Event Details
January 01, 2001
Description
United States v. Fortier decision
Participants (2)
| Name | Type | Mentions | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Tenth Circuit Court | person | 0 | View Entity |
| David Schoen | person | 386 | View Entity |
Source Documents (1)
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_017650.jpg
This document is a page from a 2007 Utah Law Review article authored by David Schoen (who later served as Jeffrey Epstein's attorney). The text critiques the Advisory Committee's failure to include 'victim representatives' in Proposed Rule 60, arguing it contradicts the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA). The document is stamped as evidence for the House Oversight Committee, likely relevant to the investigation into the handling of victims' rights in the Epstein Non-Prosecution Agreement.
Related Events
Events with shared participants
Legal research conducted by David Schoen.
2019-02-28 • N/A
Publication of BYU Law Review article
2005-01-01 • Unknown
David Schoen performed a LexisNexis search for legal articles regarding the Crime Victims' Rights Act (CVRA) and the Sixth Amendment.
2019-02-28 • N/A
Publication of Law Review Article
2007-01-01 • Utah
David Schoen conducted a LexisNexis search for legal materials regarding 'cvra and sixth amendment'.
2019-02-28 • Unknown
Proposed meeting between Jeffrey Epstein and David Schoen.
2016-06-01 • Unknown
Meeting between David Schoen and Lefkowitz regarding a prospective client.
Date unknown • Unknown
State v. Casey court case
2002-01-01 • Utah
Email sent regarding a Tea Party Pac article.
2019-03-22 • Internet
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein event