Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-362House OversightLegal Filing

Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys argue that the government's subpoena to a third party was unconstituti...

Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys argue that the government's subpoena to a third party was unconstitutional and violated her rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, as well as the Martindell principle. They seek to suppress evidence obtained from this subpoena and dismiss certain counts.

Date
Unknown
Source
House Oversight
Reference
d-362
Pages
1
Persons
1
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

Ghislaine Maxwell's attorneys argue that the government's subpoena to a third party was unconstitutional and violated her rights under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, as well as the Martindell principle. They seek to suppress evidence obtained from this subpoena and dismiss certain counts.

Persons Referenced (1)

Tags

Fourth Amendment violation due to overbroad subpoenaMartindell violation for lack of notice and opportunity to be heardFifth Amendment violation for self-incrimination
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.