DOJ-OGR-00018531.jpg
624 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
624 KB
Summary
This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. The prosecutor, Ms. Moe, explains why they did not show certain evidence to victims 'Jane' and 'Kate' during interviews to preserve the integrity of their memories against defense challenges. The Judge challenges the relevance of introducing photos taken in 2019 of 'movable objects' (specifically schoolgirl outfits) to prove a conspiracy that ended 15 years earlier.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Moe | Attorney (Prosecution/Government) |
Arguing for the admissibility of evidence regarding victim interviews and items found.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, questioning the relevance of 2019 photos to a conspiracy ending 15 years prior.
|
| Jane | Victim/Witness |
Pseudonym for a victim; prosecution discusses strategy regarding her interview.
|
| Kate | Victim/Witness |
Pseudonym for a victim; testified to the jury about schoolgirl outfits.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| DOJ | ||
| The Court |
Key Quotes (4)
"I get that. That is absolutely a strategic decision and an understandable one. It does not then excuse a lack of foundation as to relevancy."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018531.jpg
Quote #1
"whether these 2019 pictures of highly movable objects... are relevant to a conspiracy that ended 15 years earlier."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018531.jpg
Quote #2
"Because the argument before the jury from this evidence is not that these are the schoolgirl outfits... that Kate was asked to wear."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018531.jpg
Quote #3
"We've done this for two reasons. One, the defense has put in issue the quality of the victims' memories"Source
DOJ-OGR-00018531.jpg
Quote #4
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document