Back to Network
9
Shared Docs
9
Same-Page
9 / 9
Mentions
Document Mentions (9 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
Sponsored
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
efendant would automatically rebut the presumption applicable to crimes such as sex trafficking. That is manifestly incorrect. See United States v. Artis, 607 F. App'x 95, 97 (2d Cir. 2015) (finding that a defendant's lack of criminal record was "not so compelling as to defeat the presumption or to ma
(Continued) of call in seconds, inbound or outbound calls and calls made to or from phone. On , 2006, at 11:03 am, made a call to the victim Illwhich 111111192 seconds (8 minutes and 2 seconds). The victim then returned the call at 11:16 am which lasted 6 seconds. The victim then made contact wit
Sponsored
Mutual Connections (93)
Entities connected to both Artis and Illwhich
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON11 w/ Artis·10 w/ Illwhich
Prince Andrew
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
FT
Fierro v. Taylor
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
Pretrial Services
ORGANIZATION11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
KA
Kazeem
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
BO
Botero
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
VA
Valerio
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
ZA
Zarrab
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
OR
Orena
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
BO
Borodin
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
NI
Nickerson
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
BO
Bonestroo
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
JU
Jungers
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
MI
Mikoloyck
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
The Second Circuit
ORGANIZATION11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
The Silvio J. Mollo Building
ORGANIZATION11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
CI
Cilins
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
Southern District of New York
ORGANIZATION11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
ET
Emmy Taylor
PERSON11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich
SDFL to Epstein
ORGANIZATION11 w/ Artis·9 w/ Illwhich