DOJ-OGR-00003055.jpg
866 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing (legal memorandum/brief)
File Size:
866 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a Government legal filing in the criminal case against Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), arguing that certain evidence (depositions from April and July 2016) would have been 'inevitably discovered' regardless of protective order modifications. A significant footnote details Judge Preska's refusal in the related civil case to keep Maxwell's testimony sealed, specifically highlighting testimony where Maxwell denied giving massages to Jeffrey Epstein or 'Minor Victim-2,' which forms the basis of perjury charges (Count Six).
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Referred to as 'the defendant' and 'Ms. Maxwell'; subject of the criminal trial and deposition testimony.
|
| Loretta Preska | Judge |
Presiding Judge in the civil case (15 Civ. 7433) who ruled on unsealing testimony.
|
| Jeffrey Epstein | Associate of Defendant |
Mentioned in testimony where Maxwell denied giving him a massage.
|
| Minor Victim-2 | Alleged Victim |
Mentioned in testimony where Maxwell denied giving them a massage.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Government |
Arguing for the admission of evidence based on inevitable discovery.
|
|
| Supreme Court |
Cited for legal precedent regarding the exclusionary rule.
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Indicated by the footer 'DOJ-OGR-00003055'.
|
Timeline (3 events)
Relationships (2)
Text mentions Maxwell denying giving a massage to Epstein in a deposition.
Text mentions Maxwell denying giving a massage to Minor Victim-2 in a deposition.
Key Quotes (3)
"The portion of the July 2016 deposition transcript that forms the basis of Count Six that has been unsealed relates to the defendant denying that she has given a massage to anyone, including Epstein or Minor Victim-2."Source
DOJ-OGR-00003055.jpg
Quote #1
"Judge Preska determined that the public’s First Amendment right of access outweighed the defendant’s interests."Source
DOJ-OGR-00003055.jpg
Quote #2
"The answer is yes, at least as to some of the evidence, including the April 2016 deposition that forms the basis of Count Five and part of the July 2016 deposition that forms the basis of Count Six."Source
DOJ-OGR-00003055.jpg
Quote #3
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document