DOJ-OGR-00021025.jpg

655 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

7
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
5
Relationships
2
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Legal document
File Size: 655 KB
Summary

This legal document is a page from a court filing arguing against a defendant's claim of prejudice due to the death of potential witnesses. The prosecution contends that the defendant's assertions about what these witnesses (architects and a housekeeper) would have testified are speculative and unsubstantiated. It further argues that other witnesses, such as Juan Alessi, Larry Visoski, and David Rodgers, were available and did testify about similar matters, like renovations at Epstein's residences, meaning the information was obtainable through other means.

People (7)

Name Role Context
Epstein
Mentioned throughout as the individual whose residences, renovations, and private airplane are subjects of testimony.
Defendant Defendant
The subject of the legal filing, who is arguing that the absence of deceased witnesses prejudiced her case. The docum...
Juan Alessi Witness
Mentioned as a witness who testified at trial about working for Epstein.
Larry Visoski Witness
Mentioned as a witness who testified at trial about working for Epstein.
David Rodgers Witness
Mentioned as a witness who testified at trial about working for Epstein.
King
Named in the case citation 'United States v. King, 560 F.2d 122, 130 (2d Cir. 1977)'.
Long
Named in the case citation 'United States v. Long, 697 F. Supp. 651, 657 (S.D.N.Y. 1988)'.

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
United States government agency
Party in the legal cases 'United States v. King' and 'United States v. Long'.
DOJ-OGR government agency
Appears in the footer of the document (DOJ-OGR-00021025), likely a Department of Justice identifier.

Timeline (2 events)

A trial occurred where witnesses like Juan Alessi, Larry Visoski, and David Rodgers testified.
The Defendant claims two architect witnesses and a live-in housekeeper, who could have provided testimony, have died.
two architect witnesses live-in housekeeper

Locations (1)

Location Context
Location of Epstein's townhouse where the Defendant allegedly spent limited time.

Relationships (5)

Epstein personal Defendant
The document states the Defendant claims she 'spent only limited time with Epstein at his townhouse in New York'.
Epstein professional Juan Alessi
The document states Juan Alessi was one of the individuals Epstein employed to work at his residences.
Epstein professional Larry Visoski
The document states Larry Visoski was one of the individuals Epstein employed to work at his residences.
Epstein professional David Rodgers
The document states David Rodgers was one of the individuals Epstein employed to work at his residences.
Epstein professional live-in housekeeper
The document refers to 'Epstein’s live-in housekeeper'.

Key Quotes (2)

"could have established"
Source
— Defendant (The Defendant's claim about what two deceased architect witnesses could have done regarding the timeline for Epstein's renovations.)
DOJ-OGR-00021025.jpg
Quote #1
"no way of knowing what [an absent witness’s] testimony would have been"
Source
— United States v. Long, 697 F. Supp. 651, 657 (S.D.N.Y. 1988) (A legal precedent cited to argue that there is no prejudice from an absent witness when their potential testimony is unknown.)
DOJ-OGR-00021025.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