Epstein Secrets

rney, and Assistant U.S. Attorney." I said, "I would stake my life on their honor and veracity." Mr. Sands asked Mr. Kimbrough: Q. In return for Harvey's furnishing information, what was he to receive? A. I was to dismiss the Indictment against him. Q. Do you know whether or not any— A. And I would

ld not satisfy heavy burden of proving defendant under- stood government reserved right to seek property forfeiture): United States v. (Mi• chat!) Harvey, 791 F.2d at 301 (imprecision in terms of written agreement construed against the government). 11 In this case, Harvey was not granted formal st

h the rec- ognition that "[p]ast exposure to illegal conduct does not in itself show a present case or controversy" for equitable relief. OShea v. Littleton, 414 U.S. 488, 495, 94 &Ct. 669, 675, 38 L.Ed.2d 674 (1974) (0Shea). Claims for equitable relief there- fore become moot when the challenged ac- ti

erious and trau- matic. short of homicide (Koss & Harvey, 1991; Resick & Nishith, 1997). Women may be att

.e.. self-label) as rape victims if they believe that physical force or weapons are essential elements of rape/sexual assault (Fisher et al.. 2003: Littleton. Axsom, Breitkopf, & Berenson. 2006). Physical force by assailants (Bachman. 1993; Du Mont. Miller, & Myhr. 2003: Russell & Bolen. 2000). presence o

e legacy of the poor treatment of crime victims in the criminal Bustice] process." 150 Cong. Rec. S4269 (daily ed. Apr. 22, 2004) (statement of Sen. Feinstein). In any event, the VRRA did not contain any "right to confer," or a "right to be treated with fairness. and thus it does not provide guidance for

Interpretation of Legal Texts at 167 (2012) (quoting Sir Edward Coke, The First Part of the Institutes of the Laws of England. or a Commentary upon Littleton § 728, at 381a (1628; 14th ed. 1791), for the proposition that "[i]f any section [of a law] be intricate, obscure or doubtful, the proper mode of di