DOJ-OGR-00017686.jpg
586 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
586 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument between attorneys and a judge during the cross-examination of a witness named Jane. The core issue is whether questions about a $25 million settlement demand, made by the witness in a civil case, are admissible under Rule 408 to show bias, particularly as the demand was made while a related criminal case against Ms. Maxwell was pending. Attorney Ms. Menninger argues the questions are proper to show bias, while attorney Ms. Moe seeks to limit the scope of the examination.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaker in the transcript, presiding over the case and interacting with the attorneys.
|
| MS. MOE | Attorney |
Speaker in the transcript, arguing about the scope of questioning under Rule 408.
|
| Ms. Menninger | Attorney |
Speaker in the transcript, explaining her intended line of questioning regarding a settlement demand.
|
| Jane | Witness |
Mentioned in the header as the subject of the cross-examination.
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant in a criminal case |
Mentioned as having a pending criminal case at the time the witness was demanding a civil settlement.
|
| Unnamed attorney | Lawyer |
Described as the attorney for the witness in a civil matter who demanded sums of money on her behalf.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (3 events)
2022-08-10
A cross-examination of a witness named Jane, during which attorneys Ms. Moe and Ms. Menninger argue before the judge about the admissibility of questions regarding a civil settlement demand under Rule 408.
Courtroom in the Southern District
A pending criminal case involving Ms. Maxwell.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the name of the court reporting agency, SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
|
Relationships (3)
The document states, regarding the witness and the attorney in the civil case, "he was her lawyer."
The witness ('Jane') had a civil claim for which she demanded $25 million, seemingly against Ms. Maxwell or a related party, while Ms. Maxwell was a defendant in a criminal case.
Ms. Menninger is conducting a cross-examination of the witness, Jane, and seeking to ask questions that imply bias.
Key Quotes (3)
"It's a 408 issue to the extent the questions are about negotiations related to settlements which would only be admissible in order to show bias under the second prong of the rule."Source
— MS. MOE
(Arguing the legal basis for limiting the scope of questioning about settlement negotiations.)
DOJ-OGR-00017686.jpg
Quote #1
"You were demanding $25 million to settle your civil law claim while Ms. Maxwell was pending in this criminal case, I might add."Source
— MS. MENNINGER
(Stating the question she intends to ask the witness to establish bias.)
DOJ-OGR-00017686.jpg
Quote #2
"So his statements are adoptive admissions by the party from that case that she was demanding the money that's claimed in that letter."Source
— MS. MENNINGER
(Justifying why the statements of the witness's former attorney are attributable to the witness.)
DOJ-OGR-00017686.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document