Phillips
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
Dimitri Yugoslavia
|
Professional |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Bruce L. Castor, Jr.
|
Legal representative |
1
|
1 | |
|
person
Jeffrey Sterling
|
Professional critical |
1
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1982-01-01 | Legal case | Smith v. Phillips, 455 U.S. 209 (1982) | N/A | View |
| 1982-01-01 | Legal case | The Smith v. Phillips case, cited in Justice Blackmun's concurring opinion. | N/A | View |
DOJ-OGR-00020955.jpg
This legal document excerpt discusses the standards for setting aside a jury verdict and granting a new trial, particularly focusing on juror nondisclosure during voir dire examination. It cites several Supreme Court and Circuit Court cases, establishing that such motions are disfavored and require a high burden of proof, specifically demonstrating a juror's dishonest answer to a material question that would have led to a challenge for cause.
DOJ-OGR-00021746.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing (Document 87, Case 22-1426) dated July 27, 2023. It contains a Table of Authorities listing various legal precedents (cases) and the page numbers on which they appear in the full brief. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp (DOJ-OGR-00021746).
DOJ-OGR-00009030.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing that argues for a defendant's right to a fair trial by an impartial jury under the Sixth Amendment. It cites multiple legal precedents to underscore the critical importance of the voir dire process, which must provide defendants with a full and fair opportunity to uncover potential juror bias. The text establishes that ensuring an impartial jury is a fundamental principle of constitutional law and due process.
DOJ-OGR-00010568.jpg
This legal document, part of case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE filed on June 22, 2022, argues for a five-level sentencing enhancement under Section 4B1.5. The prosecution contends the enhancement applies because the defendant engaged in a pattern of prohibited sexual conduct, refuting the defense's claim of double-counting. The document cites testimony from victims Jane and Annie, who received money and a trip to Thailand respectively, as evidence of a 'commercial sex act' to support the enhancement.
DOJ-OGR-00010304.jpg
This legal document is page 14 of a court filing, arguing against a defendant's motion claiming juror bias. The author contends that there is no evidence of actual bias from Juror 50, citing the juror's statements, the jury's diligent five-day deliberation, and the resulting split verdict. The document also dismisses the claim of implied bias, stating that the circumstances do not meet the narrow criteria established by the Second Circuit.
DOJ-OGR-00009884.jpg
This legal document page argues that a new trial is warranted when a biased juror is seated, regardless of whether the juror's false answers during voir dire were deliberate or inadvertent. It cites several Supreme Court and Second Circuit cases, including McDonough, Langford, and Leonard, to support this interpretation and refutes the government's contrary reading of these precedents. The argument centers on the idea that the key issue is juror bias, not the intent behind a juror's dishonesty.
DOJ-OGR-00009821.jpg
This document is page 23 of a legal filing (Document 643) in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on March 11, 2022. It contains the Government's legal argument arguing that the Defendant's claims regarding juror bias are unpersuasive. The text defines 'actual bias' versus 'implied' or 'inferable' bias, citing precedents such as United States v. Torres and Smith v. Phillips to argue that actual bias is the only relevant inquiry in a post-trial context.
DOJ-OGR-00009697.jpg
This document is page 5 of a Table of Authorities from a legal filing in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on March 11, 2022. It lists numerous legal cases, from 1976 to 2021, that are cited as precedent within the main document. Each entry includes the case name, its legal citation, and the page numbers where it is referenced.
DOJ-OGR-00004824.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing in the Ghislaine Maxwell case (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), appearing to cite the precedent of the Bill Cosby case (Commonwealth v. Cosby). The text details former D.A. Bruce Castor's legal strategy to issue a non-prosecution statement for Bill Cosby specifically to prevent him from invoking the Fifth Amendment in a civil suit filed by Andrea Constand. It includes the text of a press release announcing the conclusion of the investigation into the January 2004 allegations.
DOJ-OGR-00005335.jpg
This document is a proposed juror questionnaire from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on October 22, 2021. It includes a section on 'Media Issues' which is contested by the government and defended by the defendant. The defendant's response argues for in-depth questioning about media exposure, citing legal precedents like the Tsarnaev case to emphasize the necessity of uncovering potential juror bias in high-profile cases involving individuals like Ms. Maxwell and Mr. Epstein.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015243.jpg
This document is a page from a House Oversight file (015243) containing an excerpt discussing conspiracy theories regarding mind control. It features a quote from 'Konformist editor Sterling' writing to 'Phillips' expressing skepticism about the book 'Trance Formation' and warning of a 'witch-hunt' mentality. The text also details extreme allegations made by author Brice Taylor in her 1999 book 'Thanks for the Memories,' involving high-profile figures such as Bob Hope, Henry Kissinger, Walt Disney, and the Kennedys.
Accuracy of Trance Formation
Sterling expresses doubt about the accuracy of Phillips' and O'Brien's book, warning it could lead to a 'hysterical witch-hunt' and 'McCarthyism'.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity