Trove
Sign In Sign Up

Timothy McVeigh

Person
Mentions
6
Relationships
1
Events
2
Documents
3
Search

Relationship Network

Loading... nodes
Interactive Network: Click nodes or edges to highlight connections and view details with action buttons. Drag nodes to reposition. Node size indicates connection count. Line color shows relationship strength: red (8-10), orange (6-7), yellow (4-5), gray (weak). Use legend and help buttons in the graph for more guidance.

Event Timeline

Interactive Timeline: Hover over events to see details. Events are arranged chronologically and alternate between top and bottom for better visibility.
1 total relationships
Connected Entity Relationship Type
Strength (mentions)
Documents Actions
person Paul Cassell
Legal representative
5
1
View
Date Event Type Description Location Actions
1998-01-01 N/A United States v. McVeigh decision (cited in footnote). 10th Circuit Court View
1996-01-01 N/A United States v. McVeigh legal proceedings and appeals regarding victims' rights to attend trial 10th Circuit Court View

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017721.jpg

This document is a page from a 2005 BYU Law Review article attached as an exhibit in a House Oversight investigation, bearing the name of Epstein attorney David Schoen. The text discusses the legal limitations of the Victims' Rights Act and the Crime Victims' Rights Act, specifically analyzing the *United States v. McVeigh* (Oklahoma City bombing) case where victims were denied certain rights despite statutory protections. It argues that statutory measures often fail due to judicial interpretation and bureaucratic inertia, leading advocates to push for a constitutional amendment.

Legal exhibit / law review article
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017639.jpg

This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article (likely authored by Paul Cassell) analyzing the history of federal victims' rights legislation. It details the failure of the 1990 Victims' Rights and Restitution Act, attributing its ineffectiveness to poor codification (Title 42 vs Title 18) and its omission from West Publishing's legal guides, citing the Oklahoma City bombing case as a key example. The document bears a House Oversight Bates stamp and the name of David Schoen, Jeffrey Epstein's attorney, suggesting it was part of a legal production regarding the CVRA, a statute central to the controversy surrounding Epstein's non-prosecution agreement.

Legal scholarship / evidence production (law review article)
2025-11-19
Analysis Source

HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017608.jpg

This document is a page from a legal brief or journal article submitted by attorney David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee. It discusses the legislative history and intent of the Crime Victims' Rights Act of 2004 (CVRA), contrasting it with the 1990 Victims' Rights and Restitution Act. It highlights the Congressional goal to ensure victims are treated with fairness, dignity, and are active participants in the legal system, citing various Senators and legal precedents.

Legal brief / journal excerpt
2025-11-19
Analysis Source
Total Received
$0.00
0 transactions
Total Paid
$0.00
0 transactions
Net Flow
$0.00
0 total transactions
No financial transactions found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.
As Sender
0
As Recipient
0
Total
0
No communications found for this entity. Entity linking may need to be improved.

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity

Back to Search