Our flagship daily news show, where we talk to in-house experts about what is going on and why you need to care about it.
…
continue reading
Kandungan disediakan oleh Bobby Capucci. Semua kandungan podcast termasuk episod, grafik dan perihalan podcast dimuat naik dan disediakan terus oleh Bobby Capucci atau rakan kongsi platform podcast mereka. Jika anda percaya seseorang menggunakan karya berhak cipta anda tanpa kebenaran anda, anda boleh mengikuti proses yang digariskan di sini https://ms.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Aplikasi Podcast
Pergi ke luar talian dengan aplikasi Player FM !
Pergi ke luar talian dengan aplikasi Player FM !
The Mega Edition: Prosecution's Opposition To Diddy's Motion For A Hearing And Other Relief (Part 1-2) (1/5/25)
MP3•Laman utama episod
Manage episode 459372821 series 3380507
Kandungan disediakan oleh Bobby Capucci. Semua kandungan podcast termasuk episod, grafik dan perihalan podcast dimuat naik dan disediakan terus oleh Bobby Capucci atau rakan kongsi platform podcast mereka. Jika anda percaya seseorang menggunakan karya berhak cipta anda tanpa kebenaran anda, anda boleh mengikuti proses yang digariskan di sini https://ms.player.fm/legal.
In United States v. Combs, Case No. 1:24-cr-00542-AS, the government filed an opposition to the defendant's motion for a hearing and other relief. The defendant, Sean Combs, had requested an evidentiary hearing to investigate alleged government misconduct, specifically claiming that unlawful leaks by government agents led to prejudicial pre-trial publicity. Combs sought discovery of government communications, a gag order to prevent further disclosures, and suppression of any evidence obtained through these alleged leaks.
The government's opposition argued that the defendant's motion lacked sufficient evidence to warrant the requested relief. They contended that there was no substantiated proof of unlawful leaks or misconduct by government personnel that would justify an evidentiary hearing or the suppression of evidence. The government maintained that existing legal safeguards were adequate to ensure a fair trial and that the defendant's claims were speculative, thus not meeting the legal standards required for the court to grant the motion.
(commercial at 11:33)
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
source:
gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.117.0.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
…
continue reading
The government's opposition argued that the defendant's motion lacked sufficient evidence to warrant the requested relief. They contended that there was no substantiated proof of unlawful leaks or misconduct by government personnel that would justify an evidentiary hearing or the suppression of evidence. The government maintained that existing legal safeguards were adequate to ensure a fair trial and that the defendant's claims were speculative, thus not meeting the legal standards required for the court to grant the motion.
(commercial at 11:33)
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
source:
gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.117.0.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1042 episod
MP3•Laman utama episod
Manage episode 459372821 series 3380507
Kandungan disediakan oleh Bobby Capucci. Semua kandungan podcast termasuk episod, grafik dan perihalan podcast dimuat naik dan disediakan terus oleh Bobby Capucci atau rakan kongsi platform podcast mereka. Jika anda percaya seseorang menggunakan karya berhak cipta anda tanpa kebenaran anda, anda boleh mengikuti proses yang digariskan di sini https://ms.player.fm/legal.
In United States v. Combs, Case No. 1:24-cr-00542-AS, the government filed an opposition to the defendant's motion for a hearing and other relief. The defendant, Sean Combs, had requested an evidentiary hearing to investigate alleged government misconduct, specifically claiming that unlawful leaks by government agents led to prejudicial pre-trial publicity. Combs sought discovery of government communications, a gag order to prevent further disclosures, and suppression of any evidence obtained through these alleged leaks.
The government's opposition argued that the defendant's motion lacked sufficient evidence to warrant the requested relief. They contended that there was no substantiated proof of unlawful leaks or misconduct by government personnel that would justify an evidentiary hearing or the suppression of evidence. The government maintained that existing legal safeguards were adequate to ensure a fair trial and that the defendant's claims were speculative, thus not meeting the legal standards required for the court to grant the motion.
(commercial at 11:33)
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
source:
gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.117.0.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
…
continue reading
The government's opposition argued that the defendant's motion lacked sufficient evidence to warrant the requested relief. They contended that there was no substantiated proof of unlawful leaks or misconduct by government personnel that would justify an evidentiary hearing or the suppression of evidence. The government maintained that existing legal safeguards were adequate to ensure a fair trial and that the defendant's claims were speculative, thus not meeting the legal standards required for the court to grant the motion.
(commercial at 11:33)
to contact me:
bobbycapucci@protonmail.com
source:
gov.uscourts.nysd.628425.117.0.pdf
Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.
1042 episod
Semua episod
×Selamat datang ke Player FM
Player FM mengimbas laman-laman web bagi podcast berkualiti tinggi untuk anda nikmati sekarang. Ia merupakan aplikasi podcast terbaik dan berfungsi untuk Android, iPhone, dan web. Daftar untuk melaraskan langganan merentasi peranti.