DOJ-OGR-00021559.jpg
561 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
4
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
561 KB
Summary
This legal document is a transcript from a court proceeding where a judge is ruling on objections from the defense. The judge overrules objections to the inclusion of testimony from a victim named Carolyn regarding a sexual assault by Epstein, stating that her testimony is credible. The judge also overrules objections to considering information about the defendant's severed perjury charges for sentencing, concluding that the defendant's 2016 sworn testimony denying knowledge of Epstein's scheme is reliable information for the court to consider.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein |
Mentioned as the individual who allegedly penetrated Carolyn's vagina and ran a scheme to recruit underage girls.
|
|
| Carolyn | Witness/Victim |
Her testimony about being penetrated by Epstein is being discussed. The judge credits her testimony.
|
| Bennett |
Mentioned in the case citation 'United States v. Bennett'.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the page, likely the court reporting agency that transcribed the proceedings.
|
| United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit | Government Agency |
Referenced in the case citation '(2d Cir. 2016)'.
|
Timeline (4 events)
2023-06-29
A judge is overruling defense objections regarding information to be considered for sentencing.
defendant
Judge
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the name of the court reporting agency, 'SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.'
|
Relationships (2)
The document discusses Carolyn's testimony that 'Epstein briefly penetrated Carolyn's vagina with his penis'.
The defendant testified in 2016 about her awareness (or lack thereof) of 'Epstein's scheme to recruit underage girls for sexual massages', suggesting a connection to his operations.
Key Quotes (3)
"I overrule this objection."Source
— Judge
(The judge's ruling on the defendant's objection to Carolyn's testimony about being penetrated by Epstein.)
DOJ-OGR-00021559.jpg
Quote #1
"I credit Carolyn's testimony."Source
— Judge
(The judge's statement affirming belief in Carolyn's testimony.)
DOJ-OGR-00021559.jpg
Quote #2
"I do overrule this objection."Source
— Judge
(The judge's ruling on the defendant's objection to including paragraphs about perjury counts in the presentence report.)
DOJ-OGR-00021559.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,626 characters)
Case 22-1426, Document 78, 06/29/2023, 3536039, Page129 of 217
SA-383
14
M6SQmax1
1 that for now.
2 Paragraph 72, defendant objects to the assertion that
3 Epstein briefly penetrated Carolyn's vagina with his penis
4 because her trial testimony the defense claims is contradicted
5 by a 2009 deposition testimony. I overrule this objection.
6 Again, I credit Carolyn's testimony. Carolyn plainly testified
7 to this at trial.
8 Paragraph 74, the defendant again objects to the
9 assertion as to the age and timing. Again, we'll pick up on
10 that issue when we discuss the appropriate guideline manual.
11 Paragraphs 75 and 76 the defendant objects to the
12 inclusion of these paragraphs in the presentence report because
13 the perjury counts have not been presented to a jury, and so
14 she contends have no bearing on the sentence in this case. I
15 do overrule this objection. A sentencing court's discretion is
16 largely unlimited as to the kind of information it may
17 consider. It's free to consider evidence of uncharged crimes,
18 dropped counts of an indictment, criminal activity resulting in
19 acquittal in determining sentence. United States v. Bennett,
20 839 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2016). I may consider the information as
21 long as the information is reliable and accurate. For the
22 following reasons, I do conclude the information underlying the
23 severed perjury charges is reliable. The defendant testified
24 under oath in 2016 that she was not aware of Epstein's scheme
25 to recruit underage girls for sexual massages and other than
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.•••
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00021559
SA-383
14
M6SQmax1
1 that for now.
2 Paragraph 72, defendant objects to the assertion that
3 Epstein briefly penetrated Carolyn's vagina with his penis
4 because her trial testimony the defense claims is contradicted
5 by a 2009 deposition testimony. I overrule this objection.
6 Again, I credit Carolyn's testimony. Carolyn plainly testified
7 to this at trial.
8 Paragraph 74, the defendant again objects to the
9 assertion as to the age and timing. Again, we'll pick up on
10 that issue when we discuss the appropriate guideline manual.
11 Paragraphs 75 and 76 the defendant objects to the
12 inclusion of these paragraphs in the presentence report because
13 the perjury counts have not been presented to a jury, and so
14 she contends have no bearing on the sentence in this case. I
15 do overrule this objection. A sentencing court's discretion is
16 largely unlimited as to the kind of information it may
17 consider. It's free to consider evidence of uncharged crimes,
18 dropped counts of an indictment, criminal activity resulting in
19 acquittal in determining sentence. United States v. Bennett,
20 839 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2016). I may consider the information as
21 long as the information is reliable and accurate. For the
22 following reasons, I do conclude the information underlying the
23 severed perjury charges is reliable. The defendant testified
24 under oath in 2016 that she was not aware of Epstein's scheme
25 to recruit underage girls for sexual massages and other than
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.•••
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00021559
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document