Whitley
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Kyles
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Starr
|
Business associate |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Starr
|
Professional |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2008-05-27 | Communication | Starr and Whitley sent a second letter to the Deputy Attorney General, arguing the need for revie... | N/A | View |
| 2008-05-19 | Communication | Starr and Whitley co-authored a letter to Deputy Attorney General Mark Filip asking for a review ... | N/A | View |
| 1995-01-01 | Legal case | Legal case: Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 | U.S. Supreme Court | View |
| 1995-01-01 | Legal case | The case of Kyles v. Whitley was decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. | U.S. | View |
DOJ-OGR-00022083.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing, specifically an argument regarding the scope of the government's discovery obligations. It cites several legal precedents (Brady, Giglio, Avellino, Kyles, Barcelo) to argue that a prosecutor's duty to disclose information is limited to materials in their possession or the possession of the 'prosecution team' (e.g., investigating officers), and does not extend to information held by separate, uninvolved government entities.
DOJ-OGR-00022065.jpg
This document is a 'Table of Authorities' from a legal filing in case 1:19-cr-00830-AT, filed on April 24, 2020. It lists numerous legal cases that are cited as precedent within the main document, along with the page numbers where they are referenced. The cases span from 1963 to 2020 and involve various parties, including individuals, non-profit organizations, and multiple U.S. government agencies, across different federal court jurisdictions.
DOJ-OGR-00021308.jpg
This legal document details communications from May 2008 regarding the Jeffrey Epstein case, where his defense team, including Starr and Whitley, petitioned the Deputy Attorney General for a review. They argued the federal prosecution was unwarranted, irregular, and politically motivated due to Epstein's "close personal association" with former President Bill Clinton. In response, a Senior Associate Deputy Attorney General instructed the U.S. Attorney's Office to postpone a June 2, 2008 plea deadline pending the completion of this high-level review.
DOJ-OGR-00021307.jpg
This document page from April 2021 describes a series of communications in May 2008 between Jeffrey Epstein's defense team and the Department of Justice. Epstein's lawyers, including Starr and Lefkowitz, raised complaints and sought meetings, while a DOJ section (CEOS), via a letter from official Oosterbaan, concluded that a federal prosecution of Epstein would not be improper, though its review was limited. The defense team continued to press its case, with Lefkowitz requesting a direct meeting with U.S. Attorney Acosta.
DOJ-OGR-00005580.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing dated October 29, 2021, argues that the jury should not consider the adequacy or methods of the government's investigation when determining a defendant's guilt. Citing multiple legal precedents, the author contends that details about investigations, including the one involving Jeffrey Epstein, are irrelevant to the case at hand. The document refutes the defense's position that they should be allowed to challenge the thoroughness of the government's investigation.
DOJ-OGR-00002706.jpg
This legal document, filed on February 4, 2021, is an argument from the defense demanding the immediate production of unredacted reports from the government. The defense contends these reports, held by the FBI, contain exculpatory 'Brady material' and that the government cannot fulfill its disclosure obligations by providing redacted versions. The argument is supported by citations to legal precedents, including Kyles v. Whitley, and a prior ruling from the court on the timing of such disclosures.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity