Diehl
PersonRelationship Network
Event Timeline
| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
7
|
3 | |
|
person
Robin Williams
|
Critic subject |
5
|
1 | |
|
person
Parties of Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N/A | N/A | A roast or event honoring 'Harlan' attended by Robin Williams and others. | Unknown (Hollywood context ... | View |
| 2021-10-12 | Court filing | Diehl filed a Rule 60(d)(3) - fraud on the court motion. | Western district of Texas | View |
| 2021-10-12 | Court filing | Filing of Document 338 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. | N/A | View |
| 2015-01-01 | Legal case | United States v. Diehl, 775 F.3d 714 (5th Cir. 2015) | 5th Cir. | View |
| 2015-01-01 | Legal appeal | The appeal of United States V. Diehl was decided by the 5th Circuit Court. | 5th Cir. | View |
| 2015-01-01 | Court case | The ruling in United States v. Diehl, 775 F.3d 714, 720. | 5th Cir. | View |
DOJ-OGR-00021113.jpg
This legal document, a page from a court filing, discusses the legal distinction between the crimes of producing and possessing child pornography. It analyzes the case of U.S. v. Coutentos, where the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals vacated a possession conviction, even though it stemmed from the defendant's own production involving the abuse of his granddaughters. The court reasoned that the offense of possession, when considered abstractly, does not inherently involve the sexual abuse of a child within the specific meaning of statute § 3283.
DOJ-OGR-00021709.jpg
This page from a 2023 appellate filing (likely by the government) argues that Ghislaine Maxwell's convictions on Counts Three and Four properly qualify as offenses involving sexual abuse of a child, citing testimony from a victim named 'Jane.' It also begins a section defending the District Court's decision regarding 'Juror 50,' who failed to disclose his own history of childhood sexual abuse during jury selection.
DOJ-OGR-00021705.jpg
This document is a page from a legal filing that argues for a broad interpretation of "sexual abuse" under Section 3283. It cites multiple federal court cases to support the position that the term covers a wide range of offenses, including those without actual physical contact, as intended by Congress. The argument is used to justify that charges like transportation of a minor for an illegal sex act (Count Four) fall within this definition.
DOJ-OGR-00021655.jpg
This document is page vii from a legal filing in Case 22-1426, dated June 29, 2023. It serves as a table of authorities, listing various legal cases with the United States as the plaintiff. Each entry includes the case name, its legal citation (including the court and year), and the corresponding page numbers where it is referenced within the main document.
DOJ-OGR-00021114.jpg
This page is from a legal brief (Case 22-1426) filed on Feb 28, 2023. It argues primarily against the retroactive application of the PROTECT Act (specifically 18 U.S.C. § 3283 regarding the statute of limitations for child abuse). The text cites legal precedents (Diehl, Coutentos) to argue that the District Court erred in its interpretation of the statute's retroactivity concerning the April 2003 amendment.
DOJ-OGR-00005181.jpg
This legal document, filed on October 12, 2021, is part of a case against a defendant named Maxwell. The author argues that the United States government is misapplying the statute of limitations (18 USC § 3283) in Maxwell's case, drawing a parallel to a previous case, United States v. Diehl. The document notes that Diehl has since filed a 'fraud on the court' motion against the government for similar alleged misconduct.
DOJ-OGR-00005180.jpg
This document is a single handwritten page (page 2 of 22) from a court filing in the case United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 12, 2021. It contains a statement asserting that an individual named Diehl's request to intervene will not prejudice the case and that Diehl has no further interest in the matter. The document bears a Department of Justice Bates stamp.
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_015387.jpg
This document appears to be a transcript or narrative description of a comedy roast honoring a man named 'Harlan'. It features dialogue between a critic named Diehl and the comedian Robin Williams. Williams makes jokes about the critic, the legal profession, and Harlan's eccentric home architecture. The document bears a 'HOUSE_OVERSIGHT' stamp, suggesting it is part of a larger government document production, though the specific page content relates to entertainment and comedy rather than explicit illicit activity.
Introduction
Introduction of Robin Williams, referencing his movie Club Paradise as a failure.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity