Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-1229House OversightLegal Filing

Ghislaine Maxwell's reply memorandum argues that allegations regarding Accuser-3 should be stricken ...

Ghislaine Maxwell's reply memorandum argues that allegations regarding Accuser-3 should be stricken from the superseding indictment because they are irrelevant and prejudicial. The government concedes that it cannot charge Maxwell with a substantive offense against Accuser-3 due to the statute of limitations and lack of evidence.

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
d-1229
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Ghislaine Maxwell's reply memorandum argues that allegations regarding Accuser-3 should be stricken from the superseding indictment because they are irrelevant and prejudicial. The government concedes that it cannot charge Maxwell with a substantive offense against Accuser-3 due to the statute of limitations and lack of evidence.

Persons Referenced (1)

Tags

Motion to Strike Surplusage from Superseding IndictmentRelevance and admissibility of allegations regarding Accuser-3Prejudicial effect of allegations regarding Accuser-3
0Share
PostReddit

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.