DOJ-OGR-00008398.jpg
616 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
4
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
616 KB
Summary
This legal document, part of a court filing dated December 17, 2021, outlines the legal principles guiding the court's analysis of the government's investigation into Ms. Maxwell. It references precedents from the Second Circuit and the Supreme Court to establish rules regarding investigative techniques, challenges to government motives, and the admissibility of evidence related to charging decisions.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Subject of investigation |
Mentioned as the person being investigated by the government.
|
| Saldarriaga | Party in a cited case |
Cited in the case United States v. Saldarriaga, 204 F.3d 50, (2d Cir. 2000).
|
| Regan | Party in a cited case |
Cited in the case United States v. Regan, 103 F.3d 1072, (2d Cir. 1997).
|
| Farhane | Party in a cited case |
Cited in the case United States v. Farhane, 634 F.3d 127 (2d Cir. 2011).
|
| White | Party in a cited case |
Cited in the case United States v. White, 692 F.3d 235 (2d Cir. 2012).
|
| Ngono | Party in a cited case |
Cited in the case United States v. Ngono, 801 F.App'x. 19 (2d Cir. 2020).
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of Florida | Government agency |
Mentioned as an investigating body.
|
| Second Circuit | Court |
Mentioned as setting legal principles and precedents for the current case.
|
| Supreme Court | Court |
Mentioned as setting guiding principles for the Court's analysis.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the page, likely the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (2 events)
An investigation into Ms. Maxwell by the U.S. government.
Southern District of Florida, New York
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The location of the U.S. Attorney's Office mentioned in the document.
|
|
|
Mentioned in relation to the scope and timeline of an investigation.
|
Relationships (1)
The document discusses the government's motives for investigating Ms. Maxwell.
Key Quotes (1)
"inquire into its relevance and probative value to the respective case."Source
— The Court
(Quoted as the third legal principle regarding the admission of evidence of the government's charging decisions.)
DOJ-OGR-00008398.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,633 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 549-1 Filed 12/17/21 Page 4 of 24 16
LB1TMAX1
LB1TMAX1
1 by the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of
2 Florida, (3) about the scope and timeline of investigation in
3 New York, and (4) other evidence that demonstrates the
4 government's motives for investigating Ms. Maxwell.
5 The Court's analysis here is guided by four principles
6 set by the Second Circuit and the Supreme Court.
7 First, because the government has no duty to employ,
8 in the course of a single investigation, any particular
9 investigative technique, the failure to utilize some particular
10 technique does not tend to show that a defendant is not guilty
11 of the crime of which he's been charged and is therefore
12 irrelevant. United States v. Saldarriaga, 204 F.3d 50, (2d
13 Cir. 2000). That's the first legal principle that frames the
14 discussion here.
15 Second, arguments that the government had an improper
16 motive generally must be directed to the Court rather than the
17 jury. United States v. Regan, 103 F.3d 1072, (2d Cir. 1997);
18 see also, United States v. Farhane, 634 F.3d 127 (2d Cir.
19 2011).
20 Third legal principle: There is no per se bar on
21 admitting evidence of the government's charging decisions.
22 Rather, the Court must -- I will quote here -- "inquire into
23 its relevance and probative value to the respective case."
24 United States v. White, 692 F.3d 235 (2d Cir. 2012); see also,
25 United States v. Ngono, 801 F.App'x. 19 (2d Cir. 2020).
2 Florida, (3) about the scope and timeline of investigation in
3 New York, and (4) other evidence that demonstrates the
4 government's motives for investigating Ms. Maxwell.
5 The Court's analysis here is guided by four principles
6 set by the Second Circuit and the Supreme Court.
7 First, because the government has no duty to employ,
8 in the course of a single investigation, any particular
9 investigative technique, the failure to utilize some particular
10 technique does not tend to show that a defendant is not guilty
11 of the crime of which he's been charged and is therefore
12 irrelevant. United States v. Saldarriaga, 204 F.3d 50, (2d
13 Cir. 2000). That's the first legal principle that frames the
14 discussion here.
15 Second, arguments that the government had an improper
16 motive generally must be directed to the Court rather than the
17 jury. United States v. Regan, 103 F.3d 1072, (2d Cir. 1997);
18 see also, United States v. Farhane, 634 F.3d 127 (2d Cir.
19 2011).
20 Third legal principle: There is no per se bar on
21 admitting evidence of the government's charging decisions.
22 Rather, the Court must -- I will quote here -- "inquire into
23 its relevance and probative value to the respective case."
24 United States v. White, 692 F.3d 235 (2d Cir. 2012); see also,
25 United States v. Ngono, 801 F.App'x. 19 (2d Cir. 2020).
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00008398
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document