| Connected Entity | Relationship Type |
Strength
(mentions)
|
Documents | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
location
United States
|
Legal representative |
5
|
1 |
| Date | Event Type | Description | Location | Actions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-18 | Legal case | Citation for the case United States v. Jain, No. 19-CR-59 (PKC), 2019 WL 6888635 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 1... | S.D.N.Y. | View |
This legal document, filed on January 25, 2021, argues that the indictment against Ms. Maxwell lacks sufficient specificity regarding the alleged crimes and the identities of accusers/victims. It contends that the open-ended time periods and vague descriptions of 'minor girls' or 'victims' in the indictment make it impossible for Ms. Maxwell to prepare an adequate defense or apply the statute of limitations. The document cites legal precedents to support the argument for greater specificity in criminal charges.
This legal document is a court filing arguing that the indictment against Ms. Maxwell is insufficient for her to prepare a defense. The filing claims the indictment uses vague, open-ended time periods for the alleged crimes (e.g., 'from at least in or about 1994') and fails to specifically identify the accusers, referring to them with general terms like 'minor girls' and 'victims'. This vagueness, the document argues, makes it impossible to apply the statute of limitations or know who the government considers a victim.
This document is a 'Table of Authorities' from a legal filing (Document 124) in case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN, filed on January 25, 2021. It lists four legal cases and one federal rule of criminal procedure as legal precedent for arguments made within the larger document. The cases cited span from 1962 to 2019 and involve various individuals in legal proceedings against the United States.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity