Podcasts about mccrary

​In the case of McCrary v. Marriott International, Inc. (Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff has filed an opposition to Marriott's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The plaintiff argues that the complaint sufficiently alleges that Marriott was complicit in facilitating human trafficking activities on its properties, thereby violating the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). Specifically, the plaintiff contends that Marriott had knowledge, or should have had knowledge, of the trafficking occurring on its premises and failed to take appropriate action to prevent it.The opposition emphasizes that Marriott's alleged inaction contributed to the plaintiff's victimization and that the claims are adequately supported to withstand a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff asserts that Marriott's motion overlooks the detailed factual allegations presented, which, if proven, demonstrate Marriott's liability under the TVPA. Therefore, the plaintiff requests that the court deny Marriott's motion to dismiss and allow the case to proceed to discovery and trial.​to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.72.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the case of McCrary v. Marriott International, Inc. (Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff has filed an opposition to Marriott's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The plaintiff argues that the complaint sufficiently alleges that Marriott was complicit in facilitating human trafficking activities on its properties, thereby violating the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). Specifically, the plaintiff contends that Marriott had knowledge, or should have had knowledge, of the trafficking occurring on its premises and failed to take appropriate action to prevent it.The opposition emphasizes that Marriott's alleged inaction contributed to the plaintiff's victimization and that the claims are adequately supported to withstand a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff asserts that Marriott's motion overlooks the detailed factual allegations presented, which, if proven, demonstrate Marriott's liability under the TVPA. Therefore, the plaintiff requests that the court deny Marriott's motion to dismiss and allow the case to proceed to discovery and trial.​to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.72.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-moscow-murders-and-more--5852883/support.

​In the case of McCrary v. Marriott International, Inc. (Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff has filed an opposition to Marriott's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The plaintiff argues that the complaint sufficiently alleges that Marriott was complicit in facilitating human trafficking activities on its properties, thereby violating the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). Specifically, the plaintiff contends that Marriott had knowledge, or should have had knowledge, of the trafficking occurring on its premises and failed to take appropriate action to prevent it.The opposition emphasizes that Marriott's alleged inaction contributed to the plaintiff's victimization and that the claims are adequately supported to withstand a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff asserts that Marriott's motion overlooks the detailed factual allegations presented, which, if proven, demonstrate Marriott's liability under the TVPA. Therefore, the plaintiff requests that the court deny Marriott's motion to dismiss and allow the case to proceed to discovery and trial.​to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.72.0_2.pdf

​In the case of McCrary v. Marriott International, Inc. (Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff has filed an opposition to Marriott's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The plaintiff argues that the complaint sufficiently alleges that Marriott was complicit in facilitating human trafficking activities on its properties, thereby violating the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). Specifically, the plaintiff contends that Marriott had knowledge, or should have had knowledge, of the trafficking occurring on its premises and failed to take appropriate action to prevent it.The opposition emphasizes that Marriott's alleged inaction contributed to the plaintiff's victimization and that the claims are adequately supported to withstand a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff asserts that Marriott's motion overlooks the detailed factual allegations presented, which, if proven, demonstrate Marriott's liability under the TVPA. Therefore, the plaintiff requests that the court deny Marriott's motion to dismiss and allow the case to proceed to discovery and trial.​to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.72.0_2.pdf

​In the case of McCrary v. Marriott International, Inc. (Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff has filed an opposition to Marriott's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The plaintiff argues that the complaint sufficiently alleges that Marriott was complicit in facilitating human trafficking activities on its properties, thereby violating the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). Specifically, the plaintiff contends that Marriott had knowledge, or should have had knowledge, of the trafficking occurring on its premises and failed to take appropriate action to prevent it.The opposition emphasizes that Marriott's alleged inaction contributed to the plaintiff's victimization and that the claims are adequately supported to withstand a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff asserts that Marriott's motion overlooks the detailed factual allegations presented, which, if proven, demonstrate Marriott's liability under the TVPA. Therefore, the plaintiff requests that the court deny Marriott's motion to dismiss and allow the case to proceed to discovery and trial.​to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.72.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of McCrary v. Marriott International, Inc. (Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff has filed an opposition to Marriott's motion to dismiss the lawsuit. The plaintiff argues that the complaint sufficiently alleges that Marriott was complicit in facilitating human trafficking activities on its properties, thereby violating the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA). Specifically, the plaintiff contends that Marriott had knowledge, or should have had knowledge, of the trafficking occurring on its premises and failed to take appropriate action to prevent it.The opposition emphasizes that Marriott's alleged inaction contributed to the plaintiff's victimization and that the claims are adequately supported to withstand a motion to dismiss. The plaintiff asserts that Marriott's motion overlooks the detailed factual allegations presented, which, if proven, demonstrate Marriott's liability under the TVPA. Therefore, the plaintiff requests that the court deny Marriott's motion to dismiss and allow the case to proceed to discovery and trial.​to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.72.0_2.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Jane Doe v. Sean Combs et al. (Civ. No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), Defendant Marriott International, Inc. has submitted a reply memorandum in further support of its motion to dismiss the complaint. Marriott argues that the plaintiff's allegations fail to establish a legal basis for holding the company liable for the alleged actions of the co-defendants. They contend that the complaint lacks specific factual assertions linking Marriott to any wrongful conduct and that mere association with other defendants does not suffice to state a claim.Furthermore, Marriott emphasizes that the plaintiff's claims against it are speculative and unsupported by concrete evidence. The company asserts that the complaint does not demonstrate how Marriott had any control over or direct involvement in the alleged incidents. As a result, Marriott requests that the court dismiss the claims against it, arguing that allowing the case to proceed without substantive allegations would set a concerning precedent for corporate liability based on tenuous connections.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Reply ISO MTD (Marriott _ McCrary)(1618681774.5).docx

Whether you're growing your side gig or aiming to become the sole income provider for your family, we're all looking to increase our income as business owners.My guest, Alex McCrary, shares all about how you can grow your business, build more income, and create an amazing client experience while still holding within your healthy boundaries.And yes, you do need to set up some boundaries.Sponsor of the show: SofiGet an additional $25 deposited in your account when you open a FREE High Yield Savings Account at allheartphoto.com/sofiConnect with Alex:alexmccraryphotography.cominstagram.com/alexmccraryphotographyCameras and Carseats Podcast

​In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants, including Sean Combs (also known as "P. Diddy") and associated business entities, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. The plaintiff, identified as "Jane Doe," alleges that Combs raped her and threatened her life in 2004. She asserts a claim under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which includes a provision that temporarily revives claims that otherwise would be barred by the statute of limitations.The defendants' motion to dismiss likely argues procedural and substantive grounds, such as the expiration of the statute of limitations and potential deficiencies in the plaintiff's allegations. They may also contend that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, possibly challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the applicability of the cited legal provisions. The court's decision on this motion will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial or is dismissed at this preliminary stage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.57.0.pdf

​In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants, including Sean Combs (also known as "P. Diddy") and associated business entities, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. The plaintiff, identified as "Jane Doe," alleges that Combs raped her and threatened her life in 2004. She asserts a claim under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which includes a provision that temporarily revives claims that otherwise would be barred by the statute of limitations.The defendants' motion to dismiss likely argues procedural and substantive grounds, such as the expiration of the statute of limitations and potential deficiencies in the plaintiff's allegations. They may also contend that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, possibly challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the applicability of the cited legal provisions. The court's decision on this motion will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial or is dismissed at this preliminary stage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.57.0.pdf

