DOJ-OGR-00005852.jpg

675 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

4
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 675 KB
Summary

This legal document argues that the photo identification of a defendant by 'Minor Victim-4' was valid and not suggestive. It establishes that the victim had prior personal knowledge of the defendant from interactions between 2001 and 2004, and that the photo identification procedure was conducted cautiously. The document refutes the defense's claim that the defendant's photo was unduly suggestive because it looked like a 'mug shot' or was different from the others.

People (4)

Name Role Context
Minor Victim-4 Victim
A victim who identified the defendant from a photo book, based on prior personal interactions.
Stallings Party in a cited case
Mentioned in the case citation 'Stallings v. Wood'.
Wood Party in a cited case
Mentioned in the case citation 'Stallings v. Wood'.
defendant Defendant
The subject of the legal proceedings, who was identified by Minor Victim-4.

Organizations (1)

Name Type Context
E.D.N.Y. Government agency
Appears in a case citation, referring to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Timeline (3 events)

2001-2004
Minor Victim-4 and the defendant met in person and interacted multiple times.
2007, 2009, 2020, and 2021
Minor Victim-4 mentioned the defendant by description or by name.
Minor Victim-4 was shown a photo book with 20 photos and identified a photo of the defendant.

Locations (1)

Location Context
Mentioned in a case citation, referring to the Eastern District of New York.

Relationships (1)

Minor Victim-4 Acquaintance defendant
The document states they 'met in person and interacted multiple times between 2001 and 2004'.

Key Quotes (2)

"looks like a mug shot"
Source
— the defense (An argument made by the defense that the defendant's photo was suggestive.)
DOJ-OGR-00005852.jpg
Quote #1
"is different than the others."
Source
— the defense (An argument made by the defense that the defendant's photo was suggestive because it stood out from the others in the photo array.)
DOJ-OGR-00005852.jpg
Quote #2

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document