Murder In Moscow: A Trial Date Has Been Set By Judge John Judge (6/28/24)

Our look into the dark underbelly of the Epstein operation continues in this episode as we begin our look at the Ghislaine Maxwell deposition in full. (commercial at 10:27)to contact me:[email protected]:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Our look into the dark underbelly of the Epstein operation continues in this episode as we begin our look at the Ghislaine Maxwell deposition in full. (commercial at 9:52)to contact me:[email protected]:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Our look into the dark underbelly of the Epstein operation continues in this episode as we begin our look at the Ghislaine Maxwell deposition in full. (commercial at 10:27)to contact me:[email protected]:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The court battle between Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán and the United States Government over Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) is centered around the stringent confinement conditions imposed on Guzmán after his extradition to the U.S. in 2017.Special Administrative Measures (SAMs): SAMs are extreme restrictions placed on prisoners deemed a significant threat to national security. These measures severely limit a prisoner's communication with the outside world, including restrictions on mail, visits, phone calls, and interaction with other inmates.Arguments by El Chapo's Defense:Human Rights Violation: Guzmán's lawyers argue that the SAMs constitute cruel and unusual punishment, violating the Eighth Amendment. They contend that these restrictions lead to severe psychological harm and amount to inhumane treatment.Right to a Fair Trial: They argue that SAMs impede Guzmán's ability to participate in his own defense by limiting his communication with his legal team, potentially infringing on his Sixth Amendment rights.Arguments by the U.S. Government:Security Concerns: The government maintains that SAMs are necessary due to Guzmán's history of orchestrating criminal activities from prison and his previous prison escapes. They argue that without these measures, Guzmán could continue to direct his drug cartel's operations, endangering public safety and national security.Preventing Witness Tampering: The restrictions are also seen as essential to prevent Guzmán from threatening or tampering with witnesses and obstructing justice.Court Rulings:The courts have largely sided with the government, upholding the imposition of SAMs on Guzmán. Judges have ruled that the restrictions are justified given Guzmán's history and the potential risks he poses.Outcome: El Chapo was convicted in February 2019 on multiple charges, including drug trafficking, murder conspiracy, and money laundering. He was sentenced to life in prison plus 30 years and is currently serving his sentence under SAMs at the ADX Florence supermax prison in Colorado.to contact me:[email protected]:032717-wls-el-chapo-SHU-doc.pdf (go.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The court battle between Joaquín "El Chapo" Guzmán and the United States Government over Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) is centered around the stringent confinement conditions imposed on Guzmán after his extradition to the U.S. in 2017.Special Administrative Measures (SAMs): SAMs are extreme restrictions placed on prisoners deemed a significant threat to national security. These measures severely limit a prisoner's communication with the outside world, including restrictions on mail, visits, phone calls, and interaction with other inmates.Arguments by El Chapo's Defense:Human Rights Violation: Guzmán's lawyers argue that the SAMs constitute cruel and unusual punishment, violating the Eighth Amendment. They contend that these restrictions lead to severe psychological harm and amount to inhumane treatment.Right to a Fair Trial: They argue that SAMs impede Guzmán's ability to participate in his own defense by limiting his communication with his legal team, potentially infringing on his Sixth Amendment rights.Arguments by the U.S. Government:Security Concerns: The government maintains that SAMs are necessary due to Guzmán's history of orchestrating criminal activities from prison and his previous prison escapes. They argue that without these measures, Guzmán could continue to direct his drug cartel's operations, endangering public safety and national security.Preventing Witness Tampering: The restrictions are also seen as essential to prevent Guzmán from threatening or tampering with witnesses and obstructing justice.Court Rulings:The courts have largely sided with the government, upholding the imposition of SAMs on Guzmán. Judges have ruled that the restrictions are justified given Guzmán's history and the potential risks he poses.Outcome: El Chapo was convicted in February 2019 on multiple charges, including drug trafficking, murder conspiracy, and money laundering. He was sentenced to life in prison plus 30 years and is currently serving his sentence under SAMs at the ADX Florence supermax prison in Colorado.(commercial at 9:07)to contact me:[email protected]:032717-wls-el-chapo-SHU-doc.pdf (go.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

