DOJ-OGR-00008307.jpg
740 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing / legal order (case 1:20-cr-00330-pae)
File Size:
740 KB
Summary
This document is page 5 of a court filing (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated December 9, 2021, regarding the Ghislaine Maxwell trial. The text discusses the legal admissibility of Government Exhibit 52 (GX 52), identified as a household directory from the Palm Beach property. The court argues that witness Mr. Alessi sufficiently authenticated the book based on his familiarity with it, despite Defense objections regarding the chain of custody and physical alterations (Post-it notes, pencil markings).
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Alessi | Witness |
Provided testimony authenticating GX 52 (household directories); established familiarity with Palm Beach household.
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant (implied) |
Mentioned in footnote regarding a transcript of her April 2016 civil deposition.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| United States District Court |
Implied by case styling and citations (S.D.N.Y., E.D.N.Y.).
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (referenced in footer Bates stamp).
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location where the directories (GX 52) were used over many years.
|
Relationships (1)
testimony established an intimate familiarity with the distinctive directories used in the Palm Beach household over many years
Key Quotes (4)
"Mr. Alessi’s testimony established an intimate familiarity with the distinctive directories used in the Palm Beach household over many years"Source
DOJ-OGR-00008307.jpg
Quote #1
"He testified that GX 52 was the same 'type of book,' with the same type of binding, cover, and information."Source
DOJ-OGR-00008307.jpg
Quote #2
"But it is well settled that 'any flaws in the chain of custody bear only on the weight of the evidence, and not on its admissibility.'"Source
DOJ-OGR-00008307.jpg
Quote #3
"Nor could he explain the addition of Post-It notes and other pencil markings in the otherwise type-face book."Source
DOJ-OGR-00008307.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,305 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 535 Filed 12/09/21 Page 5 of 8
3140366, at *4 (E.D.N.Y. 2017) (“The Court is unaware of any authority that authentication of
emails can only come through a witness with direct knowledge of the drafting, and Defendant
provides none.”).
emails can only come through a witness with direct knowledge of the drafting, and Defendant
provides none.”).
Concluding that Mr. Alessi’s testimony sufficiently authenticates GX 52 follows this
well-tread path. Mr. Alessi’s testimony established an intimate familiarity with the distinctive
directories used in the Palm Beach household over many years and during the time period of the
charged conspiracy. He testified that GX 52 was the same “type of book,” with the same type of
binding, cover, and information. This testimony of the appearance, content, substance, and other
distinctive characteristics of the exhibit is sufficient to satisfy Rule 901.2
well-tread path. Mr. Alessi’s testimony established an intimate familiarity with the distinctive
directories used in the Palm Beach household over many years and during the time period of the
charged conspiracy. He testified that GX 52 was the same “type of book,” with the same type of
binding, cover, and information. This testimony of the appearance, content, substance, and other
distinctive characteristics of the exhibit is sufficient to satisfy Rule 901.2
The Defense’s further objections go to the weight of the evidence, not its admissibility.
See Tin Yat Chin, 371 F.3d at 38. For example, Mr. Alessi was crossed on voir dire that he did
not have personal knowledge about the creation of GX 52 or how the exhibit had been
maintained since it was allegedly removed from the house. Trial Tr. at 875. He acknowledged
that he would not know whether GX 52 had been altered in some way, such as whether pages
had been added or whether it had been rebound. Nor could he explain the addition of Post-It
notes and other pencil markings in the otherwise type-face book. Trial Tr. at 872-75. But it is
well settled that “any flaws in the chain of custody bear only on the weight of the evidence, and
not on its admissibility.” United States v. Stuckey, No. 06 Cr. 339 (RPP), 2007 WL 2962594, at
*7 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (citing United States v. Morrison, 153 F.3d 34, 57 (2d Cir. 1998)). Thus,
arguments as to the Government’s possession of the document or how it has been maintained do
not go to authentication. See Al Farekh, 810 F. App’x at 25 (“Although the Government did not
present evidence regarding the circumstances surrounding the seizure of the USB drive, . . . . any
See Tin Yat Chin, 371 F.3d at 38. For example, Mr. Alessi was crossed on voir dire that he did
not have personal knowledge about the creation of GX 52 or how the exhibit had been
maintained since it was allegedly removed from the house. Trial Tr. at 875. He acknowledged
that he would not know whether GX 52 had been altered in some way, such as whether pages
had been added or whether it had been rebound. Nor could he explain the addition of Post-It
notes and other pencil markings in the otherwise type-face book. Trial Tr. at 872-75. But it is
well settled that “any flaws in the chain of custody bear only on the weight of the evidence, and
not on its admissibility.” United States v. Stuckey, No. 06 Cr. 339 (RPP), 2007 WL 2962594, at
*7 (S.D.N.Y. 2007) (citing United States v. Morrison, 153 F.3d 34, 57 (2d Cir. 1998)). Thus,
arguments as to the Government’s possession of the document or how it has been maintained do
not go to authentication. See Al Farekh, 810 F. App’x at 25 (“Although the Government did not
present evidence regarding the circumstances surrounding the seizure of the USB drive, . . . . any
______________________________________________________________________________
2 The Court notes that this conclusion does not rely on the Government’s citation in its December 8, 2021, letter to
the transcript of Ms. Maxwell’s April 2016 civil deposition.
5
2 The Court notes that this conclusion does not rely on the Government’s citation in its December 8, 2021, letter to
the transcript of Ms. Maxwell’s April 2016 civil deposition.
5
DOJ-OGR-00008307
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document