Back to Network
4
Shared Docs
3
Same-Page
4 / 4
Mentions
Document Mentions (4 shared documents)
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
provide a reason for the limitation." United States v. Marcus, which is 2007 WL 330388 at *1, an Eastern District decision citing United States v. Marti, 421 F.2d 1283 (2d Cir. 1970). I agree with the government that limiting disclosure here would protect the alleged victims from potential harassme
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 precluding the term "victim" is both unnecessary and impractical. United States v. Dupigny, 18 CR 528, transcript of October 17, 2019, Docket No. 198 at 50. It is appropriate for the government to use the terms as representative of its l
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
provide a reason for the limitation." United States v. Marcus, which is 2007 WL 330388 at *1, an Eastern District decision citing United States v. Marti, 421 F.2d 1283 (2d Cir. 1970). I agree with the government that limiting disclosure here would protect the alleged victims from potential harassme
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 precluding the term "victim" is both unnecessary and impractical. United States v. Dupigny, 18 CR 528, transcript of October 17, 2019, Docket No. 198 at 50. It is appropriate for the government to use the terms as representative of its l
2 mentions1 same-page
Page ?Same page
provide a reason for the limitation." United States v. Marcus, which is 2007 WL 330388 at *1, an Eastern District decision citing United States v. Marti, 421 F.2d 1283 (2d Cir. 1970). I agree with the government that limiting disclosure here would protect the alleged victims from potential harassme
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 precluding the term "victim" is both unnecessary and impractical. United States v. Dupigny, 18 CR 528, transcript of October 17, 2019, Docket No. 198 at 50. It is appropriate for the government to use the terms as representative of its l
Sponsored
2 mentions
Page EFTA00023369
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 precluding the term "victim" is both unnecessary and impractical. United States v. Dupigny, 18 CR 528, transcript of October 17, 2019, Docket No. 198 at 50. It is appropriate for the government to use the terms as representative of its l
Page: EFTA00023369 →Page EFTA00023370
provide a reason for the limitation." United States v. Marcus, which is 2007 WL 330388 at *1, an Eastern District decision citing United States v. Marti, 421 F.2d 1283 (2d Cir. 1970). I agree with the government that limiting disclosure here would protect the alleged victims from potential harassme
Page: EFTA00023370 →Sponsored
Mutual Connections (23)
Entities connected to both Marti and Dupigny
Jeffrey Epstein
PERSON36 w/ Marti·15 w/ Dupigny
Ghislaine Maxwell
PERSON33 w/ Marti·13 w/ Dupigny
United States
LOCATION9 w/ Marti·7 w/ Dupigny
FU
Furman
PERSON4 w/ Marti·8 w/ Dupigny
DB
Doug Band
PERSON10 w/ Marti·2 w/ Dupigny
Julie K. Brown
PERSON8 w/ Marti·4 w/ Dupigny
MI
Mizell
PERSON4 w/ Marti·5 w/ Dupigny
RA
Raniere
PERSON4 w/ Marti·5 w/ Dupigny
MW
Michael Washburn
PERSON4 w/ Marti·5 w/ Dupigny
GA
Gardner
PERSON4 w/ Marti·4 w/ Dupigny
Southern District
LOCATION3 w/ Marti·5 w/ Dupigny
Martinez
PERSON5 w/ Marti·3 w/ Dupigny
Russell Simmons
PERSON2 w/ Marti·5 w/ Dupigny
Prince Andrew
PERSON3 w/ Marti·4 w/ Dupigny
Harvey Weinstein
PERSON2 w/ Marti·5 w/ Dupigny
Elon Musk
PERSON3 w/ Marti·4 w/ Dupigny
USC Section 3771
ORGANIZATION3 w/ Marti·3 w/ Dupigny
the Eastern District
LOCATION3 w/ Marti·3 w/ Dupigny
Dupigny, Docket No.
LOCATION3 w/ Marti·3 w/ Dupigny
Department of Justice
ORGANIZATION2 w/ Marti·4 w/ Dupigny