The jury in the Karen Read trial is deadlocked after several days of deliberations without reaching a unanimous verdict. Read is accused of killing her boyfriend, Boston police officer John O’Keefe, by hitting him with her SUV. The jury has been instructed by Judge Beverly Cannone to continue their discussions and make every effort to reach a consensus. Despite this, they remain unable to agree on a verdict, leading to increasing tension and uncertainty about the trial’s outcome.And now, those deliberations will stretch on into a new week.    Let's dive in and get caught up!(commercial at 13:27)to contact me:[email protected]:Karen Read deliberations will resume Monday (wcvb.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum of law in support of a summary judgment is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to persuade the court to grant a summary judgment in their favor. Summary judgment is a legal process where the court decides a case without a full trial because there are no disputed material facts requiring a jury or judge to resolve. Here’s a detailed breakdown of what this memorandum typically includes:Introduction and Statement of Facts:The memorandum begins with a brief introduction, outlining the purpose of the document and a statement of undisputed facts. These facts are often supported by evidence such as affidavits, depositions, and other documents.Legal Arguments:This section presents the legal basis for the motion, citing relevant laws, statutes, and case precedents. The goal is to demonstrate that, based on the undisputed facts, the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.Standard of Review:The memorandum will often include a discussion of the standard of review for summary judgment, explaining that the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and determine if there is no genuine issue of material fact.Analysis:A detailed analysis follows, where the party applying for summary judgment argues how the law applies to the undisputed facts. This section aims to show that the opposing party cannot prove an essential element of their case or that there is no evidence to support their claims.Conclusion:The memorandum concludes with a summary of the arguments and a request for the court to grant summary judgment, thereby dismissing the case or certain claims within the case without the need for a trial.Supporting Documentation:The memorandum is usually accompanied by supporting documentation, such as exhibits, affidavits, and a statement of undisputed material facts, to substantiate the arguments made.Purpose and ImportanceThe purpose of a memorandum of law in support of summary judgment is to convince the court that a trial is unnecessary because there are no material facts in dispute that require a jury's evaluation. It aims to expedite the legal process, reduce costs, and provide a quicker resolution to the case.Legal StandardCourts grant summary judgment only when there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, as outlined in Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (or corresponding state rules).(commercial at 10:22)to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - MSJ BRIEF 7.24.23 Final WORD_Highlighted Black for Redactions (bwbx.io)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

A memorandum of law in support of a summary judgment is a legal document filed by a party in a lawsuit to persuade the court to grant a summary judgment in their favor. Summary judgment is a legal process where the court decides a case without a full trial because there are no disputed material facts requiring a jury or judge to resolve. Here’s a detailed breakdown of what this memorandum typically includes:Introduction and Statement of Facts:The memorandum begins with a brief introduction, outlining the purpose of the document and a statement of undisputed facts. These facts are often supported by evidence such as affidavits, depositions, and other documents.Legal Arguments:This section presents the legal basis for the motion, citing relevant laws, statutes, and case precedents. The goal is to demonstrate that, based on the undisputed facts, the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.Standard of Review:The memorandum will often include a discussion of the standard of review for summary judgment, explaining that the court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the non-moving party and determine if there is no genuine issue of material fact.Analysis:A detailed analysis follows, where the party applying for summary judgment argues how the law applies to the undisputed facts. This section aims to show that the opposing party cannot prove an essential element of their case or that there is no evidence to support their claims.Conclusion:The memorandum concludes with a summary of the arguments and a request for the court to grant summary judgment, thereby dismissing the case or certain claims within the case without the need for a trial.Supporting Documentation:The memorandum is usually accompanied by supporting documentation, such as exhibits, affidavits, and a statement of undisputed material facts, to substantiate the arguments made.Purpose and ImportanceThe purpose of a memorandum of law in support of summary judgment is to convince the court that a trial is unnecessary because there are no material facts in dispute that require a jury's evaluation. It aims to expedite the legal process, reduce costs, and provide a quicker resolution to the case.Legal StandardCourts grant summary judgment only when there is no genuine dispute of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, as outlined in Rule 56 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (or corresponding state rules).(commercial at 8:18)to contact me:[email protected]:Microsoft Word - MSJ BRIEF 7.24.23 Final WORD_Highlighted Black for Redactions (bwbx.io)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Our look into the dark underbelly of the Epstein operation continues in this episode as we begin our look at the Ghislaine Maxwell deposition in full. (commercial at 10:34)to contact me:[email protected]:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Our look into the dark underbelly of the Epstein operation continues in this episode as we begin our look at the Ghislaine Maxwell deposition in full. (commercial at 10:13)to contact me:[email protected]:Ghislaine Maxwell Deposition Transcript - DocumentCloudBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.