This document is a page from a legal filing (Document 613) in the case of United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on February 24, 2022. The text argues against 'Juror No. 50's' request to intervene and obtain discovery, citing that the juror has no legal standing and is currently under criminal investigation. The prosecution argues that releasing information would allow the juror to tailor their testimony and prejudice the ongoing investigation into their conduct.
This document is page 11 of a legal filing (Document 675) from June 25, 2022, in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell. It argues that the Court should hear from all victims of Maxwell's sex trafficking conspiracy during sentencing, citing legal precedents (such as United States v. Salutric) that allow judges to consider a defendant's broader criminal history and uncharged acts. The text emphasizes that victim impact statements regarding background and conduct are essential for determining a fair sentence.
This legal document, filed on March 11, 2022, argues that a court should deny a discovery request from 'Juror No. 50'. The filing asserts that the juror has no legal standing to intervene in the criminal case, citing legal precedent. Furthermore, it reveals that Juror No. 50 is under investigation, and releasing the requested information would prejudice that investigation by allowing the juror to tailor responses and alter the investigation's focus.
This document is a 'Table of Authorities' page (page 'vi') from a court filing dated March 11, 2022, in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE). It lists various legal precedents (case law) cited in the filing, primarily from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals and the Southern District of New York. The page does not contain narrative details regarding Epstein's activities but rather serves as a legal reference list for arguments made in the full brief.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity