Epstein Secrets

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e

ted States also agrees that it will not institute any criminal charges against any potential co-conspirators of Epstein." Dkt. No. 142-1 at 5. Under Annabi, Salatneh, and Gonzalez, a statement that "the United States" agrees not to prosecute implies no restriction on prosecutions in other districts. T

The balance of these considerations favors severance. "Motions to sever are committed to the sound discretion of the trial judge." United States v. Casamento, 887 F.2d 1141, 1149 (2d Cir. 1989). In its discretion, the Court concludes that trying the perjury counts separately will best ensure a fair and e