DOJ-OGR-00016939.jpg
547 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
547 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between the judge (THE COURT), Mr. Everdell, and Mr. Rohrbach (for the government) about jury instructions. The main point of contention is whether to explicitly state 'under the age of 17' for an offense, with Mr. Everdell arguing it's necessary for clarity to distinguish from other individuals mentioned in flight logs whose ages are unknown. The government acknowledges the age is an element of the offense but questions its inclusion in a summary.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MR. EVERDELL | Attorney |
Speaker in the court transcript, arguing for specific jury instructions for clarity.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaker in the court transcript, mediating the discussion on jury instructions.
|
| MR. ROHRBACH | Attorney |
Speaker in the court transcript, representing the government's position on jury instructions.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
A discussion took place regarding the specific wording of jury instructions for an offense involving the transportation of a minor.
Courtroom (implied)
Relationships (3)
Mr. Everdell addresses the court as 'your Honor'.
Mr. Rohrbach addresses the court as 'your Honor'.
They are opposing counsel in a legal proceeding, discussing elements of the offense and jury instructions. Mr. Rohrbach speaks for 'the government'.
Key Quotes (3)
"to transport an individual under the age of 17."Source
— THE COURT
(Quoting a suggestion for the wording of jury instructions.)
DOJ-OGR-00016939.jpg
Quote #1
"The government agrees that that's an element of the offense. There is no reason to incorporate all of the elements into the summary."Source
— MR. ROHRBACH
(Responding to the court about the proposed jury instruction wording.)
DOJ-OGR-00016939.jpg
Quote #2
"We just wanted to make it clear to the jury that we're talking about individuals under the age of 17 rather than all these people on the flight logs that we saw who we have no evidence of their ages."Source
— MR. EVERDELL
(Explaining the rationale for adding the specific age to the jury instructions for Count One.)
DOJ-OGR-00016939.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,761 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 13 of 95
LCI1MAX1
LCI1MAX1
1 MR. EVERDELL: Right.
2 THE COURT: So just rather than give the jury two
3 elements with two different ages, which I think makes sense.
4 But so then the suggestion is "to transport an individual under
5 the age of 17."
6 MR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor.
7 THE COURT: Mr. Rohrbach?
8 MR. ROHRBACH: The government agrees that that's an
9 element of the offense. There is no reason to incorporate all
10 of the elements into the summary.
11 THE COURT: Well, he's not asking all. He's just
12 asking this one. So --
13 MR. ROHRBACH: That's fine, your Honor, although the
14 government would note that that creates an asymmetry between
15 Counts One and Three, so we think it should be in both or
16 neither.
17 THE COURT: All right.
18 MR. EVERDELL: Well, it's not an element of the
19 offense in Count One. I add it there because it says "an
20 individual" and "an individual" seems sort of vague. I mean,
21 there's testimony about lots of individuals traveling, and
22 transporting here and there. We just wanted to make it clear
23 to the jury that we're talking about individuals under the age
24 of 17 rather than all these people on the flight logs that we
25 saw who we have no evidence of their ages.
2 THE COURT: So just rather than give the jury two
3 elements with two different ages, which I think makes sense.
4 But so then the suggestion is "to transport an individual under
5 the age of 17."
6 MR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor.
7 THE COURT: Mr. Rohrbach?
8 MR. ROHRBACH: The government agrees that that's an
9 element of the offense. There is no reason to incorporate all
10 of the elements into the summary.
11 THE COURT: Well, he's not asking all. He's just
12 asking this one. So --
13 MR. ROHRBACH: That's fine, your Honor, although the
14 government would note that that creates an asymmetry between
15 Counts One and Three, so we think it should be in both or
16 neither.
17 THE COURT: All right.
18 MR. EVERDELL: Well, it's not an element of the
19 offense in Count One. I add it there because it says "an
20 individual" and "an individual" seems sort of vague. I mean,
21 there's testimony about lots of individuals traveling, and
22 transporting here and there. We just wanted to make it clear
23 to the jury that we're talking about individuals under the age
24 of 17 rather than all these people on the flight logs that we
25 saw who we have no evidence of their ages.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00016939
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document