What is document EFTA00030069?

This is an email chain from March 9, 2021, between federal prosecutors and Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorneys regarding proposed redactions to court filings. The defense team was objecting to certain redactions the government wanted to make to their omnibus response brief opposing Maxwell's pretrial motions.

Who is mentioned in this document?

The key figures include Laura Menninger (Maxwell's defense attorney from Haddon, Morgan & Foreman in Denver), Judge Alison J. Nathan (presiding judge), Jeffrey Pagliuca and Christian Everdell (additional defense counsel), and multiple prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's Office whose names are redacted in this version.

What does this document reveal about the Maxwell case?

This document reveals the procedural mechanics of the high-profile prosecution, showing how both sides negotiated what information should be kept confidential versus made public in court filings. It demonstrates the careful coordination required in complex federal cases and references the government's omnibus response to multiple defense motions filed by Maxwell's legal team in early 2021, months before her trial.

What is document EFTA00030069?

This is an email chain from March 9, 2021, between federal prosecutors and Ghislaine Maxwell's defense attorneys regarding proposed redactions to court filings. The defense team was objecting to certain redactions the government wanted to make to their omnibus response brief opposing Maxwell's pretrial motions.

Who is mentioned in this document?

The key figures include Laura Menninger (Maxwell's defense attorney from Haddon, Morgan & Foreman in Denver), Judge Alison J. Nathan (presiding judge), Jeffrey Pagliuca and Christian Everdell (additional defense counsel), and multiple prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney's Office whose names are redacted in this version.

What does this document reveal about the Maxwell case?

This document reveals the procedural mechanics of the high-profile prosecution, showing how both sides negotiated what information should be kept confidential versus made public in court filings. It demonstrates the careful coordination required in complex federal cases and references the government's omnibus response to multiple defense motions filed by Maxwell's legal team in early 2021, months before her trial.

EFTA00030069 - EFTA00030070

Email correspondence between prosecutors and defense attorneys regarding proposed redactions to court filings in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell (March 2021).

This is procedural email correspondence from March 9, 2021, between the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York and Ghislaine Maxwell's defense team (Laura Menninger of Haddon, Morgan & Foreman). The emails coordinate the exchange of proposed redactions to the government's omnibus response opposing Maxwell's defense motions. This represents routine pre-trial litigation mechanics in the high-profile sex trafficking case, where both sides negotiated what information should be redacted from public court filings to protect sensitive information while maintaining transparency.

Key Highlights

•Defense attorney Laura Menninger objected to government's proposed redactions in their omnibus response brief
•Judge Alison J. Nathan presided over the case (U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330)
•Document shows the back-and-forth negotiation process for redacting sensitive information from court filings before public release
•Demonstrates the procedural complexity of the Maxwell prosecution, with multiple attorneys coordinating on both sides

Frequently Asked Questions

Books for Further Reading

Perversion of Justice

Julie K. Brown

Covers Maxwell's involvement

Ghislaine Maxwell: An Unauthorized Biography: The Shocking True Story of Jeffrey Epstein's Madam

Perversion of Justice: The Jeffrey Epstein Story

Julie K. Brown

Investigative journalism that broke the Epstein case open

Document Information

Bates Range

EFTA00030069 - EFTA00030070

Pages

Document Content

Page 1 - EFTA00030069

From: )" To: a(USANYS)” Cc: (USANYS)" Subject: RE: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) -- Objections to Gov't Proposed Redactions in Omnibus Response Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 19:56:11 +0000 Attachments: PROPOSED_REDACT1ONS - 2021.02.26 Government Omnibus_Opposition to Maxwell Defense Motions FINAL.pd >, Attached. From: (USANYS) c Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 2:54 PM To: >; USANYS) Cc: ) < ).; (USANYS) < Subject: RE: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) -- Objections to Gov't Proposed Redactions in Omnibus Response Thanks. When you can would you mind sending us our proposed redactions to pages 1-128? From: Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 2:01 PM To: (USANYS) Cc: < )'; cza ) (USANYS)< Subject: FW: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) -- Objections to Gov't Proposed Redactions in Omnibus Response FYI From: Laura Menninger <ImenningerPhmflaw.com> Sent: Tuesday, March 9, 2021 1:08 PM To: Cc: (USANYS) >; >, I I c ; 'BOBBI C STERNHEIM' ; Jeff Pagliuca Christian R Everdell - Cohen & Gresser LLP Subject: U.S. v. Ghislaine Maxwell, 20 Cr. 330 (AJN) -- Objections to Gov't Proposed Redactions in Omnibus Response Dear Judge Nathan — Pursuant to Rule 2(B) of the Court's individual rules, attached is a letter setting forth Ms. Maxwell's objections to the redactions proposed by the government to their Omnibus Response and Exhibit 5. Also attached are exhibits setting forth Ms. Maxwell's proposed redactions. Best regards, Laura A. Menninger EFTA00030069

Page 2 - EFTA00030070

Laura A. Menninger I Partner Haddon, Mor an & Foreman, P.C. Denver, CO 80203 EFTA00030070