DOJ-OGR-00004724.jpg
789 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal brief / government response to motion to dismiss
File Size:
789 KB
Summary
This document is page 17 of a Government filing (Document 295) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on May 25, 2021. The text argues that the Defendant's motion to dismiss the S2 Indictment based on improper pre-trial delay should be denied, citing that the Court has already rejected similar arguments and that the defendant failed to prove actual prejudice or intentional delay by the Government. It references case law standards for due process violations regarding pre-indictment delays.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Defendant | Defendant |
Subject of the indictment (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, generally known as Ghislaine Maxwell although name does not appear...
|
| The Government | Prosecution |
Party arguing against the dismissal of the S2 Indictment.
|
| The Court | Judiciary |
The judge/judicial body that previously issued the 'April Opinion' and is evaluating the current motion.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Implied by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR-00004724.
|
|
| S.D.N.Y. |
Southern District of New York, cited in case law footnote.
|
|
| 2d Cir. |
Second Circuit Court of Appeals, cited in case law.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Southern District of New York (Jurisdiction cited in footnote).
|
Relationships (1)
Government opposing Defendant's motion to dismiss the S2 Indictment.
Key Quotes (3)
"To prevail on a claim that pre-indictment delay violates due process, a defendant must show both that the Government intentionally delayed bringing charges for an improper purpose and that the delay seriously damaged the defendant’s ability defend against the charges."Source
DOJ-OGR-00004724.jpg
Quote #1
"The Court concluded that the defendant 'failed to establish actual prejudice from the Government’s delay in bringing charges,' rejecting the defendant’s 'highly speculative' arguments that the death of certain potential witnesses, failing memories, or lost records prejudiced"Source
DOJ-OGR-00004724.jpg
Quote #2
"[w]here an indictment is brought within the statute of limitations, there is a presumption that the [defendant] was not prejudiced."Source
DOJ-OGR-00004724.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document