DOJ-OGR-00017098.jpg
607 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
607 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, where an attorney, Mr. Pagliuca, argues for a mistrial. He contends that the government, during its closing argument, improperly used admitted evidence (Exhibit 52, pages from a book) to argue the truth of its contents, specifically to infer that Ms. Maxwell knew individuals were minors. Mr. Pagliuca asserts this violates the court's limiting instruction and, if a mistrial is not granted, asks the court to re-instruct the jury on the evidence's limited purpose.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MR. PAGLIUCA | Attorney |
Speaking to the Court, arguing for a mistrial on behalf of his client.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the case, addressed as 'your Honor', and making rulings.
|
| Jane |
Mentioned as someone who discussed 'sexualized massages'.
|
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Mentioned as the person who allegedly should have known individuals were minors. Mr. Pagliuca is likely her attorney.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (3 events)
2022-08-10
Mr. Pagliuca makes an application to the Court for a mistrial following the government's closing argument.
Courtroom
MR. PAGLIUCA
THE COURT
A closing argument was made by the government in which they allegedly misused evidence from books (Exhibit 52).
Courtroom
government
jury
Relationships (2)
Mr. Pagliuca, an attorney, is addressing 'your Honor' (the judge) in a formal court proceeding.
Mr. Pagliuca is making legal arguments that defend Ms. Maxwell's position and protect her from what he sees as improper arguments by the government, indicating an attorney-client relationship.
Key Quotes (3)
"All right. Overruled."Source
— THE COURT
(The Court's ruling on a prior, unspecified matter.)
DOJ-OGR-00017098.jpg
Quote #1
"My request, your Honor, my application, first, is that the Court declare a mistrial based on the misuse of that evidence."Source
— MR. PAGLIUCA
(An attorney's formal request to the judge for a mistrial.)
DOJ-OGR-00017098.jpg
Quote #2
"If the Court is not inclined to do that, I believe the Court should reinstruct the jurors about the limited purpose, instruct the jurors that they can't infer what the government was suggesting they could infer from that argument."Source
— MR. PAGLIUCA
(Presenting an alternative request to the Court if the motion for a mistrial is denied.)
DOJ-OGR-00017098.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,528 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 77 of 257 2910
LCKVMAX4
LCKVMAX4
1 in 2004 during the sex trafficking conspiracy.
2 THE COURT: All right. Overruled.
3 Anything else?
4 MR. PAGLIUCA: Yes, your Honor.
5 This relates to Exhibit 52, which are the pages from
6 the book that were admitted. The Court admitted those over our
7 hearsay objection with the limiting instruction. And the
8 government assured the Court, when the Court was making this
9 decision, that they weren't going to argue the truth of the
10 matter contained in any of the books.
11 And what we heard in closing argument was exactly
12 that, that there are names in the books. And you can then
13 infer from those names that those might be the people that were
14 being discussed by Jane as having the sexualized massages; that
15 they were reading the words mom, dad, phone numbers, and
16 suggesting that that's how Ms. Maxwell had to have known that
17 these individuals were minors. Again, that's the truth of the
18 matter asserted; it's not for the limited purpose that the
19 Court instructed the jury.
20 My request, your Honor, my application, first, is that
21 the Court declare a mistrial based on the misuse of that
22 evidence. If the Court is not inclined to do that, I believe
23 the Court should reinstruct the jurors about the limited
24 purpose, instruct the jurors that they can't infer what the
25 government was suggesting they could infer from that argument.
2 THE COURT: All right. Overruled.
3 Anything else?
4 MR. PAGLIUCA: Yes, your Honor.
5 This relates to Exhibit 52, which are the pages from
6 the book that were admitted. The Court admitted those over our
7 hearsay objection with the limiting instruction. And the
8 government assured the Court, when the Court was making this
9 decision, that they weren't going to argue the truth of the
10 matter contained in any of the books.
11 And what we heard in closing argument was exactly
12 that, that there are names in the books. And you can then
13 infer from those names that those might be the people that were
14 being discussed by Jane as having the sexualized massages; that
15 they were reading the words mom, dad, phone numbers, and
16 suggesting that that's how Ms. Maxwell had to have known that
17 these individuals were minors. Again, that's the truth of the
18 matter asserted; it's not for the limited purpose that the
19 Court instructed the jury.
20 My request, your Honor, my application, first, is that
21 the Court declare a mistrial based on the misuse of that
22 evidence. If the Court is not inclined to do that, I believe
23 the Court should reinstruct the jurors about the limited
24 purpose, instruct the jurors that they can't infer what the
25 government was suggesting they could infer from that argument.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00017098
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document