7
Total Mentions
7
Documents
162
Connected Entities
Organization referenced in documents
EFTA00078835
n by the court in the internal affairs of the Justice Department would clearly constitute a violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine." Id. In Dresser Industries, Inc. v. United States, 596 F.2d 1231, 1237 (511' Cir. 1979), the court of appeals observed that "[t]he decision to prosecute is largely unreviewable by
EFTA00201236
Doe. Such risk and speculation about possible criminal charges does not establish a real need for a stay. See Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368, 1376 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (refusing to grant a stay a civil proceeding before any indictment was returned because Fifth Amendment conce
EFTA00204870
al transcripts, `the strategy or direction of the investigation, the deliberations or questions of jurors, and the like."' Id. at 500, citin SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368, 1382 (D.C. Cir. I SDFL lOP 8.01.00 provides: "Grand jury matters, and all matters reasonably related to the original grand jury mat
EFTA00208037
on by the court in the internal affairs of the Justice Department would clearly constitute a violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine." Id. In Dresser Industries, Inc. v. United States, 596 F.2d 1231, 1237 (51h Cir. 1979), the court of appeals observed that "[t]he decision to prosecute is largely unreviewable by t
EFTA00722655
Doe. Such risk and speculation about possible criminal charges does not establish a real need for a stay. See Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368, 1376 (D.C. Cir. 1980) (refusing to grant a stay a civil proceeding before any indictment was returned because Fifth Amendment conce
EFTA00229916_sub_002 - EFTA00229916_200
on by the court in the internal affairs of the Justice Department would clearly constitute a violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine." Id. In Dresser Industries, Inc. v. United States, 596 F.2d 1231, 1237 (5th Cir. 1979), the court of appeals observed that tilt decision to prosecute is largely unreviewable by the
EFTA00177007_sub_001 - EFTA00177007_100
n by the court in the internal affairs of the Justice Department would clearly constitute a violation of the Separation of Powers doctrine." Id. In Dresser Industries, Inc." United States, 596 F.2d 1231, 1237 (5' Cir. 1979), the court of appeals observed that "[t]he decision to prosecute is largely unreviewable by the
Jane Doe
PersonPseudonym for anonymous victims/witnesses in Epstein legal proceedings

Kenneth Marra
PersonAmerican judge

Paul Cassell
PersonUnited States federal judge

Jeffrey Epstein
PersonAmerican sex offender and financier (1953–2019)

Scarlett Johansson
PersonAmerican actress (born 1984)

Bradley Edwards
PersonAmerican attorney who represented Epstein victims, author of Relentless Pursuit
The Court of Appeals
OrganizationFederal appeals court

Supreme Court
OrganizationHighest court of jurisdiction in the US

Cynthia Nixon
PersonAmerican actress and politician

United States
LocationCountry located primarily in North America

Prince Andrew
PersonThird child of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh (born 1960)

Eric Trump
PersonAmerican businessman and reality television personality (born 1984)

Eric Holder
PersonUnited States Attorney General from 2009 to 2015
Aguirre-Gonzalez
PersonSurname reference in Epstein-related documents
Phillip Coon
PersonPerson referenced in documents
Adelphia Communications Corporation
OrganizationOrganization referenced in documents
NFN Skinner
PersonPerson referenced in documents
Dawalibi
PersonSurname reference in documents
Petersen
PersonSurname reference in documents

India
LocationState of the United States of America