​In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants, including Sean Combs (also known as "P. Diddy") and associated business entities, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. The plaintiff, identified as "Jane Doe," alleges that Combs raped her and threatened her life in 2004. She asserts a claim under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which includes a provision that temporarily revives claims that otherwise would be barred by the statute of limitations.The defendants' motion to dismiss likely argues procedural and substantive grounds, such as the expiration of the statute of limitations and potential deficiencies in the plaintiff's allegations. They may also contend that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, possibly challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the applicability of the cited legal provisions. The court's decision on this motion will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial or is dismissed at this preliminary stage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.57.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants, including Sean Combs (also known as "P. Diddy") and associated business entities, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. The plaintiff, identified as "Jane Doe," alleges that Combs raped her and threatened her life in 2004. She asserts a claim under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which includes a provision that temporarily revives claims that otherwise would be barred by the statute of limitations.The defendants' motion to dismiss likely argues procedural and substantive grounds, such as the expiration of the statute of limitations and potential deficiencies in the plaintiff's allegations. They may also contend that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, possibly challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the applicability of the cited legal provisions. The court's decision on this motion will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial or is dismissed at this preliminary stage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.57.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

​In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants, including Sean Combs (also known as "P. Diddy") and associated business entities, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. The plaintiff, identified as "Jane Doe," alleges that Combs raped her and threatened her life in 2004. She asserts a claim under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which includes a provision that temporarily revives claims that otherwise would be barred by the statute of limitations.The defendants' motion to dismiss likely argues procedural and substantive grounds, such as the expiration of the statute of limitations and potential deficiencies in the plaintiff's allegations. They may also contend that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, possibly challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the applicability of the cited legal provisions. The court's decision on this motion will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial or is dismissed at this preliminary stage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.57.0.pdf

​In the case of Doe v. Combs et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV, the defendants, including Sean Combs (also known as "P. Diddy") and associated business entities, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting their Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint. The plaintiff, identified as "Jane Doe," alleges that Combs raped her and threatened her life in 2004. She asserts a claim under the New York City Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Act, which includes a provision that temporarily revives claims that otherwise would be barred by the statute of limitations.The defendants' motion to dismiss likely argues procedural and substantive grounds, such as the expiration of the statute of limitations and potential deficiencies in the plaintiff's allegations. They may also contend that the Amended Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, possibly challenging the sufficiency of evidence or the applicability of the cited legal provisions. The court's decision on this motion will determine whether the case proceeds to discovery and trial or is dismissed at this preliminary stage.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.57.0.pdf

  On this week's episode of the Heart and Hustle Podcast we have the joy of sitting down with Alex McCrary and Jamie Tobin to talk all about building systems that work for both business and family life. We ask them about approaching destination elopement photography and traditional wedding photography differently while both raising a family, and what were some of the systems that they put in place early on in their careers that they still use today. Alex and Jamie dive into the importance of having a good support system to lean on, what the true value of being a present parent is while also being an entrepreneur, and how they overcome the common emotion of “mom-guilt” in their lives. If you are a mom and business owner who is trying to find systems to help better balance between the two, and you are looking to hear from two awesome photographers who have managed to build great business while being present parents, then this is the episode you do not want to miss!  --------------------------------- Community Freebie: https://theheartuniversity.com/community --------------------------------- HoneyBook: share.honeybook.com/heart  In addition to a FREE 7 day trial, get 35% off your first two years of HoneyBook! --------------------------------- Heart Apparel Shop: https://theheartuniversity.com/apparel --------------------------------- Follow Alex and Jamie: Alex: https://www.instagram.com/alexmccraryphotography/ Jamie: https://www.instagram.com/jamietobinphoto/ Check Out Their Podcast “Cameras and Car Seats”: https://www.instagram.com/camerasandcarseats/ --------------------------------- Watch on YouTube: https://youtube.com/@theheartuniversitychannel?si=33lzxpBA9UxKlgTE --------------------------------- If you want to connect with us and other listeners in the Heart and Hustle community join our Facebook group here. --------------------------------- “PODCAST10” for 10% off anything from The Shop! www.theheartuniversity.com/shop --------------------------------- Follow along: www.instagram.com/mrslindseyroman www.instagram.com/evierupp www.instagram.com/theheartuniversity  

In the case McCrary v. Sean Combs, Marriott International, Inc., et al. (Civ. Action No. 24-cv-8054), Plaintiff Candice McCrary has filed a response to Marriott International, Inc.'s letter motion dated January 21, 2025. Marriott seeks permission to file a motion to dismiss McCrary's Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 12(b)(6), arguing that the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.In her response, McCrary contends that her Complaint sufficiently outlines the allegations against Marriott, providing adequate detail to meet the pleading standards required by Rule 8(a). She argues that the Complaint presents plausible claims for relief, thereby satisfying the criteria to withstand a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). McCrary requests that the court deny Marriott's request for leave to file the motion to dismiss, asserting that the case should proceed to discovery and be evaluated on its merits.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.39.0.pdf

In the case McCrary v. Sean Combs, Marriott International, Inc., et al. (Civ. Action No. 24-cv-8054), Plaintiff Candice McCrary has filed a response to Marriott International, Inc.'s letter motion dated January 21, 2025. Marriott seeks permission to file a motion to dismiss McCrary's Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 12(b)(6), arguing that the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.In her response, McCrary contends that her Complaint sufficiently outlines the allegations against Marriott, providing adequate detail to meet the pleading standards required by Rule 8(a). She argues that the Complaint presents plausible claims for relief, thereby satisfying the criteria to withstand a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). McCrary requests that the court deny Marriott's request for leave to file the motion to dismiss, asserting that the case should proceed to discovery and be evaluated on its merits.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.39.0.pdf

In the case McCrary v. Sean Combs, Marriott International, Inc., et al. (Civ. Action No. 24-cv-8054), Plaintiff Candice McCrary has filed a response to Marriott International, Inc.'s letter motion dated January 21, 2025. Marriott seeks permission to file a motion to dismiss McCrary's Complaint under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 8(a) and 12(b)(6), arguing that the Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.In her response, McCrary contends that her Complaint sufficiently outlines the allegations against Marriott, providing adequate detail to meet the pleading standards required by Rule 8(a). She argues that the Complaint presents plausible claims for relief, thereby satisfying the criteria to withstand a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6). McCrary requests that the court deny Marriott's request for leave to file the motion to dismiss, asserting that the case should proceed to discovery and be evaluated on its merits.to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.39.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Marriott International, Inc. has requested a pre-motion conference with Judge Vyskocil in anticipation of filing a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Candice McCrary's Complaint in the case McCrary v. Sean Combs, Marriott International, Inc., et al. Marriott states that despite seeking the Plaintiff's consent for the motion, no response was received. While Marriott expresses sympathy for the abuse described in McCrary's Complaint and acknowledges the seriousness of allegations involving gender-motivated violence, it argues that it is not a proper party to the claim. Marriott asserts that the Complaint fails to meet the notice pleading standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), describing the allegations as too vague.Furthermore, Marriott contends that McCrary's claim relies on the 2022 amendment to the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law (VGMVPL), which cannot be applied retroactively to conduct that occurred before the amendment. Citing the recent decision in Doe v. Combs (2024), Marriott notes that corporate defendants cannot be held liable under this statute for actions predating 2022. Since the alleged conduct against Marriott occurred in 2004, it argues that the claim should be dismissed for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Letter re_ Request for Pre-Motion Conference (Marriott _ McCrary).docx

