Salameh
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
7
|
2 | |
|
person
U.S.
|
Legal representative |
6
|
2 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1998-01-01 | Court decision | Court decision in the case U.S. v. Salameh. | 2d Cir. | View |
| 1998-01-01 | Legal case decision | Decision in the case of U.S. v. Salameh. | 2d Cir. | View |
| 1998-01-01 | Court case | U.S. v. Salameh, 152 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 1998) | 2d Cir. | View |
| 1998-01-01 | Legal case | United States v. Salameh, 152 F.3d 88 (2d Cir. 1998) | 2d Cir. | View |
| 1993-01-01 | N/A | World Trade Center Bombing | New York City | View |
| 1993-01-01 | Legal case | The legal case of United States v. Salameh, 992 F.2d 445, 446–47 (2d Cir. 1993) is cited as prece... | 2d Cir. | View |
| 1993-01-01 | Court decision | Decision in the case of United States v. Salameh by the 2nd Circuit Court. | 2d Cir. | View |
| 1990-01-01 | N/A | Kahane murder involving Salameh and Abouhalima. | Unknown | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021085.jpg
This document is page 38 of a legal brief (Case 22-1426, dated Feb 28, 2023) filed in the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. It contains legal arguments attempting to distance the current case from the precedent set in *U.S. v. Annabi*, arguing that *Annabi* is an outlier regarding whether a plea agreement in one district binds another. The text consists primarily of extensive footnotes citing various Second Circuit decisions (*Prisco*, *Ashraf*, *Salameh*, etc.) that limited plea agreements to specific US Attorney's Offices, supporting the government's position against the Appellant (identified by case number as Ghislaine Maxwell).
DOJ-OGR-00021058.jpg
This document is page 11 of a legal filing from Case 22-1426, dated February 28, 2023. It is a table of authorities listing numerous U.S. court cases, dating from 1926 to 2022, which are cited within the main document. Each citation includes the case name, legal reporter information, and the page numbers where the case is referenced.
DOJ-OGR-00020763.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 16, 2021, argues that a non-prosecution agreement (NPA) does not bind the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. Citing Second Circuit precedent, particularly United States v. Annabi, the filing asserts that such agreements are limited to the district in which they are made unless they explicitly state a broader scope. The document refutes an opposing argument from an individual named Maxwell, stating the NPA lacks the necessary language to apply to other districts.
DOJ-OGR-00021842.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing that critiques the reasoning of a prior court decision, 'Annabi'. The author argues that 'Annabi' departed from the established legal doctrine that a plea agreement with a specific U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) only binds that office, not the entire U.S. government, unless explicitly stated otherwise. The text cites numerous other cases in its footnotes to support this traditional, more limited interpretation of such agreements.
DOJ-OGR-00021829.jpg
This document is page 'iv' of a legal filing, specifically Document 117 in Case 22-1426, dated November 1, 2024. It serves as a Table of Authorities, listing various court cases and statutes that are cited within the main body of the document. The citations include references to federal court decisions from various circuits and the Supreme Court, along with federal statutes.
DOJ-OGR-00021658.jpg
This document is page 11 of 93 from a legal filing (Case 22-1426), dated June 29, 2023. It is a 'Table of Authorities' listing various legal precedents (case law) cited in the main brief, including 'United States v. Salameh', 'United States v. Teman', and 'United States v. Vickers'. The footer indicates it is a Department of Justice document (DOJ-OGR-00021658).
DOJ-OGR-00019601.jpg
Page 10 of a legal filing (Document 69) dated September 28, 2020, in Case 20-3061. The text argues for the validity of an interlocutory appeal under collateral order jurisdiction, countering the government's claim that issues have not been finally resolved. It discusses the government's use of subpoenas to obtain evidence for a criminal case and Maxwell's challenge to the legitimacy of those methods within the context of a civil appeal.
DOJ-OGR-00019421.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing in Case 20-3061, dated September 24, 2020. The author, likely representing Ms. Maxwell, argues that a protective order is appealable by citing precedent from cases like *Pappas* and *United States v. Salameh*. The filing refutes the government's argument by clarifying the focus of Ms. Maxwell's appeal.
