DOJ-OGR-00017179.jpg
562 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript (case 1:20-cr-00330-pae)
File Size:
562 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. Attorneys Ms. Moe and Ms. Menninger discuss emails between 'Kate' and Jeffrey Epstein, noting that the physical emails were introduced as redacted exhibits, but their content was established through oral testimony. Ms. Moe raises concerns about mischaracterizations of evidence during closing arguments and discusses a curative instruction for the jury.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Subject of emails |
Mentioned as exchanging emails with 'Kate'.
|
| Kate | Witness/Subject |
Mentioned as exchanging emails with Epstein.
|
| Ms. Menninger | Attorney (Prosecution) |
Discussing the admissibility of email evidence and testimony.
|
| Ms. Moe | Attorney (Prosecution/AUSA) |
Discussing redacted emails and requesting curative instructions regarding closing arguments.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the discussion regarding jury charges and evidence.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (indicated by footer DOJ-OGR).
|
Timeline (2 events)
2022-08-10
Court proceedings discussing jury instructions and closing arguments.
Courtroom (Southern District)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied Southern District of New York (SDNY) via reporter stamp.
|
Relationships (1)
Emails referenced between Kate and Epstein.
Key Quotes (3)
"Those came in redacted? ... Yes, completely redacted without any content."Source
DOJ-OGR-00017179.jpg
Quote #1
"The emails themselves were redacted. The content was part of the testimony."Source
DOJ-OGR-00017179.jpg
Quote #2
"Our concern was that there were a number of items throughout the closing that were mischaracterizations of testimony or inaccurate or references to items that were not in evidence."Source
DOJ-OGR-00017179.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,385 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 158 of 257 2992
LCKCmax7
LCKCmax7
1 they were the emails that Ms. Menninger referenced between Kate
2 and Epstein.
3 THE COURT: Those came in redacted?
4 MS. MOE: Yes, completely redacted without any
5 content.
6 MS. MENNINGER: Judge, it came in the testimony. The
7 emails themselves were redacted. The content was part of the
8 testimony.
9 THE COURT: I think that's right.
10 MS. MOE: I don't believe the emails -- were offered,
11 were offered for the truth. That's one of the reasons we
12 wanted to check the transcript.
13 THE COURT: The curative instruction that you're
14 asking for is in the charge, precisely the words that you just
15 indicated, that it's, what's in evidence and not counsel's
16 arguments. The jury is going to get that. It's in the charge.
17 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. Our concern was that there
18 were a number of items throughout the closing that were
19 mischaracterizations of testimony or inaccurate or references
20 to items that were not in evidence. That's why we're
21 requesting it now, although I understand the Court's point that
22 the jury will be charged this afternoon and that language is in
23 the charge.
24 The second issue that we wanted to raise is, as the
25 Court will recall from pretrial litigation, we moved to
2 and Epstein.
3 THE COURT: Those came in redacted?
4 MS. MOE: Yes, completely redacted without any
5 content.
6 MS. MENNINGER: Judge, it came in the testimony. The
7 emails themselves were redacted. The content was part of the
8 testimony.
9 THE COURT: I think that's right.
10 MS. MOE: I don't believe the emails -- were offered,
11 were offered for the truth. That's one of the reasons we
12 wanted to check the transcript.
13 THE COURT: The curative instruction that you're
14 asking for is in the charge, precisely the words that you just
15 indicated, that it's, what's in evidence and not counsel's
16 arguments. The jury is going to get that. It's in the charge.
17 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. Our concern was that there
18 were a number of items throughout the closing that were
19 mischaracterizations of testimony or inaccurate or references
20 to items that were not in evidence. That's why we're
21 requesting it now, although I understand the Court's point that
22 the jury will be charged this afternoon and that language is in
23 the charge.
24 The second issue that we wanted to raise is, as the
25 Court will recall from pretrial litigation, we moved to
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00017179
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document