Judge Kaplan
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Andrew Brettler
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | Legal hearing | A court hearing was held via video conference for Prince Andrew's case, where his lawyer argued f... | N/A | View |
| 2022-01-01 | N/A | Hearing on motion to dismiss Prince Andrew civil case. | Video Conference | View |
| 2019-12-16 | Court proceeding | In the case United States v. Jones, the Court instructed the jury that the parties had equal oppo... | N/A | View |
| 2019-12-11 | Court proceeding | In the case United States v. Jones, the Court denied a defense request to force the Government to... | N/A | View |
EFTA00024921.pdf
An email chain from November 17-18, 2021, involving U.S. Attorney's Office (SDNY) staff and contractors discussing the logistics of obtaining 'courtroom connect' (internet access) for legal proceedings presided over by Judge Nathan (likely the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). The correspondence details the necessity of obtaining a signed order from the judge to proceed with technical installation before Thanksgiving, referencing a similar previous application made to Judge Kaplan.
DOJ-OGR-00008434.jpg
This document is a legal letter filed on December 18, 2021, addressed to Judge Alison J. Nathan regarding the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell. The defense requests permission for a witness, Mr. Hamilton, to testify remotely from London via WebEx because he has tested positive for COVID-19 and cannot travel. The defense argues that precluding his testimony would violate Maxwell's constitutional rights to present a defense and confront accusers, specifically mentioning the need to expose the bias of an accuser named Kate.
DOJ-OGR-00008430.jpg
This legal document is a filing from the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, arguing against a defense position regarding witness availability. The prosecution cites the precedent of *United States v. Jones*, where a judge rejected a similar defense attempt to compel the government to immunize a witness. The filing concludes that since the defense had the opportunity to call numerous witnesses, including Virginia Roberts, there is no reason to deviate from the standard jury instruction on the equal availability of witnesses.
DOJ-OGR-00009183.jpg
This document details two related legal matters. First, it provides an inside account from a juror named Scotty on the deliberations in the Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking trial, explaining how the jury reached its verdict. Second, it reports on a court hearing for Prince Andrew, where Judge Kaplan appeared highly skeptical of arguments made by the prince's lawyer, Andrew Brettler, who sought to use a 2009 settlement between victim Virginia Roberts and Jeffrey Epstein to have the case dismissed.
DOJ-OGR-00009862.jpg
This document is a printed Daily Mail article filed as a court exhibit (Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN). It covers two main topics: an interview with a juror named 'Scotty' detailing the deliberations and voting splits in the Ghislaine Maxwell sex trafficking trial, and a separate legal hearing where Judge Kaplan appeared dismissive of Prince Andrew's lawyer's attempts to use a 2009 Epstein settlement to dismiss a civil suit by Virginia Roberts. The document highlights specific vote counts for the Maxwell charges and Judge Kaplan's skepticism toward Prince Andrew's defense arguments.
No Subject
Arguments regarding motion to dismiss Prince Andrew's case.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity