DOJ-OGR-00013299.jpg
606 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
4
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
606 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal discussion about the admissibility of a piece of evidence, Government Exhibit 761. An attorney, Ms. Menninger, objects to the admission of the 'financial guarantor piece' of the exhibit, which suggests Mr. Epstein provided financial assistance, arguing the school in question did not rely on it. The judge clarifies that the relevance lies in the indication of assistance itself, leading to a discussion about providing a limiting instruction to the jury.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MS. MENNINGER | Attorney |
Speaker in the transcript, arguing against the admission of a piece of evidence.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaker in the transcript, explaining the rationale for a ruling on an objection.
|
| Mr. Epstein |
Mentioned as someone who was potentially providing financial assistance to a family.
|
|
| MS. STERNHEIM | Attorney |
Speaker in the transcript, addressing the Judge.
|
Organizations (4)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| the school | educational institution |
An unnamed school that received a record (Government Exhibit 761) and used it for admissions decisions.
|
| government | government agency |
Mentioned as the source of "Government Exhibit 761" and offering a piece of evidence.
|
| THE COURT | government agency |
The judicial body presiding over the case.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
The court reporting agency that transcribed the proceedings, listed at the bottom of the page.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
A legal argument took place concerning an objection to the admission of Government Exhibit 761, specifically a part of it related to financial guarantees.
Courtroom
Relationships (3)
Ms. Menninger, an attorney, addresses the judge as 'Your Honor' while making legal arguments.
Ms. Sternheim, an attorney, addresses the judge as 'Judge'.
The document discusses the relevance of a record indicating that 'Mr. Epstein was providing financial assistance' to 'the family'.
Key Quotes (3)
"Your Honor, they didn't rely on the financial guarantor piece of it, which is what the government is offering for the truth of the matter asserted therein, and that's the piece that we object to."Source
— MS. MENNINGER
(Objecting to the admission of a specific part of Government Exhibit 761.)
DOJ-OGR-00013299.jpg
Quote #1
"I'm telling you my rationale at the time for ruling on the objection was that -- the relevance was that the family at the time was indicating that -- whether it's true or not, but that Mr. Epstein was providing financial assistance."Source
— THE COURT
(Explaining the reasoning behind a prior ruling on the admissibility of the evidence.)
DOJ-OGR-00013299.jpg
Quote #2
"If it was admitted for a limited purpose then, your Honor, I would ask that there be some type of instruction given -- we can take up at the charging conference about the purposes for which that document can be considered by the jury."Source
— MS. MENNINGER
(Requesting a limiting instruction for the jury if the contested evidence is admitted.)
DOJ-OGR-00013299.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,551 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 755 Filed 08/10/22 Page 21 of 262 1726
LC8Cmaxl
LC8Cmaxl
1 articulated a theory like that with regard to this record, but
2 the testimony for Government Exhibit 761 was that the school
3 received the record, integrated it into its files, and relied
4 on it for its admissions decisions, which are a regular
5 function and practice of the school. So it would come in as a
6 business record under that line of cases.
7 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, they didn't rely on the
8 financial guarantor piece of it, which is what the government
9 is offering for the truth of the matter asserted therein, and
10 that's the piece that we object to. If they want to redact
11 that piece, I would renew my objection to the admission of that
12 and take out the piece that they're offering that was not
13 verified by the school --
14 THE COURT: I'm telling you my rationale at the time
15 for ruling on the objection was that -- the relevance was that
16 the family at the time was indicating that -- whether it's true
17 or not, but that Mr. Epstein was providing financial
18 assistance.
19 MS. MENNINGER: If it was admitted for a limited
20 purpose then, your Honor, I would ask that there be some type
21 of instruction given -- we can take up at the charging
22 conference about the purposes for which that document can be
23 considered by the jury.
24 MS. STERNHEIM: Judge, I just want to make sure that
25 the Court is aware, whereas I don't object to the admission as
2 the testimony for Government Exhibit 761 was that the school
3 received the record, integrated it into its files, and relied
4 on it for its admissions decisions, which are a regular
5 function and practice of the school. So it would come in as a
6 business record under that line of cases.
7 MS. MENNINGER: Your Honor, they didn't rely on the
8 financial guarantor piece of it, which is what the government
9 is offering for the truth of the matter asserted therein, and
10 that's the piece that we object to. If they want to redact
11 that piece, I would renew my objection to the admission of that
12 and take out the piece that they're offering that was not
13 verified by the school --
14 THE COURT: I'm telling you my rationale at the time
15 for ruling on the objection was that -- the relevance was that
16 the family at the time was indicating that -- whether it's true
17 or not, but that Mr. Epstein was providing financial
18 assistance.
19 MS. MENNINGER: If it was admitted for a limited
20 purpose then, your Honor, I would ask that there be some type
21 of instruction given -- we can take up at the charging
22 conference about the purposes for which that document can be
23 considered by the jury.
24 MS. STERNHEIM: Judge, I just want to make sure that
25 the Court is aware, whereas I don't object to the admission as
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00013299
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document