Douglas E. Beloof
PersonRelationship Network
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
person
PAUL G. CASSELL
|
Co authors |
5
|
1 |
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017755.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a 2005 BYU Law Review article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically focusing on a victim's right to attend court proceedings and be heard. The text analyzes the rationale behind allowing victims to be present during trials and cites various state constitutions and federal rules (Rule 615). The document bears the name of attorney David Schoen in the footer and a House Oversight Bates stamp, suggesting it was used as legal research or an exhibit in proceedings related to the investigation of the handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case, likely concerning the violation of victims' rights.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017751.jpg
This document is page 37 of 52 from a legal filing, specifically an excerpt from a 2005 BYU Law Review article discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The text argues for victims' rights to access presentence reports and be heard at sentencing, countering arguments made by the 'Practitioners' Group' (defense attorneys). The document bears the name of attorney David Schoen at the bottom and a House Oversight Bates stamp, indicating it was part of a document production related to a congressional investigation.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017718.jpg
This document is page 4 of 52 from a production to the House Oversight Committee, stamped with the name David Schoen. The content is an excerpt from a 2005 BYU Law Review article discussing the history of the victims' rights movement, specifically the 1982 President's Task Force on Victims of Crime and subsequent state constitutional amendments (highlighting Arizona). The text analyzes the legal shift towards protecting victims' rights to be present and heard during criminal proceedings.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017691.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article included in a House Oversight file associated with attorney David Schoen. The text analyzes the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), arguing that legislative history and judicial precedent (specifically United States v. Kenna) guarantee victims the right to speak orally at sentencing, rather than just submitting written statements. It cites Senators Kyl and Feinstein extensively regarding the congressional intent behind the Act.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017664.jpg
This document is an excerpt from a 2007 Utah Law Review article (page 29 of 78 in the evidence file) discussing amendments to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure regarding victims' rights. It specifically details proposals for Rule 17 to protect victims from abusive subpoenas of their confidential information by defense attorneys, citing the Crime Victims' Rights Act. The document bears the name 'David Schoen' and a House Oversight Bates stamp, indicating it was part of the congressional investigation into the handling of the Epstein case (likely related to the non-prosecution agreement and victims' rights violations).
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017638.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article titled 'The Crime Victims' Rights Movement.' It details the history of the movement, specifically the 1982 President's Task Force on Victims of Crime, which recommended that victims be notified of proceedings and allowed to submit impact statements. The document bears the name of David Schoen (an attorney known for representing Jeffrey Epstein) and a House Oversight Bates stamp, indicating it was submitted as evidence or research in a congressional inquiry, likely regarding the violation of victims' rights in the Epstein case.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017613.jpg
This document appears to be Page 10 of a legal filing or article (Excerpt from 104 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 59) submitted by David Schoen to the House Oversight Committee. It analyzes the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA), specifically citing the 'In re Dean' (BP Products) case to argue that victims have rights to confer with the government before charges are formally filed or plea deals are reached. While Epstein is not named on this page, the legal argument mirrors the controversy surrounding the failure to notify victims during Epstein's 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017606.jpg
This document is a page from a legal analysis or journal article (Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology) included in a House Oversight production, likely submitted by attorney David Schoen. It argues for the application of the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) during the investigation phase, before formal charges are filed, critiquing the DOJ/OLC position to the contrary. The text specifically cites the "Jeffrey Epstein sex abuse case" as a primary example of why victim participation is necessary before charges are filed.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014080.jpg
This document is page 101 of a 2014 legal text (likely a law review article) discussing 'Crime Victims' Rights.' It analyzes the nuances of state statutes (Indiana, Louisiana, Idaho, Delaware) regarding when victims' rights attach, specifically debating whether rights exist before formal charges are filed. The page includes extensive footnotes citing various state codes and legal precedents. It is marked with a House Oversight Committee stamp, suggesting it was included in discovery or research related to the Epstein case, likely regarding the federal Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and the non-prosecution agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014052.jpg
This document is page 73 of a legal publication (dated 2014) discussing the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). It argues that victims have rights before charges are filed, citing the case 'In re Dean' and the BP Products explosion case in Texas as precedent for victims' rights to confer with the government regarding plea deals. While Jeffrey Epstein is not named on this page, the text cites Paul G. Cassell (a lawyer for Epstein's victims) multiple times, and the legal arguments regarding plea deals made without victim consultation mirror the controversy surrounding Epstein's 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_014042.jpg
This document is page 63 of a 2014 legal academic publication discussing Crime Victims' Rights. It argues for victim participation during criminal investigations, explicitly citing the 'Jeffrey Epstein sex abuse case' as a primary example of why victims need rights before charges are filed. The text also provides historical context regarding the victims' rights movement, referencing the Warren Court and President Reagan's Task Force on Victims of Crime.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity