Epstein Secrets

Maxwell was mentioned in more national media articles than in the analogous 90-day periods for Mr. Weinstein, Mr. Cosby, Mr. Guzman Loera, and Mr. Raniere combined. ALL U.S. MEDIA COVERAGE COMPARISON (90 DAYS OF ARREST) 7.000 6.000 5.000 V t y 4,000 IJ moo 2.000 1.000 0 GIIISLAINE MAXWELL

itions, counsel requested that the Warden provide a first-hand report to the Court and counsel. Following Court directive for a report from the MDC, MDC Legal submitted a letter that recited BOP policy but failed to address a number of concerns. 36 EFTA00065757 alerted the government on August 27, 2020

Maxwell was mentioned in more national media articles than in the analogous 90-day periods for Mr. Weinstein, Mr. Cosby, Mr. Guzman Loera, and Mr. Raniere combined. ALL U.S. MEDIA COVERAGE COMPARISON (90 DAYS OF ARREST) 7.000 6.000 5.000 V t y 4,000 IJ moo 2.000 1.000 0 GIIISLAINE MAXWELL

itions, counsel requested that the Warden provide a first-hand report to the Court and counsel. Following Court directive for a report from the MDC, MDC Legal submitted a letter that recited BOP policy but failed to address a number of concerns. 36 EFTA00154553 alerted the government on August 27, 2020

Maxwell was mentioned in more national media articles than in the analogous 90-day periods for Mr. Weinstein, Mr. Cosby, Mr. Guzman Loera, and Mr. Raniere combined. ALL U.S. MEDIA COVERAGE COMPARISON (90 DAYS OF ARREST) 7.000 6.000 5.000 5. a 4.003 a 3.000 2.000 1.000 0 GHISLAINE MAXWELL

itions, counsel requested that the Warden provide a first-hand report to the Court and counsel. Following Court directive for a report from the MDC, MDC Legal submitted a letter that recited BOP policy but failed to address a number of concerns. 36 EFTA00094330 alerted the government on August 27, 2020

earing or to conduct another hearing if it determines that any new information would not have a material bearing on the issue. See United States v. Raniere, No. 18-CR-2041 (NGG) (VMS), 2018 WL 6344202, at *2 n.7 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2018) (noting that lais the court has already held one detention hearing,

itions, counsel requested that the Warden provide a first-hand report to the Court and counsel. Following Court directive for a report from the MDC, MDC Legal submitted a letter that recited BOP policy but failed to address a number of concerns. 36 EFTA00093257 Ccosel.211-ZMICERWlit Meutiskfit19302Frii

0. The Court is not required to do so if it determines that any new information would not have a material bearing on the issue. See United States v. Raniere, No. 18-CR-2041 (NGG) (VMS), 2018 WL 6344202, at *2 n.7 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 5, 2018) (noting that "[als the court has already held one detention hearing

xtent to which she is required to undergo searches. The government's letter, however, does not include the concerns defense counsel has reported to MDC Legal during the past couple of months. In addition, the letter incorrectly states that legal calls are available on Saturdays. Such requests by counsel