DOJ-OGR-00016946.jpg
567 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
567 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. It captures a legal debate where attorney Rohrbach argues for the distinct meanings of "force" and "coercion" in a sex trafficking statute. The Court overrules an objection by attorney Everdell, who then ensures his objection is preserved for the record before moving on in the proceedings.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaking as the judge, questioning attorneys and making rulings during a court proceeding.
|
| MR. ROHRBACH | Attorney |
Addressing the court, providing a legal argument about the distinction between "force" and "coercion" in a sex traffi...
|
| MR. EVERDELL | Attorney |
Addressing the court, responding to a ruling, and seeking to preserve an objection for the record regarding proposed ...
|
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 (1 events)
2022-08-10
A legal discussion took place regarding the distinction between 'force' and 'coercion' in a sex trafficking statute. The Court overruled an objection but allowed it to be preserved for the record.
Courtroom (implied)
Relationships (2)
The Court questions Mr. Rohrbach on the legal support for his argument, indicating a standard judge-attorney interaction during a hearing.
The Court overrules Mr. Everdell's objection and then acknowledges his request to preserve the objection, demonstrating the formal dynamic between a judge and an attorney.
Key Quotes (3)
"Your Honor, one good reason to think that coercion does not involve force is that the sex trafficking statute includes criminal activity by force, fraud, or coercion, and in that statute, "force" and "coercion" carry different meanings."Source
— MR. ROHRBACH
(Providing a legal argument to the Court to differentiate between the terms 'force' and 'coercion'.)
DOJ-OGR-00016946.jpg
Quote #1
"Okay. I'm going to overrule the objection. So that will remain."Source
— THE COURT
(Making a ruling on an objection raised during the proceedings.)
DOJ-OGR-00016946.jpg
Quote #2
"But I would like to just preserve those, preserve my suggestions, similar ones in similar charges."Source
— MR. EVERDELL
(Requesting that his proposed changes and objections be officially recorded for potential future appeals, despite the Court's ruling.)
DOJ-OGR-00016946.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,419 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 20 of 95 2758
LCI1MAX1
LCI1MAX1
1 used, and if that's not the Court's opinion, then --
2 THE COURT: I'm just asking if you have any legal
3 support for that principle.
4 MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, one good reason to think
5 that coercion does not involve force is that the sex
6 trafficking statute includes criminal activity by force, fraud,
7 or coercion, and in that statute, "force" and "coercion" carry
8 different meanings.
9 THE COURT: Okay. I'm going to overrule the
10 objection. So that will remain.
11 Next page, Mr. Everdell.
12 MR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor. Before I get to the
13 next page, just for purposes of clarity, if the Court overrules
14 a proposed edit, I would still note that I have that same
15 proposal going through my changes. I just won't reiterate it.
16 But I would like to just preserve those, preserve my
17 suggestions, similar ones in similar charges.
18 THE COURT: So you would repeat your request to remove
19 "coercion" from every instance, so that is preserved.
20 MR. EVERDELL: Correct, your Honor.
21 All right. So we can go to page 20 now, your Honor.
22 THE COURT: Okay.
23 MR. EVERDELL: All right. So on this one, your Honor,
24 I understand, we're talking about the substantive count, and I
25 do understand that because the way the charge is organized and
2 THE COURT: I'm just asking if you have any legal
3 support for that principle.
4 MR. ROHRBACH: Your Honor, one good reason to think
5 that coercion does not involve force is that the sex
6 trafficking statute includes criminal activity by force, fraud,
7 or coercion, and in that statute, "force" and "coercion" carry
8 different meanings.
9 THE COURT: Okay. I'm going to overrule the
10 objection. So that will remain.
11 Next page, Mr. Everdell.
12 MR. EVERDELL: Yes, your Honor. Before I get to the
13 next page, just for purposes of clarity, if the Court overrules
14 a proposed edit, I would still note that I have that same
15 proposal going through my changes. I just won't reiterate it.
16 But I would like to just preserve those, preserve my
17 suggestions, similar ones in similar charges.
18 THE COURT: So you would repeat your request to remove
19 "coercion" from every instance, so that is preserved.
20 MR. EVERDELL: Correct, your Honor.
21 All right. So we can go to page 20 now, your Honor.
22 THE COURT: Okay.
23 MR. EVERDELL: All right. So on this one, your Honor,
24 I understand, we're talking about the substantive count, and I
25 do understand that because the way the charge is organized and
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00016946
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document