DOJ-OGR-00016753.jpg
599 KB
Extraction Summary
1
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
599 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN. It details a judge's rulings on the defense's questioning of a witness named Jane, repeatedly sustaining objections because the defense failed to properly establish a basis for inconsistency between Jane's current testimony and her prior statements from interviews in December 2019 and February 2020. The judge specifically notes that Jane's answer "I don't recall" is not inconsistent with her previous uncertainty about an incident.
People (1)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Jane | Witness / Interviewee |
The subject of questioning by the defense, whose prior statements and testimony are being scrutinized for inconsisten...
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the transcript page as the court reporting agency.
|
Timeline (3 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the name of the court reporting agency, "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
|
Relationships (1)
The defense is questioning Jane, referring to her prior interview documents from December 2019 and February 2020 in an attempt to find inconsistencies in her statements.
Key Quotes (1)
"I don't recall"Source
— Jane
(Quoted as Jane's answer to questions. The judge rules this statement is not an inconsistency with her prior statement of being unsure where an incident happened.)
DOJ-OGR-00016753.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,669 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 24 of 197 2565
LCFCmax1
LCFCmax1
1 Transcript at 471, sustained. As I said at the time,
2 the timeframe of that question was too unclear to create an
3 inconsistency and no statement was presented to Jane to explain
4 or deny it.
5 Transcript at 473 to 74, overruled. That's provided
6 admissible evidence either via stipulation or a witness is used
7 to prove the notes.
8 Transcript at 475, sustained. Jane's prior statement
9 was that she was not sure where the incident happened, so there
10 is no inconsistency. She also answered "I don't recall" to
11 each question, so there is no inconsistency.
12 Transcript 475 to 76, I'll sustain. The defense's
13 questions did not track the 302 report, does not refer to
14 whether the defendant touched Jane or not. The defense
15 referred Jane to the December 2019 interview document, but then
16 asked questions about the February 2020 interview. So there is
17 an inadequate basis for inconsistency.
18 Transcript at 476, lines 2 through 4, sustained.
19 Again, the defense referred Jane to the incorrect interview and
20 for the statement it now seeks to admit in Jane's statement
21 that she doesn't recall, she said she was not sure is not an
22 inconsistency.
23 Transcript at 476, lines 8 through 10, sustained. The
24 question follows the above entry and again fails to properly
25 orient Jane, and Jane said "I don't recall," which is not
2 the timeframe of that question was too unclear to create an
3 inconsistency and no statement was presented to Jane to explain
4 or deny it.
5 Transcript at 473 to 74, overruled. That's provided
6 admissible evidence either via stipulation or a witness is used
7 to prove the notes.
8 Transcript at 475, sustained. Jane's prior statement
9 was that she was not sure where the incident happened, so there
10 is no inconsistency. She also answered "I don't recall" to
11 each question, so there is no inconsistency.
12 Transcript 475 to 76, I'll sustain. The defense's
13 questions did not track the 302 report, does not refer to
14 whether the defendant touched Jane or not. The defense
15 referred Jane to the December 2019 interview document, but then
16 asked questions about the February 2020 interview. So there is
17 an inadequate basis for inconsistency.
18 Transcript at 476, lines 2 through 4, sustained.
19 Again, the defense referred Jane to the incorrect interview and
20 for the statement it now seeks to admit in Jane's statement
21 that she doesn't recall, she said she was not sure is not an
22 inconsistency.
23 Transcript at 476, lines 8 through 10, sustained. The
24 question follows the above entry and again fails to properly
25 orient Jane, and Jane said "I don't recall," which is not
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00016753
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document