HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014081.jpg
1.79 MB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
6
Locations
0
Events
0
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal journal article / house oversight committee production
File Size:
1.79 MB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal journal article (Vol. 104), likely authored by Paul Cassell ('CASSELL ET AL.'), discussing the legal precedent for crime victims' rights attaching before formal charges are filed. It analyzes statutes and case law from states including South Carolina, Illinois, Iowa, and Michigan, arguing that victims are entitled to notification and consultation during the investigation phase. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' Bates stamp, suggesting it was part of the congressional investigation into the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, specifically regarding the failure to notify victims of the non-prosecution agreement.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Cassell | Author |
Listed in the header 'CASSELL ET AL.' (Likely Paul Cassell, victims' rights attorney).
|
| James B., Jr. | Subject of legal case |
Cited in footnote 248 regarding a Connecticut Superior Court case.
|
| Kimberly J. Winbush | Legal Author |
Cited in footnote 250 for an annotation on restitution.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| South Carolina Supreme Court |
Mentioned in text regarding a decision on victims' rights prior to indictment.
|
|
| House Oversight Committee |
Implied by the Bates stamp 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014081'.
|
|
| Connecticut Superior Court |
Cited in footnote 248.
|
Locations (6)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned regarding its Supreme Court ruling.
|
|
|
Mentioned regarding state statutes on victim notification.
|
|
|
Mentioned regarding state statutes on victim notification.
|
|
|
Mentioned regarding state statutes on victim notification.
|
|
|
Cited in footnote 251 regarding state statutes.
|
|
|
Cited in footnote 254 regarding state statutes.
|
Key Quotes (3)
"In other words, while few state judiciaries have addressed the precise timing of state crime victims’ rights, those that have addressed the question have typically found that the rights do extend to pre-charging situations."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014081.jpg
Quote #1
"This law fits the long-standing trend in states toward expanding protections for crime"Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014081.jpg
Quote #2
"Michigan’s statute requires law enforcement to provide information within a mere twenty-four hours of contact between the agency and the victim."Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014081.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document