DOJ-OGR-00011542.jpg
603 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
603 KB
Summary
This court transcript excerpt details a legal argument between counsel (MS. MOE) and the judge (THE COURT) about the end date of a criminal conspiracy. MS. MOE argues the conspiracy continued through the end of 2004, citing testimony from a witness named Carolyn who stated she was continually at Epstein's house during 2004 and 2005. The Court questions this line of reasoning, suggesting the actions described may constitute 'non-conspiracy conduct'.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MS. MOE | Legal Counsel (implied) |
A speaker in the transcript, arguing a legal point to the court.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
A speaker in the transcript, presiding over the case and questioning MS. MOE's argument.
|
| Carolyn | Witness |
A person whose testimony is cited by MS. MOE as evidence that a conspiracy was ongoing.
|
| Epstein | Subject of testimony |
Mentioned as the owner of the house that witness Carolyn was continually going to.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the page, likely the court reporting agency that transcribed the proceeding.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
A location that witness Carolyn testified she was continually visiting during 2004 and 2005.
|
Relationships (2)
The document is a transcript of a formal court proceeding where MS. MOE addresses THE COURT as 'your Honor'.
Key Quotes (3)
"I think our point is that the conspiracy was still live at the end of 2004, and we know that because in fact the conspiracy was still ongoing beyond that..."Source
— MS. MOE
(Arguing to the court about the duration of the conspiracy.)
DOJ-OGR-00011542.jpg
Quote #1
"...what you point to to make that argument is definitionally non-conspiracy conduct."Source
— THE COURT
(Challenging MS. MOE's argument and the evidence she presented.)
DOJ-OGR-00011542.jpg
Quote #2
"...Carolyn testified that she was continually going to Epstein's house through age 17 and through age 18, which would have been throughout the duration of 2004 and 2005."Source
— MS. MOE
(Citing witness testimony as evidence for her argument that the conspiracy was ongoing.)
DOJ-OGR-00011542.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,461 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 Page 23 of 101
M6SQmax1
M6SQmax1
evidence.
MS. MOE: No, your Honor. I think our point is that
the conspiracy was still live at the end of 2004, and we know
that because in fact the conspiracy was still ongoing beyond
that, and I don't mean to be --
the conspiracy was still live at the end of 2004, and we know
that because in fact the conspiracy was still ongoing beyond
that, and I don't mean to be --
THE COURT: But, see, just in that sentence, the
conspiracy was going on beyond that, what you point to, I
think -- and tell me if I should look at something else, but
what you point to to make that argument is definitionally
non-conspiracy conduct.
conspiracy was going on beyond that, what you point to, I
think -- and tell me if I should look at something else, but
what you point to to make that argument is definitionally
non-conspiracy conduct.
MS. MOE: No, your Honor, in part because -- well, to
step back and discuss the framing of the issue. The question
is whether a conspiracy was still ongoing throughout 2004. And
the key thought tells us it's the defendant's burden to show
that she withdraw from the conspiracy if it was ongoing. The
question is in framing it, when did this conspiracy end. We
know that it was still live as of the end of 2004, in fact,
because, among other reasons, Carolyn testified that she was
continually going to Epstein's house through age 17 and through
age 18, which would have been throughout the duration of 2004
and 2005.
step back and discuss the framing of the issue. The question
is whether a conspiracy was still ongoing throughout 2004. And
the key thought tells us it's the defendant's burden to show
that she withdraw from the conspiracy if it was ongoing. The
question is in framing it, when did this conspiracy end. We
know that it was still live as of the end of 2004, in fact,
because, among other reasons, Carolyn testified that she was
continually going to Epstein's house through age 17 and through
age 18, which would have been throughout the duration of 2004
and 2005.
The government is not required to show that any
conspirator took an action in between those specific dates
because the question is when did the conspiracy terminate? Was
it still live at the end of 2004? And the evidence here shows
conspirator took an action in between those specific dates
because the question is when did the conspiracy terminate? Was
it still live at the end of 2004? And the evidence here shows
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011542
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document