DOJ-OGR-00013297.jpg

581 KB

Extraction Summary

4
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court transcript
File Size: 581 KB
Summary

This is a page from a court transcript (US v. Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. The text details a legal argument between the defense (Sternheim) and prosecution (Rohrbach) regarding the admissibility of evidence (exhibits 823 and 824) and hearsay concerns. The prosecution mentions Ms. Gill, the head of HR for Mar-a-Lago, noting she has reviewed a specific employment file relevant to the case.

People (4)

Name Role Context
The Court Judge
Presiding over the discussion regarding admissibility of evidence and testimony.
Ms. Sternheim Attorney (Defense)
Arguing about hearsay regarding a witness's knowledge.
Mr. Rohrbach Attorney (Prosecution)
Discussing exhibits 823/824 and the potential testimony of Ms. Gill.
Ms. Gill Head of HR for Mar-a-Lago
Witness mentioned who has reviewed a specific employment file.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
Mar-a-Lago
Employer where Ms. Gill is Head of HR.
Southern District Reporters, P.C.
Court reporting service.
DOJ
Department of Justice (referenced in footer stamp).

Timeline (1 events)

2022-08-10
Court hearing regarding Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (US v. Ghislaine Maxwell)
Southern District of New York (implied)

Locations (1)

Location Context
Location associated with employment records being discussed.

Relationships (1)

Ms. Gill Employment Mar-a-Lago
she's been the head of HR for Mar-a-Lago for quite a long time

Key Quotes (3)

"My current thinking is 823 comes in."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00013297.jpg
Quote #1
"Ms. Gill, as she's been the head of HR for Mar-a-Lago for quite a long time."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00013297.jpg
Quote #2
"She's reviewed this particular employment file, which is much larger than this set of records."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00013297.jpg
Quote #3

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,624 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 755 Filed 08/10/22 Page 19 of 262 1724
LC8Cmax1
1 THE COURT: That may or may not be true depending on
2 the testimony.
3 MS. STERNHEIM: Well, it would be hearsay as to her
4 knowledge, having gained it from somebody remotely in the
5 company providing that to her.
6 THE COURT: So if her testimony is, this is the
7 practice and this was the longstanding practice, I learned it
8 from predecessors or the like, she might have -- just as her
9 understanding of the practice of maintaining records is what
10 she learned in the course of her employment, it may be -- I'm
11 doubtful that we'll get this testimony. We'll see what the
12 testimony is.
13 My current thinking is 823 comes in. That gives -- I
14 mean, what I understand the relevance to be -- and there is no
15 objection to 823. 824, absent the content, I'm not sure gets
16 you anything beyond what 823 gets you.
17 MR. ROHRBACH: I think that's right, your Honor. If
18 824 could not come in with the content, we probably would not
19 offer 824.
20 I would like to just have this conversation with
21 Ms. Gill, as she's been the head of HR for Mar-a-Lago for quite
22 a long time. She's reviewed this particular employment file,
23 which is much larger than this set of records. So I think she
24 may have a great well more to say about these issues and we
25 would like to be able to talk with her.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00013297

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document