DOJ-OGR-00008440.jpg
745 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
0
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
745 KB
Summary
This legal document, filed on December 19, 2021, argues that the public interest in viewing the parties' presentation slides during closing arguments is minimal, as the content is already largely public. It highlights significant logistical concerns and potential delays that would arise from making the slides public in real-time, such as managing binders and toggling monitors. The parties have instead agreed to make the demonstratives available for public review after the arguments are complete.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| attorneys | Attorney |
Mentioned as the advocates whose closing arguments are the core of the proceeding.
|
| juror | Juror |
Mentioned as being present in the courtroom and having to use time-consuming binders.
|
| member of the public | Public |
Mentioned as being present in the courtroom and having a marginal interest in viewing presentations.
|
| observers | Observer |
Mentioned as being able to follow along with key exhibits during the argument.
|
| counsel for both parties | Counsel |
Mentioned as agreeing that the logistics of making slides public raise significant concerns.
|
| Court staff | Court Staff |
Mentioned as having to manually turn public monitors on and off in the courtroom and overflow room.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| the Government | government agency |
Mentioned as one of the parties in the case, whose presentation slides consist of existing exhibits and transcripts.
|
| the Court | government agency |
Mentioned as having observed the time-consuming nature of using binders during the trial.
|
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The location where the trial, closing arguments, and presentations occur.
|
|
|
An additional room where Court staff would need to manually operate public monitors.
|
Relationships (1)
counsel for the Government
→
professional
→
counsel for the defense
The document states that "counsel for both parties agree that complicated logistics...raise significant concerns," indicating a professional agreement on a procedural matter in the trial.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document