7
Shared Docs
6
Same-Page
7 / 7
Mentions
t. Impeachment evidence, as well as exculpatory evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We r
diced against Ms. Maxwell or has a motive to falsify or distort his or her testimony. Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987); United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1988). 8. Contradictory Statements: We request all prior contradictory statements of any prospective government witness. G
t. Impeachment evidence, as well as exculpatory evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We r
diced against Ms. Maxwell or has a motive to falsify or distort his or her testimony. Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987); United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1988). 8. Contradictory Statements: We request all prior contradictory statements of any prospective government witness. G
t. Impeachment evidence, as well as exculpatory evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We r
diced against Ms. Maxwell or has a motive to falsify or distort his or her testimony. Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987); United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1988). 8. Contradictory Statements: We request all prior contradictory statements of any prospective government witness. G
t. Impeachment evidence, as well as exculpatory evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We r
diced against Ms. Maxwell or has a motive to falsify or distort his or her testimony. Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987); United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1988). 8. Contradictory Statements: We request all prior contradictory statements of any prospective government witness. G
t. Impeachment evidence, as well as exculpatory evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We r
diced against Ms. Maxwell or has a motive to falsify or distort his or her testimony. Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987); United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1988). 8. Contradictory Statements: We request all prior contradictory statements of any prospective government witness. G
t. Impeachment evidence, as well as exculpatory evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agars, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We r
diced against Ms. Maxwell or has a motive to falsify or distort his or her testimony. Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987); United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1988). 8. Contradictory Statements: We request all prior contradictory statements of any prospective government witness. G
t. Impeachment evidence, as well as exculpatory evidence, falls within Brady's definition of evidence favorable to the accused. See United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985); United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 (1976). We also make the following specific Brady requests: I. Exculpatory Evidence: We r
Page: EFTA00011422 →diced against Ms. Maxwell or has a motive to falsify or distort his or her testimony. Pennsylvania v. Ritchie, 480 U.S. 39 (1987); United States v. Strifler, 851 F.2d 1197 (9th Cir. 1988). 8. Contradictory Statements: We request all prior contradictory statements of any prospective government witness. G
Page: EFTA00011424 →Entities connected to both Bagley and Strifler

Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON
Brady
PERSON
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON
United States
LOCATIONJeffrey Pagliuca
PERSONthe Southern District
LOCATION
Bradley Edwards
PERSONKyles
PERSON
Michael Cohen
PERSON
Whitley
PERSON
Paul Cassell
PERSONThane Ritchie
PERSON
David Boies
PERSONSpencer Kuvin
PERSON
Prince Andrew
PERSONSigrid McCawley
PERSONGiles
PERSONthe Epstein Victims' Compensation Program
ORGANIZATIONPeter Skinner
PERSON
United States Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION