This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 16, 2019, detailing a pretrial detention hearing. A government representative, Mr. Rossmiller, argues for the defendant's detention by describing evidence found at his home, including a massage room consistent with victim accounts and electronic disks labeled with incriminating titles. Mr. Rossmiller concludes that the defendant represents a continuing danger to the community and a flight risk, justifying detention pending trial.
This legal document is a transcript of an argument, likely from a prosecutor, asserting that the defendant is a significant flight risk and a danger to the community. The argument cites the defendant's refusal to disclose his extensive wealth, access to private jets, a residence in France, a prior guilty plea for solicitation of a minor, and credible allegations of witness tampering as reasons for his detention.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) dated July 16, 2019, in which the government argues that the defendant (Jeffrey Epstein) poses a significant flight risk. The prosecutor highlights that new victims have come forward post-charge, the defendant faces life in prison, and possesses vast wealth including six residences (one abroad). The government emphasizes they kept the investigation covert specifically to prevent the defendant from fleeing.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 16, 2019, in which a government prosecutor argues for the pretrial detention of a defendant charged with sex trafficking. The prosecutor emphasizes the seriousness of the alleged crimes, which involve years of sexual abuse of dozens of minors in multiple locations. The argument is supported by claims of strong evidence, including credible and corroborated information from victims, witnesses, and a recent search of the defendant's Manhattan mansion.
This legal document, part of a court filing dated July 16, 2019, details allegations from an indictment against a defendant for sexual abuse of underage girls. The crimes allegedly occurred at his residences in Manhattan and Palm Beach, Florida, and involved facilitation by employees and associates. The document argues that the defendant, being 'extraordinarily wealthy' with multiple international residences and two private jets, is a significant flight risk.
This document is a court transcript from a detention hearing on July 16, 2019. The government's attorney, Mr. Rossmiller, argues that the defendant should be detained without bail pending trial, citing an extraordinary risk of flight and danger. The argument is based on serious charges, including a years-long scheme of trafficking and sexually abusing minors, and is supported by a recommendation for detention from Pretrial Services.
This document is page 4 of a court transcript from July 16, 2019, detailing the arraignment of Jeffrey Epstein (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB). During this proceeding, the Court reads the charges of sex trafficking conspiracy and sex trafficking to Epstein. Represented by Mr. Weingarten, Epstein pleads 'Not guilty' to the charges, and the Court moves the proceedings toward the question of bail.
This document is page 3 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB, filed on July 16, 2019. It records the proceedings where the prosecutor, Mr. Rossmiller, confirms Jeffrey Epstein was arrested on July 6 at 5:30 p.m. The Court then proceeds to read Epstein his Miranda rights and explains his rights regarding bail and legal representation.
This document is the cover page for the transcript of a court conference in the criminal case of United States v. Jeffrey Epstein, held on July 8, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. It identifies the presiding Magistrate Judge, Henry B. Pitman, and lists the legal counsel for both the prosecution and the defense, as well as an FBI agent and an NYPD detective who were also present. The document was filed with the court on July 16, 2019.
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on July 16, 2019. In it, a judge grants a joint request from the prosecution and defense to adjourn proceedings and exclude the time until Monday, July 15th, from speedy trial calculations. The judge justifies the decision as necessary to prevent a miscarriage of justice and to allow both sides adequate time to prepare, specifically mentioning a 'written bail submission'.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB) dated July 16, 2019. The text details a discussion between the Judge (The Court), defense attorneys (Weingarten and Weinberg), and the prosecutor (Rossmiller) regarding the scheduling of a bail application hearing, moving it from Thursday to the following Monday at 10:00 AM. The prosecutor, Mr. Rossmiller, requests a moment to confer with the defense and subsequently states that the government will rely on its initial submission.
This is page 14 of a court transcript from July 16, 2019, in the case of USA v. Epstein. The judge asks the prosecution (Mr. Rossmiller) if other defendants are anticipated; Rossmiller replies that no superseding indictments are imminent but are possible. Defense attorney Mr. Weingarten then argues against current obstruction allegations by citing historical negotiations from 2007-2008, where federal and defense lawyers settled on a state statute plea deal rather than federal charges.
