DOJ-OGR-00003018.jpg

884 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

5
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 884 KB
Summary

This legal document, filed on April 16, 2021, is a rebuttal to a defendant's accusation that the Government delayed an indictment for tactical advantage. The author contrasts the Government's decision to stay the civil case of *Doe v. Indyke* with its inaction in the settled case of *Giuffre v. Maxwell*, arguing the different procedural postures and the risk of witness deposition in the active *Doe* case justified the different legal strategies. The document asserts that the Government's actions were logical and not part of a conspiracy to gain an advantage in the criminal case.

People (5)

Name Role Context
Doe Plaintiff
Mentioned as the plaintiff in the case Doe v. Indyke.
Indyke Defendant
Mentioned as the defendant in the case Doe v. Indyke.
Giuffre Plaintiff
Mentioned as the plaintiff in the case Giuffre v. Maxwell.
Maxwell Defendant
Mentioned as the defendant in the case Giuffre v. Maxwell.
Judge Freeman Judge
Recipient of a letter from the Government regarding the Doe v. Indyke case.

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
Government government agency
A party in the legal proceedings, accused by the defendant of delaying an indictment for tactical advantage. The docu...
Court government agency
The judicial body being addressed in the document, which the defendant urges to draw an inference about the Governmen...

Timeline (3 events)

2017
The Giuffre v. Maxwell litigation was resolved.
The Doe v. Indyke case was initiated after the Government opened its investigation and after the Indictment in the criminal case was filed.
The Government moved to intervene and stay the proceedings in Doe v. Indyke.

Locations (1)

Location Context
Mentioned in a quote from a Government letter describing Doe v. Indyke as the 'lone case in this District that has no...

Relationships (3)

Giuffre Legal Adversaries Maxwell
They are the opposing parties in the lawsuit Giuffre v. Maxwell.
Doe Legal Adversaries Indyke
They are the opposing parties in the lawsuit Doe v. Indyke.
Government Professional Judge Freeman
The Government, as a litigant, communicated with Judge Freeman via a letter regarding a case.

Key Quotes (3)

"sharp contrast"
Source
— defendant (Used to describe the difference between the Government's actions in the Doe v. Indyke and Giuffre v. Maxwell civil cases.)
DOJ-OGR-00003018.jpg
Quote #1
"establish a strong inference that as long as the government stood to gain a tactical advantage by delaying the indictment . . ., it would not move to intervene."
Source
— defendant (The defendant's argument suggesting the Government's motive for its actions regarding civil cases and the timing of the indictment.)
DOJ-OGR-00003018.jpg
Quote #2
"lone case in this District that has not yet been either resolved or stayed at this point."
Source
— Government (A quote from the Government's letter to Judge Freeman, explaining the status of the Doe v. Indyke case.)
DOJ-OGR-00003018.jpg
Quote #3

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document