D. Nev.
LocationRelationship Network
DOJ-OGR-00000143.tif
This document discusses the legal complexities surrounding a joint trial for Maxwell, specifically focusing on the potential disqualification of her attorneys due to their involvement as potential witnesses in perjury counts and the civil action. It cites legal precedents from the Second Circuit and District of Nevada regarding attorney testimony and the Sixth Amendment right to counsel, highlighting the prejudice Maxwell could face given her attorneys' long-standing representation and familiarity with the case facts.
DOJ-OGR-00001301.jpg
This document is page 11 of a court filing (Case 4:17-cr-02949-MV) dated February 3, 2021. It argues for the pretrial release of a defendant named Mr. Robertson under 18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) to allow him to prepare for his trial scheduled for April 5, 2021. The text cites various legal precedents regarding temporary release for defense preparation. Note: While the user requested an 'Epstein-related' analysis, this specific page pertains to a 'Mr. Robertson' and does not contain direct text references to Jeffrey Epstein.
DOJ-OGR-00000929.jpg
This legal document, part of a court filing, argues for the temporary release of a defendant, Ms. Maxwell, under statute § 3142(i). It contends that her incarceration prevents her from adequately preparing for her upcoming trial in July, given the millions of pages of discovery documents she cannot effectively review. The argument compares her situation favorably to a precedent case, Robertson, to demonstrate the necessity of her release for a fair defense.
DOJ-OGR-00022096.jpg
This is the concluding page of a legal document filed on April 24, 2020, by the office of United States Attorney Geoffrey S. Berman. The document argues that the defendant Thomas's motion to compel discovery for a selective prosecution defense should be denied because the defendant failed to meet the required 'rigorous standard'. The filing cites several legal precedents to support the argument that courts routinely prevent defendants from questioning the government's motives for prosecution at trial.
DOJ-OGR-00009166.jpg
This legal document is a portion of a court filing arguing against a defendant's motion. The defendant seeks to strike a motion to intervene filed by 'Juror 50', claiming it is inappropriate and not a 'judicial document' deserving public access. The author of this filing refutes these claims, arguing that the defendant's cited legal precedents are inapplicable and that Juror 50's motion is relevant to the judicial process and should not be struck.
DOJ-OGR-00009062.jpg
This legal document is a filing on behalf of Ms. Maxwell arguing that the court should strike all filings made by 'Juror No. 50.' The argument posits that the juror, as a non-party, lacks standing and that the filings are an improper attempt at discovery, not 'judicial documents' entitled to public access. Alternatively, it requests that the juror's filings remain sealed pending the outcome of Ms. Maxwell's motion for a new trial, which is based on the same juror's alleged dishonesty during jury selection.
DOJ-OGR-00009005.jpg
This document is page 4 of a legal filing (Document 613) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on February 24, 2022. It is a 'Table of Authorities' listing various legal precedents (cases) cited in the main document, ranging from 1933 to 2022. Notably, it cites 'Brown v. Maxwell' (2019), a case directly involving the defendant.
DOJ-OGR-00019847.jpg
This legal document argues for the temporary pretrial release of Ms. Maxwell, citing legal statute § 3142(i) and precedent from the Robertson case. The argument centers on the necessity of release for trial preparation, highlighting the complexity of the case, the millions of pages of discovery documents, and the practical impossibilities of reviewing them while incarcerated before her trial set for July.
DOJ-OGR-00009696.jpg
This document is a 'Table of Authorities' from a legal document filed on March 11, 2022, for case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. It lists numerous legal cases, with decision dates ranging from 1933 to 2022, which are cited as legal precedent in the main filing. Each entry includes the case name, citation, and the page number(s) where it is referenced in the document.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity