DOJ-OGR-00000083.tif
38.8 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
5
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document / court filing excerpt
File Size:
38.8 KB
Summary
This document is an excerpt from a legal filing or report, discussing legal arguments concerning a defendant named Maxwell. It addresses whether the evidence at trial varied prejudicially from the indictment and concludes that the evidence presented, which included Maxwell transporting 'Jane' to New York for sexual abuse, did not materially differ from the indictment's allegations. The text references legal precedents like United States v. Salmonese and Dove.
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States |
Party in legal case 'United States v. Salmonese'
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location to which 'Jane' was transported for sexual abuse
|
Key Quotes (5)
""uncertain whether [Maxwell] was convicted of conduct that was the subject of the grand jury's indictment.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00000083.tif
Quote #1
""must establish that the evidence offered at trial differs materially from the evidence alleged in the indictment.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00000083.tif
Quote #2
"“that substantial prejudice occurred at trial as a result" of the variance."Source
DOJ-OGR-00000083.tif
Quote #3
""A defendant cannot demonstrate that he has been prejudiced by a variance where the pleading and the proof substantially correspond, where the variance is not of a character that could have misled the defendant at the trial, and where the variance is not such as to deprive the accused of his right to be protected against another prosecution for the same offense.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00000083.tif
Quote #4
""materially different" from the allegations in the Indictment."Source
DOJ-OGR-00000083.tif
Quote #5
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document