The document outlines a schedule of motions and responses between two opposing parties in a legal case, referred to as 'the government' and 'the defense'.
They are opposing sides in a legal proceeding, discussing procedural matters like evidence inspection and admissibility.
The document shows the Government filing a motion to preclude the defense from presenting certain evidence and arguments at trial.
The document describes them as presenting opposing arguments to the jury: 'The government asks you to draw one set of inferences while the defense asks you to draw another.'
DOJ-OGR-00000614.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a legal proceeding filed on August 6, 2019. In it, a representative for the government, Ms. Moe, proposes a detailed schedule to the court for the defense to file discovery-related and pretrial motions, with corresponding deadlines for the government's responses. Ms. Moe concludes by requesting that the court schedule a trial for June of the following year.
DOJ-OGR-00017254.jpg
This document is a transcript of a jury charge from a criminal case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. The judge instructs the jury on the legal definition of an inference, distinguishing it from speculation and explaining how to draw reasonable conclusions from evidence. The judge specifically warns the jury that they cannot find the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, guilty based solely on her presence at and knowledge of a crime being committed.
DOJ-OGR-00011639.jpg
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. In it, an attorney, Ms. Moe, confirms to the judge that an item was made available for inspection by the defense, resolving that issue. The judge then directs the conversation to the next matter: the admissibility of co-conspirator statements for the upcoming trial.
DOJ-OGR-00005579.jpg
This document is a legal filing from the prosecution ("the Government") in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on October 29, 2021. The Government argues that the Court should prevent the defense from discussing certain issues or offering related evidence during its opening statement and the trial, claiming such evidence is irrelevant, inadmissible, and prejudicial. The filing cites several legal precedents to support the Court's authority to limit the defense's presentation to ensure a fair trial and avoid a mistrial.
Entities connected to both The government and the defense
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein relationship