All data sourced from public U.S. government records. Appearance of any name does NOT imply guilt or wrongdoing. Full disclaimer →
The document is a reply memorandum in support of Ghislaine Maxwell's motion to dismiss Counts Five and Six of the superseding indictment. It argues that the alleged misstatements are not perjurious as a matter of law due to the ambiguity and immateriality of the questions and answers in a previous deposition. The filing references various legal precedents and cases to support its arguments.
Source
DOJ
Release Date
—
Pages
16
Jurisdiction
—
Case
208
4 individuals identified
Ghislaine Maxwell (Defendant): This document is a crucial court filing in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, arguing for the dismissal of specific counts in the indictment based on legal precedents and the nature of the alleged misstatements.
Christian R. Everdell (Defense Attorney): This document is a crucial court filing in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, arguing for the dismissal of specific counts in the indictment based on legal precedents and the nature of the alleged misstatements.
Full-Text Search — Phase 2
In-document keyword search is coming when OCR/text ingestion is complete.
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca (Defense Attorney): This document is a crucial court filing in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, arguing for the dismissal of specific counts in the indictment based on legal precedents and the nature of the alleged misstatements.
Bobbi C. Sternheim (Defense Attorney): This document is a crucial court filing in the case against Ghislaine Maxwell, arguing for the dismissal of specific counts in the indictment based on legal precedents and the nature of the alleged misstatements.