Court dialogue on obscenity case involving Grove Press and alleged First Amendment misuse
Summary
The passage records a courtroom exchange featuring Judge Aldrich, Judge Julian, and attorney Alan Dershowitz discussing obscenity standards and profit motives. It offers no concrete leads, transaction Alan Dershowitz argues the film should be protected by the First Amendment despite alleged obscenity Judges question whether the case is driven by profit rather than free speech. Reference to Grove P
This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.
View Source CollectionPersons Referenced (2)
Tags
Related Documents (6)
Court discussion on obscenity, First Amendment, and public exposure of films
The passage is a routine judicial dialogue about obscenity law and First Amendment limits, mentioning only lower‑level judges and a publisher. It lacks concrete allegations, financial flows, or ties t Debate over whether knowledge of an obscene film’s showing is protected speech. Reference to Grove Press and potential billboard advertising of obscene material. Judges Julian and Aldrich express per
Obscenity Conviction of Harry Reems Cited as Potential Precedent for Political Conspiracy Prosecutions
The passage discusses legal commentary on the Harry Reems obscenity case and its possible use against political activists, but provides no concrete new evidence, names of officials, financial transact Legal scholars warned the Reems conviction could set a precedent for conspiracy charges against anti Nat Hentoff and Alan Dershowitz publicly criticized the potential expansion of obscenity law. The
Alan Dershowitz recounts involvement in Harry Reems/Deep Throat legal battles and Harvard student protests
The passage provides personal anecdotes about past First Amendment litigation involving adult film actors and student protests, but offers no concrete new leads, financial transactions, or connections Dershowitz acted as an informal advisor to Harry Reems during his obscenity case. Justice Department eventually dropped the case after public pressure. Harvard students organized a Deep Throat screen
Cease‑and‑desist letter from Mishcon de Reya on behalf of Alan Dershowitz regarding defamatory article
The document is a legal demand letter asserting defamation and requesting removal of an article. It contains no concrete new evidence, financial transactions, or actionable leads linking powerful acto Claims the article falsely alleges Jeffrey Epstein directed a woman to have sex with Alan Dershowitz Accuses Daily Mail of publishing without seeking comment and embellishing a New York Daily News st
Challenge to Boston prosecutor over adult theater film regulation
The passage describes a low‑level legal strategy involving a state prosecutor and three district judges. It provides no concrete financial flows, high‑level officials, or novel allegations of miscondu Attorney sought injunction against Boston prosecutor Garrett Byrne. Case heard by Judges Aldrich, Julian, and Raymond Pettine. Argument centered on First Amendment rights versus state regulation of a
Assange allegedly coordinated Sarah Harrison’s rapid deployment to Hong Kong to aid Snowden’s escape to Russia
The passage provides a detailed narrative linking Julian Assange, Sarah Harrison, and Edward Snowden, suggesting a coordinated operation to move Snowden to Russia via Hong Kong. It names specific indi Assange reportedly advised Snowden to seek asylum in Russia and fabricated a story of a route throug Assange instructed senior WikiLeaks staffer Sarah Harrison to abandon an Australian political camp
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.