greatly appreciated. Respectfully submitted, /s/ Mark S. Cohen Mark S. Cohen Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP 800 Third Avenue, 21st Floor New York New York 10022 cc: All counsel of record (via email) EFTA00095655

Related Documents (6)

Court UnsealedTestimonyUnknown

Court Transcript: 773

The transcript details a segment of Ghislaine Maxwell's jury trial where the jury requests supplies and a definition for 'enticement'. The prosecution and defense discuss how to respond, with the judge referencing previous cases (United States v. Almonte and United States v. Dupigny) to define 'entice' as 'to attract, induce, or lure using hope or desire'.

58p
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) MEMORANDUM OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL IN SUPPORT OF HER RENEWED MOTION FOR BAIL Mark S. Cohen Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP New York, NY 10022 Phone: Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. Denver, CO 80203 Phone: Bobbi C. Stemheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim New York, NY 10011 Phone: Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00094289 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1 ARGUMENT 7 I. Reconsideration of the Court's Bail Decision is Appropriate Under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(O 7 II. Ms. Maxwell Should Be Granted Bail Under the Proposed Strict Bail Conditions 10 A. Ms. Maxwell Has Deep Family Ties to the United States and Numerous Sureties to Support Her Bond 10 1. Ms. Maxwell is Devoted to Her Spouse and Stepchildren and Would Never Destroy Her Family By Leaving th

45p
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
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Filing: 123

Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team filed a motion to dismiss Counts One through Four of the superseding indictment for lack of specificity. The motion was filed on January 25, 2021, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The defense team is represented by multiple attorneys from different law firms.

2p
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) MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT OF GHISLAINE MAXWELL'S THIRD MOTION FOR RELEASE ON BAIL Bobbi C. Sternheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00090990 INTRODUCTION Ghislaine Maxwell respectfully submits this Memorandum in Support of her Third Motion for Release on Bail. As Ms. Maxwell has stated on numerous occasions and reaffirms here: she has no intention or desire to leave this country. She is an American citizen, has lived in United States for 30 years, has strong family ties and the support of friends and family residing in this country. She wants nothing more than to remain in the United States under whatever conditions the Court deems necessary so that she can effectively prepare fo

9p
Court UnsealedLegal FilingUnknown

Court Filing: 121

Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team filed a motion to dismiss either Count One or Count Three of the superseding indictment, arguing that they are multiplicitous. The motion was filed on January 25, 2021, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The defense team is represented by multiple attorneys from different law firms.

2p

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.