Marriott International, Inc. has requested a pre-motion conference with Judge Vyskocil in anticipation of filing a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Candice McCrary's Complaint in the case McCrary v. Sean Combs, Marriott International, Inc., et al. Marriott states that despite seeking the Plaintiff's consent for the motion, no response was received. While Marriott expresses sympathy for the abuse described in McCrary's Complaint and acknowledges the seriousness of allegations involving gender-motivated violence, it argues that it is not a proper party to the claim. Marriott asserts that the Complaint fails to meet the notice pleading standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), describing the allegations as too vague.Furthermore, Marriott contends that McCrary's claim relies on the 2022 amendment to the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law (VGMVPL), which cannot be applied retroactively to conduct that occurred before the amendment. Citing the recent decision in Doe v. Combs (2024), Marriott notes that corporate defendants cannot be held liable under this statute for actions predating 2022. Since the alleged conduct against Marriott occurred in 2004, it argues that the claim should be dismissed for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Letter re_ Request for Pre-Motion Conference (Marriott _ McCrary).docxBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Marriott International, Inc. has requested a pre-motion conference with Judge Vyskocil in anticipation of filing a motion to dismiss Plaintiff Candice McCrary's Complaint in the case McCrary v. Sean Combs, Marriott International, Inc., et al. Marriott states that despite seeking the Plaintiff's consent for the motion, no response was received. While Marriott expresses sympathy for the abuse described in McCrary's Complaint and acknowledges the seriousness of allegations involving gender-motivated violence, it argues that it is not a proper party to the claim. Marriott asserts that the Complaint fails to meet the notice pleading standard under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), describing the allegations as too vague.Furthermore, Marriott contends that McCrary's claim relies on the 2022 amendment to the Victims of Gender-Motivated Violence Protection Law (VGMVPL), which cannot be applied retroactively to conduct that occurred before the amendment. Citing the recent decision in Doe v. Combs (2024), Marriott notes that corporate defendants cannot be held liable under this statute for actions predating 2022. Since the alleged conduct against Marriott occurred in 2004, it argues that the claim should be dismissed for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Microsoft Word - Letter re_ Request for Pre-Motion Conference (Marriott _ McCrary).docx

Today I have Alex McCrary on the show with me. Alex is a photographer from Iowa who's had an amazing transformational journey especially over the past year in her photography business. She's also been a member in my Business Blueprint coaching program! Watching her hustle and make things happen has been so inspiring and I'd love her to be able to share some of her story with you!

American Secularism and Its Believers with Charles McCrary by American Academy of Religion

Jesus tell us in this world we will have trials but take heart for he has overcome the world. In those midnight hours we must pray and worship our way through. God is an on time Father and He wants to set you free. What you give to Him, He will use!

Let us know how you're enjoying the show or ideas for any future topics!In this inspiring episode, Zach McCrary shares his incredible story of resilience after a life-changing workplace accident that resulted in the loss of both of his legs. Zach opens up about his recovery journey, from navigating the physical and emotional challenges of the accident, to his experiences with surgeries, prosthetics, and adjusting to life as a double amputee. He also discusses his transformative journey into sled hockey, and how the sport has played a pivotal role in his recovery, fueling his dream of one day competing in the Paralympics.Zach discusses his experience in the workers' compensation system, and transition to Ametros as a CareGuard member. As a dad of three boys, Zach's story is one of strength, perseverance, and the unbreakable bond of family. Join us for this powerful conversation about overcoming life's greatest challenges and embracing the journey of transformation.How to get involded:  Challenged Athletes Foundation:https:/www.challengedathletes.org/__;!!Dgr3g5d8opDR!W7UJ5nqEsvA8-_6ti2pr9Zqr9xJCgR85zJmFkSm2fcdM5xfwhm1m-G9juPYxLNW9p-1J1fKlSmlqGoFJRntm$Ametros is changing the way injured individuals navigate healthcare by providing them with post-settlement medical management tools for their settlement funds. Ametros helps drive more simplified, secured, and supported settlements and saves money by working closely with injured workers, insurers, employers, attorneys, and Medicare to create a seamless experience.Learn how Ametros can support you.

Recorded by Amber McCrary for Poem-a-Day, a series produced by the Academy of American Poets. Published on November 18, 2024. www.poets.org

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:55)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdf

In the case of Doe v. Combs (No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration regarding her request to proceed under a pseudonym. The plaintiff, alleging sexual assault by Sean Combs, initially sought to maintain anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the case. However, the court emphasized the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and found that the plaintiff's concerns did not outweigh the public's right to open access.The court acknowledged the plaintiff's fears of potential harm but determined that these concerns were speculative and unsupported by concrete evidence. It noted that many plaintiffs in similar cases proceed under their real names without incident. Consequently, the court upheld its original decision, requiring the plaintiff to refile the complaint using her legal name to ensure fairness and uphold the principles of open justice.(commercial at 8:18)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.22.0.pdf

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:55)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdf

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:23)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdf

