| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
This legal document is a portion of the prosecution's (the Government's) argument against a defendant's motion to sever perjury counts from other charges. The Government contends that a full re-litigation of a prior defamation action is not necessary and that any potential for 'spillover prejudice' can be managed through stipulations, using a pseudonym for a witness (Giuffre), and providing limiting instructions to the jury. The document cites several legal precedents to support the argument that juries are presumed to follow such instructions.
This document is a page from a legal filing, likely a brief or motion, dated April 16, 2021. It argues against the severance of counts or defendants in a criminal case by citing numerous legal precedents. The text establishes that defendants have a 'heavy burden' to show 'substantial prejudice' to justify separate trials, and that courts generally favor joint trials for efficiency, leaving the decision to the district court's discretion.
This document is page 26 of 239 from a legal filing (Document 204) in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on April 16, 2021. It is a 'Table of Authorities' listing legal precedents (case law starting with W and Z) and a comprehensive list of Federal Statutes (18 U.S.C. and 28 U.S.C.) referenced in the filing. The statutes cited include laws regarding sex trafficking (§ 1591), coercion/enticement (§ 2422), transportation of minors (§ 2423), and child victims' rights (§ 3509), which are central charges in the Maxwell/Epstein proceedings.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity