Browse by Document Type
Court Filings (12,056 documents)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document652 Filed 04/01/22 Pagelof2
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
The Silvio J. Mollo Building
One Saint Andrew's Plaza
New
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 652 Filed 04/01/22 Page2of2
motions at that time, but it is inappropriate to stay this matter based on nothing more than the
defendant’s conjecture.
The Government s
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document650_ Filed 04/01/22 Pagelof2
U.S. Department of Justice
United States Attorney
Southern District of New York
The Silvio J. Mollo Building
One Saint Andrew's Plaza
New
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document650_ Filed 04/01/22 Page2of2
The Government has conferred with defense counsel, who consent to this request.
Respectfully submitted,
DAMIAN WILLIAMS
United States Att
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 649 _ Filed 03/15/22 Page 8of12
LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIA\
sample of which are provided below, provide further evidence of his bias. See Skaggs, 164 F.3d
at 51
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 649 _ Filed 03/15/22 Page3of12
LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIA\
Question 49, which asked “Have you or a friend or family member ever been accused of sexual
harassmen
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 649 _ Filed 03/15/22 Page 2of12
LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIA\
Maxwell, so he attempted to give innocuous explanations for his false questionnaire responses
and hi
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 649 _ Filed 03/15/22 Page1of12
LAW OFFICES OF BOBBI C. STERNHEIA\
212-243-1100 * Main 225 Broadway, Suite 715
917-912-9698 ° Cell New York, NY 10007
888-587-4737 ° Fa
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 648 Filed 03/15/22 Page 15 of16
the victims in this case—rather, it is quite different. (Mar. 8, 2022 Tr. at 8:14-20 (stating that he
was abused at age nine or ten by
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 648 Filed 03/15/22 Page 16 of 16
Conclusion
For these reasons, and for the reasons set forth in the Government’s memorandum in
opposition (Dkt. No. 643), the defenda
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 648 Filed 03/15/22 Page4of16
In short, at each step of the analysis, the defendant has not come close to establishing that
the extraordinary remedy of a new trial is w
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 648 Filed 03/15/22 Page3of16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ee eee Xx
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
-V.- i S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
GHISLAINE MAXWEL
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 648 Filed 03/15/22 Page 2 of 16
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. The Defendant’s Motion for a New Trial Should Be Denied 00.0... eee eeeeeeeeneeneeeneetneeeeee 2
A. The Record Do
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 648 Filed 03/15/22 Page1of16
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ee eee Xx
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
-V.- i S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
GHISLAINE MAXWEL
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document647 _ Filed 03/11/22 Page11of 24
note asking a similar question about Annie Farmer’s testimony. See Court Exhibit # 9 (“Can we
consider Annie’s testimony as conspiracy
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document647_ Filed 03/11/22 Page10of 24
The government further argues that the Jury Note is ambiguous because it is not clear
which flights it refers to or where the jury belie
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 647 Filed 03/11/22 Page9of24
a result, there is a substantial likelihood that the jury convicted Ms. Maxwell on Count Four
based on a constructive amendment of the cri
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 647 _ Filed 03/11/22 Page6of24
that [Ms. Maxwell] was not convicted of the crime described in that core, but of a crime
‘distinctly different’ from the one alleged.” U
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 647 Filed 03/11/22 Page5of24
Ghislaine Maxwell respectfully submits this Reply Memorandum in Support of her Post-
Trial Motions (““Motion” or “Mot.”).
I. The Court’s
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 647 Filed 03/11/22 Page 2 of 24
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
I. The Court’s Response to the Jury Note (Court Exhibit #15) Was Erroneous and
Resulted in a Constructive Amend
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 647 Filed 03/11/22 Page1of24
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
V.
GHISLAINE MAXWELL,
Defendant
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 646 Filed 03/11/22 Pagelof1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES OF AM
USA / Plaintiff(s)
20 CR 330
Case No.:
G
be
N
Ww
ws
Oo
OY
~]
oO
WO
a
oO
=
be
N
Ww
=
Hs
Oo
a
OY
a
~]
a
oO
a
Ke)
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
M38TMAX1
signed the proposed immunity order
Document 645
Fil
be
NO
Ww
ws
Oo
OY
~]
oO
Ke)
a
oO
he
be
No
(ee)
=
Hs
Oo
_
OY
a
~]
a
oO
a
Ke}
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
M38TMAX1
(Case call
ed)
D
BS
PUTY CLE
ina
Document
fe
