DOJ-OGR-00003148.jpg
798 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
4
Events
4
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
798 KB
Summary
This legal document is a filing by the Government in response to a defense motion. The Government argues that it is not required to produce pages from a personal diary belonging to a third-party victim because the diary is not in its custody or control. Furthermore, the Government asserts that it has already inquired with the victim, who confirmed that no diary entries exist for the relevant time period in the spring of 1996 when she met the defendant while visiting Epstein.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| defendant | defendant |
The subject of the legal proceedings, whose defense is requesting documents.
|
| civilian third party | victim |
An individual, also referred to as 'this victim', whose personal diary is being requested by the defense. She met Eps...
|
| Epstein |
Mentioned as a person the victim met and visited. The victim's journal entries relate to him. A search warrant was ex...
|
|
| Collins |
Named in the case citation 'United States v. Collins'.
|
|
| Blaszczak |
Named in the case citation 'United States v. Blaszczak'.
|
|
| defense counsel | legal representative |
Mentioned in a footnote as having received a redacted document recovered from one of Epstein's devices.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Government | government agency |
The prosecuting party in the case, arguing against the disclosure of a third party's diary.
|
| Department of Justice | government agency |
Mentioned in a quote regarding the extent of the Government's 'Brady obligations'.
|
| Executive Branch | government branch |
Mentioned in a quote as a potential part of the government whose materials might fall under 'Brady obligations'.
|
Timeline (4 events)
A victim's first meeting with Epstein, after which she wrote in her journal for about a month.
A trip the victim took months later to visit Epstein, during which she met the defendant.
Execution of a search warrant for one of Epstein's devices.
spring of 1996
The defense is concerned about whether there are diary entries from the spring of 1996.
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Southern District of New York, mentioned in case citations for 'United States v. Collins' and 'United States v. Blasz...
|
Relationships (4)
The victim had a 'first meeting with Epstein' and took a 'subsequent trip... to visit Epstein'. She also kept journal entries 'relating to Epstein'.
The victim 'met the defendant' during a trip she took to visit Epstein.
The Government is the prosecuting party in a criminal case against the defendant.
The victim 'provided the Government with copies of her journal entries' and 'informed the Government' about the nature of the remaining entries.
Key Quotes (2)
"The Government’s ‘Brady obligations extend only to materials within prosecutors’ possession, custody or control or, in appropriate cases, that of the Department of Justice, perhaps another part of the Executive Branch, or a comparable state authority involved in the federal prosecution."Source
— United States v. Collins case
(Quoted to support the Government's argument that it is not obligated to obtain personal papers of a third party.)
DOJ-OGR-00003148.jpg
Quote #1
"Because this victim stopped writing in her journal about a month after that first meeting with Epstein, there are no entries regarding the subsequent trip she took months later to visit Epstein, during which she met the defendant."Source
— Government (from Dkt. No. 100)
(Quoted from a previous filing to show that the Government has already indicated that no diary entries exist for the period in question.)
DOJ-OGR-00003148.jpg
Quote #2
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document