Defense Counsel

organization 50 mentions 5% confidence Hidden (not-a-name)

Document Mentions (50)

Preview Document Volume Page Context
Page 71 059.pdf - 71 stigation ............................................ 20 5. October 2006- February 2007: Epstein's Defense Counsel Initiate Contact with Villafana, L...
Page 72 059.pdf - 72 o Meet with Epstein's New Attorneys ............................. 59 2. Leading to the Meeting with Defense Counsel, Investigative Steps Are Postponed...
Page 73 059.pdf - 73 r the Victims .................................................... 94 F. Despite Affirming the NPA, Defense Counsel Intensify Their Challenges to It a...
Page 76 059.pdf - 76 NOT A CERTIFIED COPY D. OPR Does Not Find That the Subjects' Preexisting Relationships with Defense Counsel, Decisions to Meet with Defense Counsel, a...
Page 103 059.pdf - 103 ransactions. The case agent viewed the case as "strong." 5. October 2006 - February 2007: Epstein's Defense Counsel Initiate Contact with Villafana, L...
Page 105 059.pdf - 105 ecise crimes the USAO intended to charge, which Villafana did not want to reveal. 6. February 2007: Defense Counsel Meet with Lourie and Villafana and...
Page 111 059.pdf - 111 ictment drastically different from the current draft?" Sloman responded only, "Taken care of."46 D. Defense Counsel Seek a Meeting with Senior USAO Ma...
Page 114 059.pdf - 114 ibility issues were generic rather than tied to specific victims. F. The June 26, 2007 Meeting with Defense Counsel Menchel agreed to meet with defens...
Page 141 059.pdf - 141 whether the Department might direct the USAO to "drop this case."96 2. Leading to the Meeting with Defense Counsel, Investigative Steps Are Postponed,...
Page 145 059.pdf - 145 ages. We also put in deadlines for a plea and sentencing date." B. September 12, 2007: The USAO and Defense Counsel Meet with the State Attorney Altho...
Page 154 059.pdf - 154 y reply email, Villafana asked Lourie to call her, but there is no record of whether they spoke. F. Defense Counsel Offers New Proposals Substantially...
Page 179 059.pdf - 179 ce "Affirmation" of the NP A and its addendum, signed by Epstein. 154 F. Despite Affirming the NPA, Defense Counsel Intensify Their Challenges to It a...
Page 180 059.pdf - 180 New USAO Criminal Chief Begins a Full Review of the Evidence, and Acosta Agrees to Meet Again with Defense Counsel After reviewing Starr's and Lefkowi...
Page 231 059.pdf - 231 e NPA for Epstein's benefit. D. OPR Does Not Find That the Subjects' Preexisting Relationships with Defense Counsel, Decisions to Meet with Defense Co...
Page 232 059.pdf - 232 attorneys he had selected to represent him. 2. The Subjects Asserted That Their Relationships with Defense Counsel Did Not Influence Their Actions Aco...
Page 236 059.pdf - 236 to one of Epstein's attorneys. E. The Evidence Does Not Establish That the Subjects' Meetings with Defense Counsel Were Improper Benefits to Epstein O...
Page 241 059.pdf - 241 Evidence Does Not Establish That Acosta Negotiated a Deal Favorable to Epstein over Breakfast with Defense Counsel OPR separately considered the circu...
Page 16 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 16 stigation ............................................20 5. October 2006 – February 2007: Epstein’s Defense Counsel Initiate Contact with Villafaña, L...
Page 17 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 17 to Meet with Epstein’s New Attorneys .............................59 2. Leading to the Meeting with Defense Counsel, Investigative Steps Are Postponed...
Page 18 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 18 or the Victims ....................................................94 F. Despite Affirming the NPA, Defense Counsel Intensify Their Challenges to It a...
Page 21 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 21 xix D. OPR Does Not Find That the Subjects’ Preexisting Relationships with Defense Counsel, Decisions to Meet with Defense Counsel, and Other Factors ...
Page 48 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 48 ransactions. The case agent viewed the case as “strong.” 5. October 2006 – February 2007: Epstein’s Defense Counsel Initiate Contact with Villafaña, L...
Page 50 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 50 ecise crimes the USAO intended to charge, which Villafaña did not want to reveal. 6. February 2007: Defense Counsel Meet with Lourie and Villafaña and...
Page 56 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 56 ictment drastically different from the current draft?” Sloman responded only, “Taken care of.”46 D. Defense Counsel Seek a Meeting with Senior USAO Ma...
Page 59 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 59 ibility issues were generic rather than tied to specific victims. F. The June 26, 2007 Meeting with Defense Counsel Menchel agreed to meet with defens...
Page 86 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 86 whether the Department might direct the USAO to “drop this case.”96 2. Leading to the Meeting with Defense Counsel, Investigative Steps Are Postponed,...