In the case of Doe v. Combs (No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff, Jane Doe, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting her motion for reconsideration of the court's decision denying her request to proceed under a pseudonym. She also sought permission to file a supporting declaration under seal. The plaintiff argued that the court had overlooked critical factors, including the highly sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential for significant harm if her identity were disclosed. She emphasized that revealing her identity could lead to severe emotional distress and possible retaliation, given the prominence of the defendant, Sean Combs.Additionally, the plaintiff contended that allowing her to proceed anonymously would not prejudice the defendants and would serve the public interest by encouraging victims of sexual assault to come forward without fear of exposure. The request to file the declaration under seal was made to protect the confidentiality of detailed personal information pertinent to her motion.(commercial at 7:07)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.21.0.pdf

In the case of Doe v. Combs (No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff, Jane Doe, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting her motion for reconsideration of the court's decision denying her request to proceed under a pseudonym. She also sought permission to file a supporting declaration under seal. The plaintiff argued that the court had overlooked critical factors, including the highly sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential for significant harm if her identity were disclosed. She emphasized that revealing her identity could lead to severe emotional distress and possible retaliation, given the prominence of the defendant, Sean Combs.Additionally, the plaintiff contended that allowing her to proceed anonymously would not prejudice the defendants and would serve the public interest by encouraging victims of sexual assault to come forward without fear of exposure. The request to file the declaration under seal was made to protect the confidentiality of detailed personal information pertinent to her motion.(commercial at 7:07)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.21.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case of Doe v. Combs (No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration regarding her request to proceed under a pseudonym. The plaintiff, alleging sexual assault by Sean Combs, initially sought to maintain anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the case. However, the court emphasized the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and found that the plaintiff's concerns did not outweigh the public's right to open access.The court acknowledged the plaintiff's fears of potential harm but determined that these concerns were speculative and unsupported by concrete evidence. It noted that many plaintiffs in similar cases proceed under their real names without incident. Consequently, the court upheld its original decision, requiring the plaintiff to refile the complaint using her legal name to ensure fairness and uphold the principles of open justice.(commercial at 8:18)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.22.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:55)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdf

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:58)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdf

In the case of Doe v. Combs (No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the court denied the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration regarding her request to proceed under a pseudonym. The plaintiff, alleging sexual assault by Sean Combs, initially sought to maintain anonymity due to the sensitive nature of the case. However, the court emphasized the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and found that the plaintiff's concerns did not outweigh the public's right to open access.The court acknowledged the plaintiff's fears of potential harm but determined that these concerns were speculative and unsupported by concrete evidence. It noted that many plaintiffs in similar cases proceed under their real names without incident. Consequently, the court upheld its original decision, requiring the plaintiff to refile the complaint using her legal name to ensure fairness and uphold the principles of open justice.(commercial at 8:18)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.22.0.pdf

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:23)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdf

In the case of Doe v. Combs (No. 1:24-cv-08054-MKV), the plaintiff, Jane Doe, filed a Memorandum of Law supporting her motion for reconsideration of the court's decision denying her request to proceed under a pseudonym. She also sought permission to file a supporting declaration under seal. The plaintiff argued that the court had overlooked critical factors, including the highly sensitive nature of the allegations and the potential for significant harm if her identity were disclosed. She emphasized that revealing her identity could lead to severe emotional distress and possible retaliation, given the prominence of the defendant, Sean Combs.Additionally, the plaintiff contended that allowing her to proceed anonymously would not prejudice the defendants and would serve the public interest by encouraging victims of sexual assault to come forward without fear of exposure. The request to file the declaration under seal was made to protect the confidentiality of detailed personal information pertinent to her motion.(commercial at 7:07)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.21.0.pdf

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:55)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:58to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

In the case Jane Doe v. Sean Combs, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08054, the plaintiff, proceeding under a pseudonym, filed a lawsuit against Sean Combs and associated entities, alleging sexual assault and related misconduct. The complaint details incidents from approximately twenty years ago, asserting that Combs engaged in non-consensual sexual acts and inflicted emotional distress upon the plaintiff. The plaintiff seeks a jury trial to address these allegations and obtain appropriate legal remedies.Subsequently, the plaintiff requested permission to proceed under a pseudonym, citing concerns for personal safety and privacy. However, on October 30, 2024, the court denied this motion, emphasizing the importance of transparency in judicial proceedings and the defendants' right to a fair defense. The court ordered the plaintiff to refile the complaint under her legal name by November 13, 2024, to proceed with the case.In this episode, we get a look at the complaint and the name of the accuser.   (commercial at 7:23)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:gov.uscourts.nysd.630450.23.0.pdfBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

