This document is a court transcript from July 24, 2019, capturing a dialogue between an attorney, Mr. Weinberg, and the presiding judge. Mr. Weinberg argues that his client's case is not a typical trafficking case and that the legal presumption for detention is rebuttable. The discussion focuses on the two prongs for rebuttal—danger to the community and flight risk—and the different legal standards of proof required for each.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Presiding over the case, asking questions and making comments to Mr. Weinberg.
|
| MR. WEINBERG | Attorney |
Arguing legal points before the court, likely on behalf of a defendant.
|
| Fioro |
Mentioned in reference to the "Fioro (phonetic) case" by the Court.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the page, likely the court reporting service that transcribed the proceeding.
|
"But this is not quintessential commercial sex trafficking to third parties for profit."Source
"the presumption is rebuttable. Even in those cases that your Honor listed, the statute contemplates that some 1591 defendants will be released under conditions..."Source
"So those prongs have different burdens of proof for one thing, clear and convincing in one instance and preponderance in the other."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,442 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document