This document is a transcript from a court hearing on July 16, 2019, in the Southern District of New York. The discussion centers on pretrial matters for a Mr. Epstein, including clarification that he has one effective passport and a debate over whether a pretrial report indicates he refused to provide financial information or was simply incomplete. The judge also questions another attorney, Mr. Rossmiller, about allegations of witness tampering by Mr. Epstein, confirming these will be part of the government's bail submission.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated July 16, 2019, from case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB. An attorney, Mr. Rossmiller, argues before a judge that a nonprosecution agreement made in the Southern District of Florida was understood by that district to be limited in scope, and therefore does not impede a separate prosecution in the Southern District of New York. This argument is intended to counter the defense's position and validate the ongoing investigation.
This is page 11 of a court transcript filed on July 16, 2019. Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg argues to The Court that the discussion should concern the scope of Epstein's Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA), not its legality. He references a filing by Northern District of Georgia prosecutors (acting for Southern District of Florida) before Judge Marrah that supported the NPA's constitutionality and asserted Epstein fulfilled his obligations.
This document is a page from a legal transcript where a defense attorney argues against the legality of a prosecution. The attorney claims the government is improperly relying on old evidence from a 2007 Florida case and is violating established Department of Justice procedure by prosecuting the same conduct in a second jurisdiction (Georgia) after it was handled in the first (Florida).
This document is page 9 of a court transcript from July 16, 2019, in the case United States v. Epstein (SDNY). The prosecution argues that the Southern District of New York is not bound by the 2008 Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA). Defense attorney Mr. Weinberg counters that the NPA provided Epstein with immunity for the conduct currently being prosecuted, including interstate travel and communications, and asserts that Epstein fulfilled the terms of that agreement.
This document is page 7 of a court transcript from Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (USA v. Epstein) filed on July 16, 2019. Defense attorney Mr. Weingarten argues that discovery is needed to determine if Florida prosecutors violated the Non-Prosecution Agreement (NPA) by steering victims to New York. Prosecutor Mr. Rossmiller responds that the conduct is within the statute of limitations and denies allegations of a conspiracy within the Department of Justice.
This document is page 4 of a court transcript from July 16, 2019, regarding the case against Jeffrey Epstein. The court discusses a search conducted at Epstein's East 71st Street residence over the previous weekend and questions the impact of discovered materials on his sex offender status. Prosecutor Rossmiller describes the materials as 'extremely concerning' regarding bail, while defense attorney Weingarten notes they have not yet seen the 'pictures' in question.
This document is page 3 of a court transcript from July 16, 2019, regarding Case 1:19-cr-00490-RMB (United States v. Epstein). The Judge questions prosecutor Mr. Rossmiller to ensure victims have been notified of the case. The discussion also covers Epstein's status as a Tier 3 sex offender in New York, originating from his 2008 Florida prosecution, classifying him as a high-risk individual for committing sex crimes with minors.
This document is the cover page of a court transcript for a conference held on July 8, 2019, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. The case is United States of America v. Jeffrey Epstein, with Judge Richard M. Berman presiding. The document lists the appearances of the legal counsel for both the prosecution and the defense, as well as other officials present, including an FBI agent, an NYPD officer, and two probation officers.
This document is a court transcript from February 28, 2023, capturing the conclusion of a legal proceeding. The judge clarifies the guideline fine range is 20 to 200,000 per count, which is confirmed by counsel. Before adjourning, the judge thanks the victims, their counsel, counsel for Ms. Maxwell, and counsel for the government.
This document is a court transcript from February 28, 2023, detailing a portion of a legal proceeding. The judge (THE COURT) informs a party of their appellate rights, discusses issuing a post-trial order, and establishes July 2004 as the official end date for a criminal conspiracy. Counsel, Ms. Moe and Ms. Sternheim, acknowledge the court's statements and indicate they have no objections, though Ms. Moe reserves the right to submit a letter if the date conflicts with the sentencing transcript.
This document is a page from a court transcript (likely a sentencing hearing for Ghislaine Maxwell) where the judge is ruling on sentencing guidelines. The judge overrules an objection, finding by a preponderance of evidence that the defendant supervised Sarah Kellen, who is identified as a 'knowing participant in the criminal conspiracy.' The ruling cites testimony from Larry Visoski, David Rodgers, and Carolyn, as well as flight records and a household manual, to establish the defendant's leadership role as 'Epstein's number two.'
This document is a page from a court transcript dated February 28, 2023, in which a judge explains the legal basis for applying specific sentencing enhancements to a defendant. The judge refutes the defendant's arguments that guideline 4B1.5(b) requires a finding of future danger and outlines the necessary factual findings for applying a leadership role enhancement under guideline 3B1.1(a).
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity