The UK Column is an independent news organisation analysing the information war.
…
continue reading
Contenido proporcionado por Bobby Capucci. Todo el contenido del podcast, incluidos episodios, gráficos y descripciones de podcast, lo carga y proporciona directamente Bobby Capucci o su socio de plataforma de podcast. Si cree que alguien está utilizando su trabajo protegido por derechos de autor sin su permiso, puede seguir el proceso descrito aquí https://es.player.fm/legal.
Player FM : aplicación de podcast
¡Desconecta con la aplicación Player FM !
¡Desconecta con la aplicación Player FM !
The Prosecution's Opposition To Diddy's Motion For A Hearing And Other Relief (Part 1) (12/23/24)
MP3•Episodio en casa
Manage episode 457115230 series 2987886
Contenido proporcionado por Bobby Capucci. Todo el contenido del podcast, incluidos episodios, gráficos y descripciones de podcast, lo carga y proporciona directamente Bobby Capucci o su socio de plataforma de podcast. Si cree que alguien está utilizando su trabajo protegido por derechos de autor sin su permiso, puede seguir el proceso descrito aquí https://es.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
…
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
1096 episodios
MP3•Episodio en casa
Manage episode 457115230 series 2987886
Contenido proporcionado por Bobby Capucci. Todo el contenido del podcast, incluidos episodios, gráficos y descripciones de podcast, lo carga y proporciona directamente Bobby Capucci o su socio de plataforma de podcast. Si cree que alguien está utilizando su trabajo protegido por derechos de autor sin su permiso, puede seguir el proceso descrito aquí https://es.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
…
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
1096 episodios
所有剧集
×Bienvenido a Player FM!
Player FM está escaneando la web en busca de podcasts de alta calidad para que los disfrutes en este momento. Es la mejor aplicación de podcast y funciona en Android, iPhone y la web. Regístrate para sincronizar suscripciones a través de dispositivos.