DOJ-OGR-00013555.jpg
619 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
3
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 argument between legal counsel and the judge. The discussion centers on the appropriate method for presenting exhibits to a jury, specifically concerning a witness, Mr. Buscemi, whose testimony would be limited to simply identifying the items. An attorney, Ms. Moe, defends her proposed streamlined approach against objections that it is improper and prevents substantive cross-examination.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Judge | Honor |
Addressed as "Honor" and "Your Honor" by the speakers. The judge is presiding over the legal proceeding.
|
| Mr. Buscemi | Witness |
Mentioned as a witness who cannot be substantively cross-examined and would only identify exhibits.
|
| Ms. Moe | Attorney |
A speaker in the transcript who addresses the judge ("Your Honor") to explain a proposed method for presenting eviden...
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Court | government agency |
Mentioned in the phrase "the Court's concerns," referring to the judicial body.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in the name of the court reporting agency, indicating the location of the court.
|
Relationships (3)
Ms. Moe addresses the judge as "Your Honor" while presenting a legal argument in a courtroom setting.
An unnamed speaker addresses the judge as "Honor" while making a legal argument in a courtroom setting.
Mr. Buscemi is identified as a witness in the legal proceeding being discussed.
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
(Arguing against a proposed method of presenting evidence by highlighting the limited testimony of the witness.)
DOJ-OGR-00013555.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 judge.)
DOJ-OGR-00013555.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,758 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-00013555
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document