DOJ-OGR-00008339.jpg
563 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
563 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from December 10, 2021, detailing a discussion between an attorney, Mr. Rohrbach, and the judge. They are clarifying a point of law regarding the testimony of 'witness 3' about sexual conduct with Mr. Epstein. The core of the conversation is whether the defendant can be convicted 'solely' on this testimony or if it must be considered in combination with other evidence.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MR. ROHRBACH | Attorney |
A speaker in the transcript, arguing a point of law before the court.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
A speaker in the transcript, questioning Mr. Rohrbach on a legal clarification.
|
| witness 3 | Witness |
A witness whose testimony is the subject of the legal discussion.
|
| Mr. Epstein |
Mentioned in relation to alleged sexual conduct with witness 3, which is part of the testimony being discussed.
|
|
| the defendant | Defendant |
The individual on trial whose potential conviction is being discussed.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service that transcribed the proceedings.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2021-12-10
A legal argument and clarification between an attorney (Mr. Rohrbach) and the judge (The Court) regarding the weight and sufficiency of a witness's testimony for a conviction.
Relationships (2)
Mr. Rohrbach addresses the court as 'your Honor' and they are engaged in a formal legal discussion as part of a court proceeding.
The transcript discusses testimony regarding 'sexual conduct between this witness and Mr. Epstein'.
Key Quotes (3)
"So if you add "solely," then, to my ear, it would mean that you can convict the defendant on the basis of the testimony of witness 3 regarding the sexual conduct between this witness and Mr. Epstein, and other evidence regarding the sexual conduct between this witness and Mr. Epstein. Is that a correct statement of law?"Source
— THE COURT
(The judge questioning Mr. Rohrbach about the legal implication of adding the word 'solely' to a jury instruction or statement of law.)
DOJ-OGR-00008339.jpg
Quote #1
"Insofar as the Court has ruled that evidence related to witness 3 is direct evidence of the offense, if that is offered in combination with other evidence in the case that goes --"Source
— MR. ROHRBACH
(Responding to the judge's question, beginning to explain the government's position before being interrupted.)
DOJ-OGR-00008339.jpg
Quote #2
"The government has said that the sexual conduct between Mr. Epstein and this witness took place over all relevant ages of consent. Correct?"Source
— THE COURT
(Seeking confirmation from Mr. Rohrbach about a fact asserted by the government regarding the testimony.)
DOJ-OGR-00008339.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,647 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 536 Filed 12/10/21 Page 29 of 43 29
LBNAMAXTps
LBNAMAXTps
1 MR. ROHRBACH: I apologize, your Honor. I'm just
2 trying to pull find that. This is for the --
3 THE COURT: For witness 3.
4 MR. ROHRBACH: For witness 3. Yes, your Honor, we
5 agree that's a correct statement of the law.
6 THE COURT: But you want to add "solely."
7 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes. The government thinks that that
8 clarification --
9 THE COURT: Let me ask you this. So if you add
10 "solely," then, to my ear, it would mean that you can convict
11 the defendant on the basis of the testimony of witness 3
12 regarding the sexual conduct between this witness and
13 Mr. Epstein, and other evidence regarding the sexual conduct
14 between this witness and Mr. Epstein. Is that a correct
15 statement of law?
16 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. Insofar as the Court
17 has ruled that evidence related to witness 3 is direct evidence
18 of the offense, if that is offered in combination with other
19 evidence in the case that goes --
20 THE COURT: No, I think maybe you misunderstood my
21 question. The government has said that the sexual conduct
22 between Mr. Epstein and this witness took place over all
23 relevant ages of consent. Correct?
24 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor.
25 THE COURT: So the defendant can't be convicted based
2 trying to pull find that. This is for the --
3 THE COURT: For witness 3.
4 MR. ROHRBACH: For witness 3. Yes, your Honor, we
5 agree that's a correct statement of the law.
6 THE COURT: But you want to add "solely."
7 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes. The government thinks that that
8 clarification --
9 THE COURT: Let me ask you this. So if you add
10 "solely," then, to my ear, it would mean that you can convict
11 the defendant on the basis of the testimony of witness 3
12 regarding the sexual conduct between this witness and
13 Mr. Epstein, and other evidence regarding the sexual conduct
14 between this witness and Mr. Epstein. Is that a correct
15 statement of law?
16 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor. Insofar as the Court
17 has ruled that evidence related to witness 3 is direct evidence
18 of the offense, if that is offered in combination with other
19 evidence in the case that goes --
20 THE COURT: No, I think maybe you misunderstood my
21 question. The government has said that the sexual conduct
22 between Mr. Epstein and this witness took place over all
23 relevant ages of consent. Correct?
24 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, your Honor.
25 THE COURT: So the defendant can't be convicted based
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00008339
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document