N
Ww
ws
Oo
OY
~]
oO
WO
a
oO
a
fe
N
Ww
=
Hs
Oo
a
OY
a
~]
a
oO
a
Ke)
20
21
22
23
24
25
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 645 Filed 03/11/22 Page1of50 1
M38TMAX1
UNITED STATES
areneuesbasmmmaeshdiaaicemmiaiy ar, bimemmmammaneii ceeded
Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 605 _ Filed 03/18/13 Page 1 of 41
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES
CaébasiAQOAS UR DARN TOT O30. FSS DATO ab ateye eG af1171 7
Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 604 _ Filed 03/16/13 Page 1 of 14
7185 AVENUE OF THE AMERICAS 31ST FLOOR
4 NEW YORK, NY 10036-2603
vy. ZUC
Cabas i Ze Or 4G RsP AS SL emer itt 46 S82 CAibell ORS OP Re Bays Bet af1171 7
wodinon sib NH
MMM NM MM PRP RPP Pee RP Re
O®WNrFOWOA RU SF wWNe Oo
A-5925
23
CAC3PARC
has stated that you can find t
Caédas@AQOAR URE PANN 1 Demo PrRe mi Giaew 0 Fie DUP ab dee 6 086F df1171.7
ww omnia nnuvubeWWNYNYPe
NPN N Nh HMR RP RP PPP RP RPP RP PP PP PPP eee
OBW NY OOWWU MOAR HUoO Ss Bw Herod
A-5903
CAC3PA
CaébasiAQOAS UR DARN mea art i FSU DATO? ab ate 6 ai af1171 7
Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 544 _ Filed 08/07/12 Page 1 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STAT
CaasP AOA ies PAN mma Wr <-7 3 ie FeSO DAO ab ate) VAG af1171 7
Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 522 Filed 04/06/12 Page 20 of 29
Stephen Gillers
LEGAL AND Reporter, Appellate Judges Conference, Comm
CaasP AOA ies PAN mma Wr t-7 0 FeSO DA ab éthig2 26F af1171 7
Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 522 Filed 04/06/12 Page 2 of 29
separate question of whether the motion for a new trial based on the con
CaasP AOA ies PAN may at -7 FSS DA ab ate 2 &26F af1171 7
Case 1:09-cr-00581-WHP Document 522 Filed 04/06/12 Page 1 of 29
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED ST
Cabas i Ze Or Oc kteP AS SL eminent G6 2 (Abels DOP Rape 71 Bf dfS080
e
oOWOAaof& Whe
ee
BWhHrPOW Mat mU BW he
aa
A-5702
245
C2GFDAU1 Hearing
THE DEPUTY CLERK: Continued case of United States o
Caédas@AROAS URE PANN 1 Bem PrRemtiGieZ 0 ARS DAP ab &ttep &4H dfS080
WwwoemetstitIanwosa BWW HMR H
A-5699
C2GFDAUI Hearing
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
UNITED STATES
C Ea 8 ARON OREESE AGNI Danie
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, y
PAUL M. DAUGERDAS, ET AL.,
Cetrdau3 Page 97
1 (Witness excused)
2 THE COURT: Before the defendants call Juror No. LI
3 have before me an app
Cabas6 202 OF ed RRES BAB In Beictiardomit GLG-2O Fite RSA Pag St SE at 767
x1
PAGE
Exhibit D to Brune Affidavit—
Email from Viviann Stapp to Randy Kim, March 1, 2011 ........ A-5466
Exhibit E to
Cadac 282 Oo RRES BAB Nn Beier domit GL62O Rite ORS Paha af af 767
x
PAGE
Exhibit 24 to Trzaskoma Declaration—
Order, Conrad v. Manessis, February 5, 2009 ................... A-5212
Exhibit 25 to Tr
Cadac 202 Oreo CRRES AE n Bieta damit GOG2O Rite ORE Peake 13 of at 767
ix
PAGE
Exhibit 13 to Trzaskoma Declaration—
Certificate of Disposition from the Criminal Court of the City of
New York, County
Cadasé 22 Ord Cie BA In Buia deni G67 O TARE ORSAY 7 Pn Peake Of c76 7
vil
PAGE
GX1002-64 Fax from Lisa Hurley to James D. Beumel,
May 16, 2003........ cece eee ened A-4777
GX1002-122 Letter from Lis
Cadasé 22 OF e0 Cee BA mn Buia denit GALE A7 O TAD ORE 7 Peake & Sf a 76 7
iv
PAGE
Transcript—Trial, Day 47, May 23, 2011 ............. 2... cee eee ee A-2637
Transcript—Trial, Day 48, May 25, 2011
Cadasé 22 Ord Cite BA mn Buia denit G62 O TAD ORE 7 Pn Paktpee at cf76 7
13-1388-cr
IN THE
United States Court of Appeals
FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Appellee,
—against—
PA
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 644 _ Filed 03/11/22 Page 24 of 32
E. This Court should reject the government’s attempt to manufacture a
“Show Hearing”.
To read the government’s brief, one would thi
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 644 _ Filed 03/11/22 Page 7 of 32
response would have provided a valid basis for a challenge for cause”). That’s because, as the
Supreme Court held in United States v.
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 644 _ Filed 03/11/22 Page1of32
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
we ee a ee ee xX
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
v : S2 20 Cr. 330 (AJN)
GHISLAINE
1/26/22, 3:30PM Case 1:20-cr-O0@MakihAexwellld @Ceays evitle find Beminced kad de Wd A2predatdr ADpay Mat fOntie
ISEMENT
During the trial Scotty, who works in finance, was seated in the third row of
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document643_ Filed 03/11/22 Page 47 of 49
Mar. 9, 2020); Strike 3 Holdings, LLC v. Doe, 19 Civ. 2552 (LAK) (OTW), 2019 WL 4855039,
at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 2, 2019).
Finally, the
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 643 _ Filed 03/11/22 Page 48 of 49
the court to invoke its powers or affect its decisions” stands on a “different footing” than items
merely passed between parties in
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 643 Filed 03/11/22 Page 42 of 49
first instance, it held that the district court’s decision not to do so was within its broad discretion.
Id. at 306.
As the foregoing
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document643_ Filed 03/11/22 Page 19 of 49
which are relatively easily understood by lawyers and judges.”); Dyer v. Calderon, 151 F.3d 970,
973 (9th Cir. 1998) (“[W]e must be to