DOJ-OGR-00019138.jpg
619 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
619 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a procedural debate between legal counsel and a judge. An unnamed attorney objects to Ms. Moe's proposal to have a witness, Mr. Buscemi, present exhibits to the jury, arguing it prevents substantive cross-examination and resembles a closing argument. Ms. Moe defends the method as a streamlined process to show the jury evidence they haven't yet seen.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Honor | Judge |
Addressed by the speakers as 'Honor' and 'Your Honor', presiding over the legal proceeding.
|
| Mr. Buscemi | Witness |
Mentioned as a witness whose testimony would be limited to identifying exhibits, without the possibility of substanti...
|
| MS. MOE | Attorney |
A speaker in the transcript who is proposing a method of presenting evidence with a witness to the jury.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the document as the court reporting service.
|
| the Court | Government agency |
Mentioned by Ms. Moe in acknowledging the judge's concerns ('I understand the Court's concerns').
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
A procedural argument in court regarding the method of presenting evidence to a jury. An unnamed speaker objects to a proposed method of showing exhibits with a witness, Mr. Buscemi, arguing it's akin to a closing argument and prevents proper cross-examination. Ms. Moe defends the proposal as a streamlined way to present evidence the jury has not yet seen.
Courtroom (implied)
Relationships (2)
Ms. Moe, likely an attorney, addresses the 'Honor' (judge) directly to argue a point of legal procedure during a hearing.
An unnamed speaker, likely an attorney, addresses the 'Honor' (judge) to make an objection and argue a point of legal procedure.
Key Quotes (2)
"This witness, Mr. -- if I'm saying it correctly, Mr. Buscemi, can't be cross-examined substantively about anything; all he's going to be able to say would be, I looked at this, and I looked at that, and I looked at this, I looked at that, and those are the exhibits."Source
— Unnamed Speaker
(Explaining the limitations of Mr. Buscemi's potential testimony as a basis for objecting to the proposed method of presenting evidence.)
DOJ-OGR-00019138.jpg
Quote #1
"Your Honor, that's why we propose doing this with a witness, to avoid any, sort of, awkwardness. But I don't understand the objection to publishing items that are in evidence that the jury has not yet seen."Source
— MS. MOE
(Defending the proposed method of presenting evidence to the jury through a witness.)
DOJ-OGR-00019138.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,776 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 757 Filed 08/10/22 Page 14 of 49 1987
LC9VMAXT
LC9VMAXT
1 Honor. This is classically what someone would do in a closing
2 argument. You can put this in a Power Point and put up a
3 screen that shows this, and then put up a screen that shows
4 that, and then make an argument about it.
5 And if they wanted to elicit this testimony, it should
6 have been done, I believe, with a witness that then could be
7 cross-examined substantively about what was being discussed.
8 This witness, Mr. -- if I'm saying it correctly,
9 Mr. Buscemi, can't be cross-examined substantively about
10 anything; all he's going to be able to say would be, I looked
11 at this, and I looked at that, and I looked at this, I looked
12 at that, and those are the exhibits.
13 So I guess I'm a little confused about the process,
14 where one would just look at a jury and say, Look at this and
15 then look at that. And I don't understand why that isn't, sort
16 of, impermissibly highlighting certain pieces of evidence. And
17 then, you know, am I allowed to get up and say, Why don't you
18 look at this and why don't you look at that? It just seems
19 rather awkward to me to be doing it in that fashion.
20 MS. MOE: Your Honor, that's why we propose doing this
21 with a witness, to avoid any, sort of, awkwardness. But I
22 don't understand the objection to publishing items that are in
23 evidence that the jury has not yet seen. Again, our hope was
24 for this to be very streamlined; but I understand the Court's
25 concerns.
2 argument. You can put this in a Power Point and put up a
3 screen that shows this, and then put up a screen that shows
4 that, and then make an argument about it.
5 And if they wanted to elicit this testimony, it should
6 have been done, I believe, with a witness that then could be
7 cross-examined substantively about what was being discussed.
8 This witness, Mr. -- if I'm saying it correctly,
9 Mr. Buscemi, can't be cross-examined substantively about
10 anything; all he's going to be able to say would be, I looked
11 at this, and I looked at that, and I looked at this, I looked
12 at that, and those are the exhibits.
13 So I guess I'm a little confused about the process,
14 where one would just look at a jury and say, Look at this and
15 then look at that. And I don't understand why that isn't, sort
16 of, impermissibly highlighting certain pieces of evidence. And
17 then, you know, am I allowed to get up and say, Why don't you
18 look at this and why don't you look at that? It just seems
19 rather awkward to me to be doing it in that fashion.
20 MS. MOE: Your Honor, that's why we propose doing this
21 with a witness, to avoid any, sort of, awkwardness. But I
22 don't understand the objection to publishing items that are in
23 evidence that the jury has not yet seen. Again, our hope was
24 for this to be very streamlined; but I understand the Court's
25 concerns.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00019138
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document