DOJ-OGR-00005838.jpg
664 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
664 KB
Summary
This legal document, filed on October 29, 2021, is a portion of a government motion arguing against the defense's proposed jury instruction. The Government contends that the defense's instruction regarding sexual activity with 'Minor Victim-3' is wrong on the law and that the relevance of United Kingdom's age of consent law should be disregarded. The document also states that the Government has already provided the defense with discovery materials, including the identities of alleged co-conspirators, making the defense's request to preclude their statements baseless.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Vasquez |
Mentioned in a case citation: United States v. Vasquez, 82 F.3d 574, 577 (2d Cir. 1996).
|
|
| Minor Victim-3 | Victim |
Mentioned in the context of sexual activity that the defense argues should not be considered illegal for the purposes...
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Court | government agency |
Referred to as the judicial body presiding over the case, responsible for providing instructions to the jury.
|
| Government | government agency |
Represents the prosecution in the case, arguing against the defense's proposed jury instructions and providing discov...
|
| 2d Cir. | government agency |
The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, cited in the case United States v. Vasquez.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2021-10-11
The Government provided the defense with comprehensive Jencks Act material for trial witnesses and its exhibits, along with a letter.
Government
defense
The document discusses arguments and evidence to be presented at an upcoming trial, including the Government's intention to argue certain individuals are co-conspirators.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in relation to its law on the age of consent, which the Government argues is irrelevant to the case.
|
Relationships (1)
The document details an adversarial legal relationship where the Government is arguing against a motion and proposed jury instruction submitted by the defense.
Key Quotes (2)
"represent[] a theory of the defense with a basis in the record that would lead to acquittal"Source
— United States v. Vasquez
(Cited as the legal standard for when it is appropriate for a court to reject a defense request for a jury instruction.)
DOJ-OGR-00005838.jpg
Quote #1
"cannot be considered ‘illegal’ or ‘criminal’ or ‘unlawful’ for purposes of the crimes charged in the indictment"Source
— defense
(A quote from the defense's proposed jury instruction regarding sexual activity involving Minor Victim-3.)
DOJ-OGR-00005838.jpg
Quote #2
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document