Back to People & Entities
MA
Markiewicz
Person
4
Total Mentions
4
Documents
98
Connected Entities
Markiewicz is not a person connected to Epstein, but rather a 1992 Second Circuit legal case (United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786) cited as precedent in Epstein-related legal briefs.
All four mentions are identical legal citations appearing in what appear to be legal briefs or motions related to Epstein cases. The case is cited for the legal principle that courts can only evaluate whether a question was fundamentally ambiguous after the development of a full factual record at trial. The cited case itself involved perjury charges and federal jurisdiction issues, unrelated to Epstein.
Key Highlights
- •United States v. Markiewicz was a 1992 case involving Duane Markiewicz and five co-defendants on perjury and witness tampering charges
- •The case is cited in Epstein legal documents solely as legal precedent regarding ambiguous questioning during depositions
- •No person named Markiewicz appears to have any direct connection to Jeffrey Epstein or the investigation
Frequently Asked Questions
Books for Further Reading
Document Mentions (4)
1 mention
y evaluate whether a question was fundamentally ambiguous only after the development of a full factual record at trial. See, e.g., United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786, 808 (2d Cir. 1992). The evidence at trial may shed further light on whether the questions posed were objectively ambiguous in contex
Page: EFTA00020282 →1 mention
y evaluate whether a question was fundamentally ambiguous only after the development of a full factual record at trial. See, e.g., United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786, 808 (2d Cir. 1992). The evidence at trial may shed further light on whether the questions posed were objectively ambiguous in contex
Page: EFTA00022112 →1 mention
y evaluate whether a question was fundamentally ambiguous only after the development of a full factual record at trial. See, e.g., United States v. Markiewicz, 978 F.2d 786, 808 (2d Cir. 1992). The evidence at trial may shed further light on whether the questions posed were objectively ambiguous in contex
Page: EFTA00029561 →Sponsored
1 mention
ndication" to the defendant "as trustee"). The defendant's answers were unequivocal, with no expressions of confusion or internal contradictions. Cf Markiewicz, 978 F.2d at 809 (explaining that a question was ambiguous as to whether it asked about the deponent's personal or professional capacities, in ligh
Page: EFTA00029852 →Sponsored
Connected Entities(20 of 98)
Brady
PersonCity in and county seat of McCulloch County, Texas, United States
4 docs4 co-mentions
Giglio
Person4 docs4 co-mentions
Second Circuit
Organization4 docs4 co-mentions
CO
Collins
PersonSapper in Indian Engineers, British Indian Army
4 docs4 co-mentions
Jeffrey Epstein
PersonAmerican sex offender and financier (1953–2019)
4 docs4 co-mentions
LI
Lighte
Person4 docs4 co-mentions
United States
LocationCountry located primarily in North America
3 docs3 co-mentions
Murray
PersonCity in Calloway County, Kentucky, United States
3 docs3 co-mentions
JE
Jeffries
PersonFamily name
3 docs3 co-mentions
Supreme Court
OrganizationHighest court of jurisdiction in the US
3 docs3 co-mentions
Antonin Scalia
PersonAssociate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States from 1986 to 2016
3 docs3 co-mentions
SC
Schneider
PersonFamily name
3 docs3 co-mentions
Eric Holder
PersonUnited States Attorney General from 2009 to 2015
3 docs3 co-mentions
ST
Stringer
PersonInclusion, possibly leading to a defect, in cast metal
3 docs3 co-mentions
TH
Thompson
Person3 docs3 co-mentions
Circuit
Organization2008 television film
3 docs3 co-mentions
RU
Russo
Person3 docs3 co-mentions
D.C. Cir.
Organization3 docs3 co-mentions
Leahy
PersonCanadian folk group originating from Lakefield, Ontario
3 docs3 co-mentions
WA
Walker
Person3 docs3 co-mentions