DOJ-OGR-00011533.jpg
638 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
3
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
638 KB
Summary
This document is a transcript from a legal proceeding, dated July 22, 2022, in which a judge is ruling on objections made by the defendant. The judge overrules objections to including testimony from a victim named Carolyn about a sexual assault by Epstein and information about perjury charges in a presentence report. The judge affirms the court's broad discretion in considering such information for sentencing and states a belief in the reliability of both Carolyn's testimony and the information underlying the perjury charges.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein |
Mentioned as the perpetrator of a sexual assault on Carolyn and the orchestrator of a scheme to recruit underage girls.
|
|
| Carolyn | Witness |
A witness whose testimony about being sexually assaulted by Epstein is being discussed and credited by the speaker.
|
| Bennett |
Named in the legal case citation 'United States v. Bennett'.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the document, likely the court reporting agency that transcribed the proceedings.
|
| 2d Cir. | Government agency |
Referenced in a legal citation, referring to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.
|
Timeline (3 events)
2009
A deposition testimony was given, which the defense claims contradicts Carolyn's trial testimony.
2016
The defendant testified under oath that she was not aware of Epstein's scheme.
The defendant
2022-07-22
A court hearing where a judge is overruling objections from the defendant regarding information in a presentence report.
The defendant
The judge
Relationships (2)
The document states that the defendant objects to the assertion that 'Epstein briefly penetrated Carolyn's vagina with his penis'.
The defendant testified in 2016 about her awareness (or lack thereof) of 'Epstein's scheme to recruit underage girls for sexual massages', indicating a connection relevant to the case.
Key Quotes (3)
"I credit Carolyn's testimony. Carolyn plainly testified to this at trial."Source
— The judge/speaker
(The speaker is overruling an objection by stating their belief in the testimony provided by Carolyn.)
DOJ-OGR-00011533.jpg
Quote #1
"A sentencing court's discretion is largely unlimited as to the kind of information it may consider."Source
— The judge/speaker
(The speaker is justifying the decision to overrule an objection regarding the inclusion of perjury counts in a presentence report.)
DOJ-OGR-00011533.jpg
Quote #2
"The defendant testified under oath in 2016 that she was not aware of Epstein's scheme to recruit underage girls for sexual massages and other than"Source
— The judge/speaker
(The speaker is referencing the defendant's prior testimony, which is related to the perjury charges being considered for sentencing.)
DOJ-OGR-00011533.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,624 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 Page 14 of 101
M6SQmax1
M6SQmax1
1 that for now.
2 Paragraph 72, defendant objects to the assertion that
3 Epstein briefly penetrated Carolyn's vagina with his penis
4 because her trial testimony the defense claims is contradicted
5 by a 2009 deposition testimony. I overrule this objection.
6 Again, I credit Carolyn's testimony. Carolyn plainly testified
7 to this at trial.
8 Paragraph 74, the defendant again objects to the
9 assertion as to the age and timing. Again, we'll pick up on
10 that issue when we discuss the appropriate guideline manual.
11 Paragraphs 75 and 76 the defendant objects to the
12 inclusion of these paragraphs in the presentence report because
13 the perjury counts have not been presented to a jury, and so
14 she contends have no bearing on the sentence in this case. I
15 do overrule this objection. A sentencing court's discretion is
16 largely unlimited as to the kind of information it may
17 consider. It's free to consider evidence of uncharged crimes,
18 dropped counts of an indictment, criminal activity resulting in
19 acquittal in determining sentence. United States v. Bennett,
20 839 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2016). I may consider the information as
21 long as the information is reliable and accurate. For the
22 following reasons, I do conclude the information underlying the
23 severed perjury charges is reliable. The defendant testified
24 under oath in 2016 that she was not aware of Epstein's scheme
25 to recruit underage girls for sexual massages and other than
2 Paragraph 72, defendant objects to the assertion that
3 Epstein briefly penetrated Carolyn's vagina with his penis
4 because her trial testimony the defense claims is contradicted
5 by a 2009 deposition testimony. I overrule this objection.
6 Again, I credit Carolyn's testimony. Carolyn plainly testified
7 to this at trial.
8 Paragraph 74, the defendant again objects to the
9 assertion as to the age and timing. Again, we'll pick up on
10 that issue when we discuss the appropriate guideline manual.
11 Paragraphs 75 and 76 the defendant objects to the
12 inclusion of these paragraphs in the presentence report because
13 the perjury counts have not been presented to a jury, and so
14 she contends have no bearing on the sentence in this case. I
15 do overrule this objection. A sentencing court's discretion is
16 largely unlimited as to the kind of information it may
17 consider. It's free to consider evidence of uncharged crimes,
18 dropped counts of an indictment, criminal activity resulting in
19 acquittal in determining sentence. United States v. Bennett,
20 839 F.3d 153 (2d Cir. 2016). I may consider the information as
21 long as the information is reliable and accurate. For the
22 following reasons, I do conclude the information underlying the
23 severed perjury charges is reliable. The defendant testified
24 under oath in 2016 that she was not aware of Epstein's scheme
25 to recruit underage girls for sexual massages and other than
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
•
•
•
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011533
•
•
•
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011533
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document