All data sourced from public U.S. government records. Appearance of any name does NOT imply guilt or wrongdoing. Full disclaimer →
Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys argue that the government's subpoena to a third party was unconstitutional and violated her rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, as well as the Martindell principle. They seek to suppress evidence obtained from this subpoena and dismiss certain counts.
Source
DOJ
Release Date
—
Pages
21
Jurisdiction
—
Case
140
2 individuals identified
Ghislaine Maxwell (Defendant): This document is potentially important because it presents legal arguments for suppressing evidence obtained through a grand jury subpoena, which could significantly impact the case against Ghislaine Maxwell.
Jeffrey S. Pagliuca (Attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell): This document is potentially important because it presents legal arguments for suppressing evidence obtained through a grand jury subpoena, which could significantly impact the case against Ghislaine Maxwell.
Full-Text Search — Phase 2
In-document keyword search is coming when OCR/text ingestion is complete.