DOJ-OGR-00013215.jpg
545 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
545 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, and the judge during the cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn. The conversation centers on the consistency of paragraph 206 of an exhibit, which describes allegations against Epstein, with prior testimony. The Court ultimately rules that the paragraph is not inconsistent and sustains an objection.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein | wealthy financier |
Mentioned in a paragraph being discussed, described as using his wealth and network to exploit a minor.
|
| MR. PAGLIUCA | Attorney |
A speaker in the transcript, arguing a point to the court regarding an exhibit.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
A speaker in the transcript, presiding over the hearing and making a ruling on an objection.
|
| Carolyn | Witness |
Mentioned in the header as being under cross-examination ("Carolyn - cross").
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the transcript as the court reporting agency.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
A cross-examination of a witness named Carolyn, during which counsel (Mr. Pagliuca) and the judge (The Court) discuss the admissibility and consistency of paragraph 206 of an exhibit.
Courtroom
Relationships (2)
Their interaction as attorney and judge during a court proceeding, as documented in the transcript.
The document refers to Epstein's "network of assistants and employees".
Key Quotes (3)
"Epstein's a wealthy financier with a lavish home, wealth, a network of assistants and employees used his resource and influence over a vulnerable minor child to engage in a systematic pattern of sexually exploited behavior."Source
— Unknown (read from a document)
(A statement from paragraph 12 of a document being discussed in court.)
DOJ-OGR-00013215.jpg
Quote #1
"I don't think that paragraph is factually inconsistent with the testimony for precisely the reason I've just indicated."Source
— THE COURT
(The judge's reasoning for their ruling on paragraph 206.)
DOJ-OGR-00013215.jpg
Quote #2
"So 206 is not inconsistent. Therefore, the objection is sustained."Source
— THE COURT
(The judge's final ruling on the matter of paragraph 206.)
DOJ-OGR-00013215.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document