DOJ-OGR-00016749.jpg

562 KB
View Original

Extraction Summary

3
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court transcript (criminal case)
File Size: 562 KB
Summary

This document is page 20 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial), filed on August 10, 2022. The content captures a procedural discussion where the Judge ('The Court') outlines the legal requirements for introducing extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement to impeach a witness, citing United States v. Gulani. Ms. Menninger briefly responds to a question about a pseudonym.

People (3)

Name Role Context
Ms. Menninger Attorney (likely Prosecutor)
Answering a question from the Judge regarding a pseudonym.
The Court Judge
Outlining legal standards for offering extrinsic evidence of prior inconsistent statements.
AJN Judge (Initials in case header)
Judge Alison J. Nathan (inferred from case number suffix).

Organizations (3)

Name Type Context
Southern District Reporters, P.C.
Court reporting service listed in the footer.
S.D.N.Y.
Southern District of New York (cited in legal precedent).
DOJ
Department of Justice (referenced in footer stamp DOJ-OGR).

Timeline (1 events)

2022-08-10
Court proceeding in Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The Court is defining the legal standard for impeaching a witness.
Southern District of New York

Locations (1)

Location Context
Jurisdiction implied by case number and reporter footer.

Relationships (1)

Ms. Menninger Attorney/Judge The Court
Dialogue exchange in court transcript.

Key Quotes (3)

"Second, the parties seeking to offer extrinsic evidence of a prior inconsistent statement must have laid a proper foundation for doing so..."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00016749.jpg
Quote #1
"Finally, even if all these requirements have been satisfied, the trial court nevertheless may exclude the extrinsic evidence under Rule 403 on an appropriate finding."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00016749.jpg
Quote #2
"At issue first is step 2, whether the witness being impeached had an opportunity to explain or deny the statement."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00016749.jpg
Quote #3

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document