DOJ-OGR-00009605.jpg
858 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
4
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
6
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document / court filing
File Size:
858 KB
Summary
This document, a legal filing from February 25, 2022, discusses the defendant's arguments regarding the availability and completeness of phone records and flight manifests in a criminal case. The defendant claims that Carolyn's testimony could have been disproven by phone records and that flight manifests would have helped challenge Jane's recollections, but the document refutes these claims, citing testimony from Visoski and Rodgers about the handling and incompleteness of flight manifests.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Carolyn | Witness/Victim (implied) |
Her trial testimony about being called by the defendant for massage appointments, and her phone records.
|
| Jane | Witness/Victim (implied) |
Her presence on flights and recollection of events, challenged by the defendant.
|
| Visoski | Witness |
Testified about dropping off passenger manifests at Epstein's office (1994-2004) and completing them accurately, even...
|
| Rodgers | Witness (implied) |
Testified about turning over passenger manifests to Epstein's attorneys; kept flight logs described as incomplete.
|
| Epstein | Defendant (implied) |
His main office in New York, his attorneys, subject of the Indictment related to flight manifests.
|
| Defendant | Defendant |
The subject of the claims and arguments discussed in the document.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Government |
The prosecuting entity in the case.
|
|
| Epstein's main office |
Location where Visoski dropped off passenger manifests.
|
|
| Epstein's attorneys |
Recipients of passenger manifests from Rodgers.
|
|
| S.D.N.Y. |
Southern District of New York, related to a cited legal case.
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location of Epstein's main office.
|
Key Quotes (6)
""could have been disproven with contemporaneous phone records.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00009605.jpg
Quote #1
""could have used them to challenge whether Jane was on those flights as well as the accuracy of Jane's recollection of events.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00009605.jpg
Quote #2
""did not go back to the time period charged in the Indictment" "[b]ecause of the passage of time.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00009605.jpg
Quote #3
""The fact that evidence may be lost or destroyed during the pre-indictment stage is inherent in any delay, no matter what the duration. Furthermore, there has been no allegation in this case that the destruction of the records was deliberate on the part of either the government or trustee.""Source
DOJ-OGR-00009605.jpg
Quote #4
""were incomplete and often identified passengers simply by their first names or generic identifiers like '1 female' or '1 male'""Source
DOJ-OGR-00009605.jpg
Quote #5
""tried to be as accurate as [he] could," but that if he "didn't know a passenger name, [he] wanted to put whether"Source
DOJ-OGR-00009605.jpg
Quote #6
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document