VLOG Nov 13 Trump NY criminal case delay to 11/19; Eric Adams scandals from LI to Turkish restaurant by UN.Diddy docket: McCrary gives name; Amazon still hasn't re complainant banning book. Palin v NYT April, US v Visa, UN Censorship gala https://www.innercitypress.com/uncorruption1endgame111224.html

This is a different type of episode this week as I have borrowed the audio from a panel I was part of last Thursday (10/24/24) to discuss the upcoming 2024 elections. This panel is hosted by the government affairs firm Husch Blackwell Strategies, and the video link can be accessed here. Moderating the discussion is Husch Blackwell CEO Andy Blunt and I'm also joined by election analyst Jim Ellis - whose background includes working for the GOP House leadership and, for decades, has been an analyst and advisor to corporations and trade associations.The discussion was recorded last Thursday and covers a lot of ground...the current state of the presidential race, the different electoral college paths available to both candidates, what can be gleaned from the early vote, what to expect in the House and Senate races, recent polling trends, late-breaking surprise races, the prediction markets, and much more.

Diane used to teach in the maximum security women's prison, where she met Mary McCrary. Her journey from prison to Princeton is extraordinary and will inspire you richly today. Her story has been covered on Good Morning America, Inside Edition, among other national media outlets. Learn more about how to get involved in Mary's passion at TPOM.org --- Support this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/ladyupamerica/support

In this quick episode of the Commerce Collective Podcast's unBoxed coverage, Donte McCrary-McClain gives us a speedy overview of multiple new product launches related to AMC, some of which Flywheel had the opportunity to beta test prior to the conference. We'll cover bid boosting for SP and SB with the help of AMC and a variety of measurement enhancements to AMC itself. Tune in to learn more about what these products are, how to strategically use them, and how Flywheel has been able to bring these to life for a few advertisers via our early testing access.

Attorney, award winning filmmaker,  best selling author, and Co-Founder of GameUp Crystal McCrary joins the community to chat about building “The Amazon for Youth Basketball”. Crystal and her son, Orlando Magic Point Guard Cole Anthony, are building a marketplace that connects kids and their parents to the trainers, teams, and resources that fit their current skill level. That app has been in Beta but will be launching soon. We chat about the challenges of youth basketball, entrepreneurship, and where the future of Youth Sports is heading via technology. The views and opinions expressed in this video are solely those of the individuals featured and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of Athletes & Assets. We do not accept liability for any advice given in this video, and viewers are encouraged to seek professional guidance before making any business decisions. Additionally, the participation of athletes in this video does not imply endorsement or sponsorship by their respective employers.

As Zach's summer vacation continues, we present to you an amazing episode of the Git Rec'd podcast!Hosts Micah and Thor invite Zach to make a recommendation, and he chose the 90s fan film, "The Green Goblin's Last Stand!"Tune in and hear how awesome the Git Rec'd podcast is, and enjoy some Spider-Man talk!---------------------------------------------------Want to hear more from Thor and Micah?Check out the Git Rec'd Podcast!Follow them on Instagram!---------------------------------------------------GoFundMe to help my wife's family in VietnamAny help is appreciated. We also understand if you can't. A share would also be nice!---------------------------------------------------Check out Dreampass and all their killer tracks on Spotify!---------------------------------------------------Join the Patreon to help us keep the lights on, and internet connected! https://www.patreon.com/tctwl---------------------------------------------------Listen to my other podcast!TFD: NerdcastAnd I am also part of the team over at...I Read Comic Books!---------------------------------------------------Want to try out all the sweet gigs over on Fiverr.com? Click on the link below and sign up!https://go.fiverr.com/visit/?bta=323533&brand=fiverrcpa---------------------------------------------------Follow on Instagram!The Comics That We LoveFollow on Tiktok!The Comics that We LoveFollow on Twitter!@Z_Irish_Red