DOJ-OGR-00019404.jpg
This document is page 5 of a 58-page legal filing (Document 60, Case 20-3061) dated September 24, 2020. It is a table of authorities, listing legal cases, federal rules of procedure, and statutes that are cited within the larger document. The page numbers provided indicate where each authority is referenced.
DOJ-OGR-00003123.jpg
This legal document, part of case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE filed on April 16, 2021, argues that the indictment against the defendant is valid. The prosecution asserts that the defendant's alleged actions of recruiting and grooming 'Minor Victim-3' for 'Epstein' constitute sufficient evidence of participation in a conspiracy, even if the substantive crime of transporting a minor was not completed. A footnote addresses a defense objection to the term 'abuse,' noting that while Minor Victim-3 may have been over the age of consent in the United Kingdom for some acts, she will testify to the traumatic nature of the experience.
DOJ-OGR-00002966.jpg
This legal document, filed on April 16, 2021, argues that a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) signed by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Florida (USAO-SDFL) is only binding within that specific district. The document refutes the defendant's claim that the use of terms like "United States" implies the agreement binds the entire U.S. Government, citing several legal precedents, including cases from the Second Circuit, to support the position that such agreements are geographically limited unless explicitly stated otherwise.
DOJ-OGR-00002965.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues that a Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) is not enforceable in the Southern District of New York. It cites numerous legal precedents from the Second Circuit to support the position that plea agreements are binding only in the district where they are made, unless explicitly stated otherwise. The document concludes that the defendant has failed to provide evidence that the USAO-SDFL's NPA with Epstein was intended to bind other districts.
DOJ-OGR-00002956.jpg
This document is page xxi from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on April 16, 2021. It serves as a table of authorities, listing various legal precedents in the format 'United States v. [Defendant]'. Each entry includes the case citation and the corresponding page numbers where it is referenced within the main document.
DOJ-OGR-00004799.jpg
This document page discusses the legal standards applicable to the defendant Maxwell's request for an evidentiary hearing, specifically debating the applicability of the 'Franks' standard. The Court concludes that despite differences in context (Fourth vs Fifth Amendment), the 'Franks' standard is appropriate and Maxwell must make a substantial preliminary showing to justify a hearing.
DOJ-OGR-00004717.jpg
This legal document, filed on May 25, 2021, is a legal argument concerning the scope of plea agreements across different federal judicial districts. The author argues, based on Second Circuit precedent like Annabi, that a plea agreement from one district does not bind another unless explicitly stated. The document contrasts this with a broader interpretation from the Third Circuit (in United States v. Gebbie), which the defendant in the current case (Maxwell) is urging the court to adopt.
DOJ-OGR-00004710.jpg
This document is a 'Table of Authorities' from a legal filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, Document 295), filed on May 25, 2021. It lists numerous legal cases, primarily involving the United States as a party, which are cited as legal precedent within the main document. The table provides the case names, citations, and the page numbers where they are referenced in the brief.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015019.jpg
This document, marked as a House Oversight record, discusses allegations of government corruption and state-sponsored terrorism. It links 'Bud Horton' and 'Sue' to 'Franklin Scandal compromises' and billion-dollar contracts involving bioterrorism. The text heavily cites Peter Dale Scott's book 'The American Deep State' to argue that the Clinton administration and U.S. agencies protected terrorists (including Ali Mohamed) involved in the 1993 WTC bombing and 1998 Nairobi Embassy bombing.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015006.jpg
This document appears to be a page from a larger manuscript or investigative file submitted to the House Oversight Committee (Bates stamped HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015006). It extensively quotes Peter Dale Scott's book 'The American Deep State' to argue that the Clinton administration and US intelligence agencies failed to act on, or actively protected, individuals associated with Al-Qaeda, specifically linking these failures to the 1993 WTC bombing and the 1998 Nairobi Embassy bombing. The text alleges a systemic suppression of facts regarding US agency intervention that allowed terrorists like Ali Mohamed and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to continue their activities.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity