DOJ-OGR-00000061.tif
25.6 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
4
Organizations
3
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document / court filing
File Size:
25.6 KB
Summary
This document, dated April 10, 2025, is a legal filing arguing for the granting of a petition for certiorari. It highlights a legal dispute regarding the enforceability of a government promise not to prosecute Epstein's co-conspirators, specifically mentioning Ghislaine Maxwell's prosecution despite such a promise. David Oscar Markus, Counsel of Record from MARKUS/MOSS PLLC, is representing the petitioner.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein | Subject / Co-conspirator |
His co-conspirators were promised non-prosecution by the government.
|
| Maxwell | Subject / Co-conspirator |
Prosecuted as a co-conspirator of Epstein by the United States.
|
| DAVID OSCAR MARKUS | Counsel of Record / Counsel for Petitioner |
Signed the document, representing the petitioner.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MARKUS/MOSS PLLC |
Law firm of David Oscar Markus
|
|
| United States |
Government entity involved in prosecution and promise of non-prosecution.
|
|
| U.S. Attorney's office in New York |
Party against whom the enforceability of the promise is questioned.
|
|
| Southern District of Florida |
Party against whom the enforceability of the promise is questioned.
|
Timeline (1 events)
April 10, 2025
Submission of a legal document, likely a petition for certiorari.
Locations (3)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Address for MARKUS/MOSS PLLC
|
|
|
Location of U.S. Attorney's office
|
|
|
Location of U.S. Attorney's office
|
Relationships (2)
Counsel for Petitioner
Key Quotes (3)
"This case is an ideal vehicle for resolving the split over this important and recurring question."Source
DOJ-OGR-00000061.tif
Quote #1
"the government made a written promise that Epstein's co-conspirators would not be prosecuted by the United States, and Maxwell was in fact prosecuted as a co-conspirator of Epstein by the United States."Source
DOJ-OGR-00000061.tif
Quote #2
"The only question is whether the government's promise that the "United States" would not prosecute her was enforceable against the U.S. Attorney's office in New York, or only against the Southern District of Florida."Source
DOJ-OGR-00000061.tif
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,064 characters)
19
III. This case is an ideal vehicle for resolving the
split over this important and recurring
question.
This case is especially worthy of review because it
cleanly presents the issue at hand, which is ripe for
this Court's attention. In this case, the government
made a written promise that Epstein's co-conspirators
would not be prosecuted by the United States, and
Maxwell was in fact prosecuted as a co-conspirator of
Epstein by the United States. The only question is
whether the government's promise that the "United
States" would not prosecute her was enforceable
against the U.S. Attorney's office in New York, or only
against the Southern District of Florida. The circuit
split on this issue is well developed and ripe for the
Court's review.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, this Court should grant
the petition for certiorari.
April 10, 2025
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID OSCAR MARKUS
Counsel of Record
MARKUS/MOSS PLLC
40 N.W. Third Street
Penthouse One
Miami, FL 33128
(305) 379-6667
dmarkus@markuslaw.com
Counsel for Petitioner
DOJ-OGR-00000061
III. This case is an ideal vehicle for resolving the
split over this important and recurring
question.
This case is especially worthy of review because it
cleanly presents the issue at hand, which is ripe for
this Court's attention. In this case, the government
made a written promise that Epstein's co-conspirators
would not be prosecuted by the United States, and
Maxwell was in fact prosecuted as a co-conspirator of
Epstein by the United States. The only question is
whether the government's promise that the "United
States" would not prosecute her was enforceable
against the U.S. Attorney's office in New York, or only
against the Southern District of Florida. The circuit
split on this issue is well developed and ripe for the
Court's review.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, this Court should grant
the petition for certiorari.
April 10, 2025
Respectfully submitted,
DAVID OSCAR MARKUS
Counsel of Record
MARKUS/MOSS PLLC
40 N.W. Third Street
Penthouse One
Miami, FL 33128
(305) 379-6667
dmarkus@markuslaw.com
Counsel for Petitioner
DOJ-OGR-00000061
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document