Page 90 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 90 ages. We also put in deadlines for a plea and sentencing date.” B. September 12, 2007: The USAO and Defense Counsel Meet with the State Attorney Altho...
Page 99 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 99 y reply email, Villafaña asked Lourie to call her, but there is no record of whether they spoke. F. Defense Counsel Offers New Proposals Substantially...
Page 124 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 124 ence “Affirmation” of the NPA and its addendum, signed by Epstein.154 F. Despite Affirming the NPA, Defense Counsel Intensify Their Challenges to It a...
Page 125 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 125 New USAO Criminal Chief Begins a Full Review of the Evidence, and Acosta Agrees to Meet Again with Defense Counsel After reviewing Starr’s and Lefkowi...
Page 176 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 176 e NPA for Epstein’s benefit. D. OPR Does Not Find That the Subjects’ Preexisting Relationships with Defense Counsel, Decisions to Meet with Defense Co...
Page 177 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 177 attorneys he had selected to represent him. 2. The Subjects Asserted That Their Relationships with Defense Counsel Did Not Influence Their Actions Aco...
Page 181 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 181 to one of Epstein’s attorneys. E. The Evidence Does Not Establish That the Subjects’ Meetings with Defense Counsel Were Improper Benefits to Epstein O...
Page 186 2020.11 DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility Report.pdf - 186 Evidence Does Not Establish That Acosta Negotiated a Deal Favorable to Epstein over Breakfast with Defense Counsel OPR separately considered the circu...
Page 1 EFTA00009654.pdf VOL00007 1 the Government, the defendant ("Defendant"), and/or to the defendant's criminal defense attorneys ("Defense Counsel,' and 1 EFTA00009654
Page 2 EFTA00009658.pdf VOL00007 2 losed to Defense Staff, Defense Experts/Advisors, Other Authorized Persons, or Potential Witnesses, Defense Counsel shall instruct such individual(s) ...
Page 3 EFTA00009658.pdf VOL00007 3 ling absent contrary order of the Court. 8. Confidential Information disclosed to the defendant, or Defense Counsel, respectively, during the course o...
Page 4 EFTA00009658.pdf VOL00007 4 0490-RMB Document 37-1 Filed 07/25/19 Page 7 of 9 c) Shall not be possessed outside the presence of Defense Counsel, or maintained, by the Defendant; ...
Page 5 EFTA00009658.pdf VOL00007 5 13. The foregoing provisions shall remain in effect unless and until either (a) the Government and Defense Counsel mutually agree otherwise, or (b) th...
Page 2 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 2 ery disclosed to the defendant ("Defendant") and/or to the defendant's criminal defense attorneys ("Defense Counsel") during the course of proceedings...
Page 3 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 3 xpert, legal advisor, consultant, or any other individual retained or employed by the Defendant and Defense Counsel for the purpose of assisting in th...
Page 4 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 4 such acknowledgments shall be retained by Defense Counsel and shall be subject to in camera review by the Court if good cause for review is demonstrat...
Page 5 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 5 the identity of any victims or witnesses referenced in the Discovery. This Order does not prohibit Defense Counsel or Defense Staff from referencing t...
Page 6 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 6 lf publicly as such on the record in this case shall not be treated as Confidential Information. 9. Defense Counsel may, at any time, notify the Gover...
Page 7 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 7 ing absent contrary order of the Court. 10. Confidential Information disclosed to the defendant, or Defense Counsel, respectively, during the course o...
Page 8 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 8 ment 36 Filed 07/30/20 Page 8 of 12 e) Shall be reviewed by the Defendant solely in the presence of Defense Counsel or when provided access to Discove...
Page 9 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 9 de, partially-nude, or otherwise sexualized images, videos, or other depictions of individuals. 13. Defense Counsel may, at any time, notify the Gover...
Page 10 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 10 /30/20 Page 10 of 12 b) Shall not be disseminated, transmitted, or otherwise copied and provided to Defense Counsel or the Defendant; c) Shall be revi...
Page 11 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 11 AJN Document 36 Filed 07/30/20 Page 11 of 12 publicly available or obtained by the Defendant or her Defense Counsel from a source other than the Gover...
Page 12 EFTA00009664.pdf VOL00007 12 Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 36 Filed 07/30/20 Page 12 of 12 Defense Counsel may make an appropriate application to the Court for any such modifica...
No images found for this person. Images are detected through:
  • Celebrity face recognition (Amazon Rekognition)
  • Name mentions in image text/captions