Chanse McCrary (Smosh) joins the show to take stunning calls about an insane hookup, a new vegetable, a decades old lie, and reading your boyfriends diary.Subscribe To The Patreon: https://bit.ly/PPPTRN - Weekly Bonus episodes every Friday & ad-free extended version of this episode)Watch on Youtube: https://bit.ly/PerfectPodYTWatch Miles' Main Channel Videos: https://bit.ly/MilesbonYTFollow On Insta To Call-In!: https://bit.ly/PPPodGramTell a friend about the show! Tweet it! Story it! Scream it!Advertise on Perfect Person via Gumball.fmSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

STS Book on Audible: Https://www.audible.com/pd/Surviving-...STS Book on Amazon: Https://www.amazon.com/shop/surviving...STS Merch Store: https://www.bonfire.com/store/sts-store/STS Patreon: Https://patreon.com/SurvivingTheSurvivorSTS Website: https://survivingthesurvivor.com/#STSNation, Welcome to another episode of Surviving The Survivor, the podcast that brings you the #BestGuests in all of True Crime… A shooting at Donald Trump 's rally in Butler, Pennsylvania is being investigated as an attempted assassination of the former president and presumptive Republican nominee, law enforcement officials say … officials are also reportedly investigating as a possible domestic terror act. Both president biden and former president Trump called Sunday for unity and resilience as shocked leaders across the political divide reacted to the shooting. #BestGuests: Dr. Ann Burgess is an internationally recognized pioneer in the assessment and treatment of victims of trauma and abuse, and author of A Killer by Design: Murderers, Mindhunters, and My Quest to Decipher the Criminal Mind. Among her many awards and accolades, in 2016 she was named a Living Legend by the American Academy of Nursing She has also worked with FBI Academy special agents to study serial offenders, and the links between child abuse, juvenile delinquency, and subsequent perpetration. NEW SHOW MASTERMIND ON HULU Agent Gregg McCrary entered on duty as a Special Agent with the FBI on December 1, 1969 … I was 5 months old He has been associated with the National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime (NCAVC) since its inception in 1985.  He has provided expert witness testimony in homicide and rape trials in North America and Europe Mr. McCrary has authored numerous publications including “The Unknown Darkness, Profiling the Predators Among Us” with Dr. Katherine Ramsland and was a contributing author to the FBI's Crime Classification Manual  #TrumpAssassinationAttempt #DonaldTrump #JoeBiden #SecretService #ButlerPA #FBI #ThomasMatthewCrooks #President #CIA #truecrimecommunity #truecrimepodcast #newsupdate #news #mindhunter #crimestory #criminaljustice

Beep & Veep - Stuff Island #140 w/ Lukas McCrary Comedians Chris O'Connor and Tommy Pope are making all kinds of Stuff on the paytch. Each week they talk about anything & everything under the sun. Tommy also chefs up some delicious meals. It's a goddamn blast, folks - SUB TO PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/StuffIsland - SUB ON ITUNES: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/stuff-island/id1448662475 - SUB ON SPOTIFY: https://open.spotify.com/show/3QvnmWtMlJ0ZC9uUu1Vvdk - Follow Chris on IG: https://www.instagram.com/achrisoconnor/?hl=en - Follow Tommy on IG: https://www.instagram.com/tommyjpope/?hl=en - Follow Lukas on IG: https://www.instagram.com/lukaswmc/?hl=en Check Out Squarespace.com for a free trial, and when you're ready to launch, go to https://www.squarespace.com/STUFFISLAND to save 10% off your first purchase of a website or domain. Get 20% off your entire order w/ promo code: STUFFISLAND @ CUTSClothing.com Sponsor Stuff Island: https://public.liveread.io/media-kit/stuff-island Sponsor Look at Dish: https://public.liveread.io/media-kit/lookatdish Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices