DOJ-OGR-00011655.jpg
644 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
644 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument between the government (represented by Mr. Rohrbach) and the judge. The discussion centers on whether the potential illegality of sexual conduct in New Mexico can be used as evidence for an enticement charge under New York law. The judge expresses skepticism about the government's approach, pointing out that the charges were not filed under New Mexico law and cautioning against confusing the jury.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MR. ROHRBACH | Attorney (implied) |
A speaker in the transcript, arguing on behalf of the government in response to Mr. Everdell's point.
|
| Mr. Everdell | Attorney (implied) |
Mentioned by Mr. Rohrbach, who is responding to a point he made.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
A speaker in the transcript, questioning the government's legal theory and discussing jury instructions.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
| government | Government agency |
Refers to the prosecution in the case, whose legal theory and proposed evidence are being discussed.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
A discussion in court regarding jury instructions for an enticement charge, focusing on the relevance of sexual activity that occurred in New Mexico and its legality under New Mexico law.
Southern District Court (implied)
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in the context of the "enticement charge to violate New York law."
|
|
|
The location where alleged "sexual activity" occurred, and whose state law regarding age of consent is being discussed.
|
Relationships (2)
Mr. Rohrbach is directly responding to a point made by Mr. Everdell, indicating they are opposing counsel in a legal proceeding.
Mr. Rohrbach addresses the court as 'your Honor' and presents legal arguments for the court's consideration and ruling.
Key Quotes (3)
"Just in response to Mr. Everdell's point, your Honor, the government is not prepared to concede today that the sexual activity that occurred in New Mexico was above the relevant age of consent."Source
— MR. ROHRBACH
(Stating the government's position that it will not agree that the sexual activity in New Mexico was legal.)
DOJ-OGR-00011655.jpg
Quote #1
"As we briefed in our letter, that's a complex question of New Mexico state law."Source
— MR. ROHRBACH
(Explaining why the government will not concede the legality of the sexual activity in New Mexico.)
DOJ-OGR-00011655.jpg
Quote #2
"I'm not going to -- again, that's not how you charged it. That's not how you charged it here. Right? You haven't charged pursuant to New Mexico law."Source
— THE COURT
(Questioning the government's strategy of introducing evidence about the illegality of an act under New Mexico law when the charge was not brought under that law.)
DOJ-OGR-00011655.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,914 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 34 of 43 34
LBNAMAXTps
LBNAMAXTps
1 But it seems to me these witnesses are in very
2 different postures, and therefore different risk of prejudice.
3 But I propose an instruction that I think gets to the point.
4 And it's a different instruction precisely for this reason,
5 that that sexual conduct can be relevant evidence of the
6 enticement charge to violate New York law. So I do think some
7 charge with respect to that witness, some limiting instruction
8 with respect to that witness, is necessary. I won't make it
9 confusing, and I won't allow the government to just insert its
10 theory into the charge. But I'll take a look to see if there
11 is any additional clarification. That would be helpful.
12 MR. ROHRBACH: Just in response to Mr. Everdell's
13 point, your Honor, the government is not prepared to concede
14 today that the sexual activity that occurred in New Mexico was
15 above the relevant age of consent. As we briefed in our
16 letter, that's a complex question of New Mexico state law.
17 THE COURT: So, I mean, if there's a factual question
18 that the government intends to put on, as to whether that was
19 illegal sexual activity under New Mexico law, then certainly
20 I'm not going to -- again, that's not how you charged it.
21 That's not how you charged it here. Right? You haven't
22 charged pursuant to New Mexico law. But if what the government
23 is saying is, I shouldn't give that charge because in fact
24 you're going to show that it was illegal sexual activity -- I'm
25 not going to misinform the jury that it wasn't illegal under
2 different postures, and therefore different risk of prejudice.
3 But I propose an instruction that I think gets to the point.
4 And it's a different instruction precisely for this reason,
5 that that sexual conduct can be relevant evidence of the
6 enticement charge to violate New York law. So I do think some
7 charge with respect to that witness, some limiting instruction
8 with respect to that witness, is necessary. I won't make it
9 confusing, and I won't allow the government to just insert its
10 theory into the charge. But I'll take a look to see if there
11 is any additional clarification. That would be helpful.
12 MR. ROHRBACH: Just in response to Mr. Everdell's
13 point, your Honor, the government is not prepared to concede
14 today that the sexual activity that occurred in New Mexico was
15 above the relevant age of consent. As we briefed in our
16 letter, that's a complex question of New Mexico state law.
17 THE COURT: So, I mean, if there's a factual question
18 that the government intends to put on, as to whether that was
19 illegal sexual activity under New Mexico law, then certainly
20 I'm not going to -- again, that's not how you charged it.
21 That's not how you charged it here. Right? You haven't
22 charged pursuant to New Mexico law. But if what the government
23 is saying is, I shouldn't give that charge because in fact
24 you're going to show that it was illegal sexual activity -- I'm
25 not going to misinform the jury that it wasn't illegal under
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011655
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document