DOJ-OGR-00005576.jpg

656 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

3
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
0
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 656 KB
Summary

This legal document is a motion filed by the Government on October 29, 2021, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The Government asks the Court to establish the conditions under which it can introduce prior consistent statements from its witnesses, particularly if the defense attacks their credibility in opening statements or cross-examination. The motion cites Rule 801(d)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Evidence and the precedent set in United States v. Purcell to support its arguments.

People (3)

Name Role Context
Minor Victims Victims
Mentioned as individuals whose privacy and dignity the Government seeks to protect, and who will testify about being ...
defendant Defendant
The party whose rights the defense has allegedly failed to identify as being burdened by the Government's requested o...
Purcell Party in a cited case
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Purcell, 967 F.3d 159, 196-97 (2d Cir. 2020)'.

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
The Government Government agency
The prosecuting party in the case, seeking court orders and moving to admit evidence.
The Court Judicial body
The entity being asked to grant a motion and resolve litigation regarding witness statements.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit Judicial body
Cited as '2d Cir.' in the case precedent United States v. Purcell.

Timeline (3 events)

2020
The case of United States v. Purcell was decided, which is now cited as precedent for offering prior consistent statements to rebut inconsistency.
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
United States Purcell
2021-10-29
Document 383 was filed in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE.
The Government moved in limine to admit prior consistent statements of its witnesses pursuant to Rule 801(d)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Evidence.

Relationships (1)

The Government Adversarial / Legal the defense
The document outlines a legal disagreement between the Government (prosecution) and the defense regarding the rules of evidence and the admissibility of witness statements for an upcoming trial.

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document