DOJ-OGR-00008413.jpg
612 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
612 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from a hearing dated December 17, 2021, in the case against Ms. Maxwell. The prosecution, represented by Ms. Moe, is arguing that the defense should be precluded from introducing statements from other alleged victims unless they first formally proffer which witnesses they intend to call. The government contends this is necessary to prevent the introduction of inappropriate hearsay evidence during opening statements or cross-examination.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MS. STERNHEIM | Attorney |
Appears as a speaker in the transcript, likely representing the defense, agreeing with the court's decision to defer ...
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant (implied) |
Mentioned in the context of the government's argument regarding evidence of her "failure to commit other bad acts."
|
| MS. MOE | Attorney |
Appears as a speaker in the transcript, likely representing the government, arguing against the defense introducing c...
|
| your Honor | Judge |
Addressed by Ms. Moe, referring to the judge presiding over the case (THE COURT).
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| THE COURT | government agency |
Refers to the presiding judicial body, which makes rulings and directs the hearing.
|
| Government | government agency |
Refers to the prosecution in the case, which is arguing a motion to require the defense to proffer evidence.
|
| 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)
2021-12-17
A court hearing where the government argues that the defense should be required to proffer the basis and relevance of evidence concerning Ms. Maxwell's alleged failure to commit other bad acts, specifically regarding statements from victims not at issue in the case.
Courtroom
Relationships (3)
They are on opposing sides in a legal proceeding, with Ms. Sternheim representing the defense and Ms. Moe representing the government.
It is implied that Ms. Sternheim is part of the defense team for Ms. Maxwell.
Ms. Moe is speaking on behalf of the government, presenting its arguments to the court.
Key Quotes (4)
"So we will defer on that. In light of the overlap on the 412 issues we will take that up at the 412 hearing."Source
— THE COURT
(The judge's ruling to postpone discussion on a particular issue.)
DOJ-OGR-00008413.jpg
Quote #1
"The government argues that before offering evidence or argument of Ms. Maxwell's failure to commit other bad acts it should require the defense to proffer the basis and the relevance of such evidence."Source
— THE COURT
(Summarizing the government's motion before hearing arguments.)
DOJ-OGR-00008413.jpg
Quote #2
"The concern here is what the defense has flagged in its opening papers relating to statements by other victims who were interviewed during the course of the government's investigation."Source
— MS. MOE
(Explaining the government's specific concern about the evidence the defense may try to introduce.)
DOJ-OGR-00008413.jpg
Quote #3
"Evidence along those lines, if proffered in an opening statement, or if asked about in cross-examination of a law enforcement officer, would be inappropriate and hearsay."Source
— MS. MOE
(Arguing that the potential evidence from the defense would be legally inadmissible.)
DOJ-OGR-00008413.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,542 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 549-1 Filed 12/17/21 Page 19 of 24 31
LB15MAX2
LB15MAX2
1 sense to address this issue at the same time.
2 MS. STERNHEIM: We agree.
3 THE COURT: So we will defer on that. In light of the
4 overlap on the 412 issues we will take that up at the 412
5 hearing.
6 Government's 7. The government argues that before
7 offering evidence or argument of Ms. Maxwell's failure to
8 commit other bad acts it should require the defense to proffer
9 the basis and the relevance of such evidence. Let me hear from
10 the government what the specific concern is here and then I
11 will speak to the defense.
12 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. Thank you.
13 The concern here is what the defense has flagged in
14 its opening papers relating to statements by other victims who
15 were interviewed during the course of the government's
16 investigation. Evidence along those lines, if proffered in an
17 opening statement, or if asked about in cross-examination of a
18 law enforcement officer, would be inappropriate and hearsay.
19 Such evidence could only come in at trial, if at all, if the
20 defense called, as defense witnesses, victims who were not at
21 issue in this case. And so, for that reason, your Honor, the
22 defense should be precluded from opening on this issue unless
23 and until they proffer which victims these statements would
24 come through, who they would anticipate calling as defense
25 witnesses at trial so the Court can assess whether that is
2 MS. STERNHEIM: We agree.
3 THE COURT: So we will defer on that. In light of the
4 overlap on the 412 issues we will take that up at the 412
5 hearing.
6 Government's 7. The government argues that before
7 offering evidence or argument of Ms. Maxwell's failure to
8 commit other bad acts it should require the defense to proffer
9 the basis and the relevance of such evidence. Let me hear from
10 the government what the specific concern is here and then I
11 will speak to the defense.
12 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. Thank you.
13 The concern here is what the defense has flagged in
14 its opening papers relating to statements by other victims who
15 were interviewed during the course of the government's
16 investigation. Evidence along those lines, if proffered in an
17 opening statement, or if asked about in cross-examination of a
18 law enforcement officer, would be inappropriate and hearsay.
19 Such evidence could only come in at trial, if at all, if the
20 defense called, as defense witnesses, victims who were not at
21 issue in this case. And so, for that reason, your Honor, the
22 defense should be precluded from opening on this issue unless
23 and until they proffer which victims these statements would
24 come through, who they would anticipate calling as defense
25 witnesses at trial so the Court can assess whether that is
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00008413
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document