Skip to content.
About GPO   |   Newsroom/Media   |   Congressional Relations   |   Inspector General   |   Careers   |   Contact   |   askGPO   |   Help  
 

  FDsys > More Information
(Search string is required)
 

16-10258 - USA v. Salemme et al


Download Files

Metadata

Document in Context
16-10258 - USA v. Salemme et al
November 9, 2016
PDF | More
Judge Allison D. Burroughs: ORDER entered. as to Paul M. Weadick. For the reasons explained herein, Defendant Weadick's Motion for Revocation of the Order of Detention [ECF No. 38] is DENIED. (Montes, Mariliz)
June 1, 2018
PDF | More
Judge Allison D. Burroughs: ORDER entered granting in part and denying in part 230 Motion for Reconsideration of 192 Order. "For the foregoing reasons, and as discussed at the hearing on May 23, 2018, the Court orders that in addition to the limiting measures imposed by the Court's April 25 Order, the inspectors may testify using makeup to hide their true identity. To protect the Defendants' right to confrontation, the use of makeup should be no greater than necessary to hide the true identity of the inspectors, and should not be distracting to the jury or impose more than a minimal burden on the jury's ability to assess the demeanor of the witnesses. Although the Court does not necessarily intend to give the jury any instruction with regard to the inspectors' testimony or the imposition of these protective measures, the parties may submit proposed instructions for the Court's consideration" (see attached Order). (Montes, Mariliz) Judge Allison D. Burroughs: ORDER entered granting in part and denying in part 230 Motion for Reconsideration of 192 Order. "For the foregoing reasons, and as discussed at the hearing on May 23, 2018, the Court orders that in addition to the limiting measures imposed by the Court's April 25 Order, the inspectors may testify using makeup to hide their true identity. To protect the Defendants' right to confrontation, the use of makeup should be no greater than necessary to hide the true identity of the inspectors, and should not be distracting to the jury or impose more than a minimal burden on the jury's ability to assess the demeanor of the witnesses. Although the Court does not necessarily intend to give the jury any instruction with regard to the inspectors' testimony or the imposition of these protective measures, the parties may submit proposed instructions for the Court's consideration" (see attached Order). (Montes, Mariliz)