Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-1616House OversightLegal Filing

The defense attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell argues that Accuser-3's evidence is not direct evidence o...

The defense attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell argues that Accuser-3's evidence is not direct evidence of the sex trafficking conspiracy charged in Count Five and should be excluded under Rule 404(b) and Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The government had argued that Accuser-3's evidence is admissible to prove the sex trafficking conspiracy, but the defense counters that the government's arguments are meritless and based on flawed assumptions.

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
d-1616
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The defense attorney for Ghislaine Maxwell argues that Accuser-3's evidence is not direct evidence of the sex trafficking conspiracy charged in Count Five and should be excluded under Rule 404(b) and Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The government had argued that Accuser-3's evidence is admissible to prove the sex trafficking conspiracy, but the defense counters that the government's arguments are meritless and based on flawed assumptions.

Persons Referenced (1)

Tags

Admissibility of Accuser-3's evidenceMotion in Limine to Exclude Evidence Related to Accuser-3Sex trafficking conspiracy charged in Count Five
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.