DOJ-OGR-00004874.jpg
951 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal exhibit / court opinion
File Size:
951 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a legal opinion (Commonwealth v. Cosby) filed as an exhibit in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It discusses the legal implications of a prosecutor's decision not to prosecute a suspect (Cosby) and whether such a decision binds future prosecutors. The text argues that prosecutors cannot induce a suspect to give up rights (like self-incrimination protections) by promising non-prosecution, only to reverse course later. This precedent was likely cited in the Maxwell case regarding the validity of the Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement.
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| District Attorney's Office |
Office held by Castor.
|
|
| Trial Court |
Lower court that made initial findings of fact.
|
|
| Superior Court |
Appellate court mentioned in the procedural history.
|
|
| This Court |
The court issuing this opinion (likely the PA Supreme Court given citation style J-100-2020).
|
Key Quotes (4)
"The trial court—the entity charged with sorting through those facts—found that D.A. Castor made no agreement or overt promise."Source
DOJ-OGR-00004874.jpg
Quote #1
"Here, D.A. Castor’s exercise of discretion was made deliberately to induce the deprivation of a fundamental right."Source
DOJ-OGR-00004874.jpg
Quote #2
"To rule otherwise would authorize, if not encourage, prosecutors to choose temporarily not to prosecute, obtain incriminating evidence from the suspect, and then reverse course with impunity."Source
DOJ-OGR-00004874.jpg
Quote #3
"Due process necessarily requires that court officials, particularly prosecutors, be held to a higher standard."Source
DOJ-OGR-00004874.jpg
Quote #4
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document