Epstein Secrets

04) 7 United States v. Korfant, 771 F.2d 660 (2d Cir.1985) 9 United States v. Laskow, 688 F. Supp. 851 (E.D.N.Y. 1988) 8, 10 United States v. Lopez, 356 F.3d 463 (2d Cir. 2004) 9, 11 United States v. Prisco, 391 F. App'x 920 (2d Cir. 2010) 7 United States v. Rivera, 844 F.2d 916 (2d Cir. 1

SSER LLP 800 Third Avenue ISO Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. 150 East 10th Avenue Denver Colorado 80203 Bobbi C. Sternheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim 7 Ms. Maxwell notes that her request for a Bill of Particulars includes a request that the government identify th

z v. Colorado, 137 S. Ct. 855 (2017) 50 Rosales-Lopez v. United States, 451 U.S. 182 (1981) 38, 45 Ru

MAXWE 'S MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON. M R AN & FOREMAN P.C. Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP Bobbi C. Sternheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Sternheim Attorneys for Chislaine Maxwell EFTA00155901 Table of Contents Table of Contents ii Table of Authorities i

ING INDICTMENT AS MULTIPLICITOUS Jeffrey S. Pagliuca Laura A. Menninger HADDON, MORGAN & FOREMAN P.C. Christian R. Everdell COHEN & GRESSER LLP Bobbi C. Stemheim Law Offices of Bobbi C. Stemheim Attorneys for Ghislaine Maxwell EFTA00028968 --- PAGE BREAK --- The government does not dispute that Counts 1

e burden shifts to the prosecution to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that there are in fact two distinct conspiracies." United States v. Lopez, 356 F.3d 463, 467 (2d Cir. 2004) (citing United States v. DelVecchio, 800 F.2d 21, 22 (2d Cir. 1986)). As demonstrated in Ms. Maxwell's moving pape