DOJ-OGR-00011551.jpg
640 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
640 KB
Summary
This document is an excerpt from a court transcript where an unidentified speaker argues against the assertion that Ms. Maxwell supervised Sarah Kellen. The speaker cites trial testimony from witnesses Carolyn and Juan Alessi to support the claim that Kellen replaced Maxwell in the role of scheduling massage appointments, indicating a 'clear break' and a replacement of duties rather than ongoing supervision.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Sarah Kellen |
Discussed as the person who took over scheduling massage appointments from Ms. Maxwell. The central point of discussi...
|
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Mentioned as the defendant. The text argues she did not supervise Sarah Kellen but was instead replaced by her in the...
|
| Carolyn | Witness |
Her testimony is cited as evidence that there was a 'clear break' between when Ms. Maxwell scheduled appointments and...
|
| Juan Alessi | Witness |
His testimony is mentioned as corroborating Carolyn's, stating that Sarah Kellen took over scheduling massage appoint...
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Second Circuit | Government agency |
Mentioned in the context of the law regarding the supervision of a criminal participant.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the page, likely the court reporting agency that transcribed the proceedings.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Sarah Kellen took over the responsibility of scheduling massage appointments from Ms. Maxwell.
Carolyn and Juan Alessi provided testimony during a trial regarding the roles of Ms. Maxwell and Sarah Kellen.
Relationships (1)
The document discusses whether Ms. Maxwell supervised Sarah Kellen. The speaker argues, based on witness testimony, that Kellen replaced Maxwell in her duties, implying no supervisory relationship existed for that task.
Key Quotes (2)
"I don't think it is a fair inference to say from the trial record that Ms. Maxwell was supervising Sarah Kellen. In fact, the inference is exactly the opposite."Source
— Unknown
(The speaker is arguing against the idea that Ms. Maxwell supervised Sarah Kellen, based on the trial record.)
DOJ-OGR-00011551.jpg
Quote #1
"What the record shows is that there was a replacement. Sarah Kellen replaced Ms. Maxwell, at least according to the trial testimony; not that there was some sort of ongoing supervision by Ms. Maxwell over Sarah Kellen."Source
— Unknown
(The speaker summarizes their argument that the evidence points to a replacement of duties, not supervision.)
DOJ-OGR-00011551.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,566 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 Page 32 of 101
M6SQmax1
M6SQmax1
already been decided or conceded by the defendant. The court
found they were leader or the defendant didn't contest that, so
the issue was only about whether the criminal activity was
otherwise extensive. So that is not -- that is clear under
Second Circuit law, that they have to supervise another
criminal participant, and it's clear from the guidelines too,
as the government concedes.
Let's just talk a bit about Sarah Kellen. I don't
think it is a fair inference to say from the trial record that
Ms. Maxwell was supervising Sarah Kellen. In fact, the
inference is exactly the opposite. And you can rely on
Carolyn's testimony alone for that; that she herself testified
that there was a clear break between when she says that
Ms. Maxwell was calling her to schedule for massage
appointments versus when Sarah Kellen took over and scheduled
for massage appointments. They did not overlap. There was a
break. That is corroborated by Juan Alessi no less, who said
the same thing. He said Sarah Kellen came at the end of my
employment, to his recollection, and as soon as she got there,
she took over the responsibility of scheduling the massage
appointments. Again, a clear break.
What the record shows is that there was a replacement.
Sarah Kellen replaced Ms. Maxwell, at least according to the
trial testimony; not that there was some sort of ongoing
supervision by Ms. Maxwell over Sarah Kellen. It couldn't be
found they were leader or the defendant didn't contest that, so
the issue was only about whether the criminal activity was
otherwise extensive. So that is not -- that is clear under
Second Circuit law, that they have to supervise another
criminal participant, and it's clear from the guidelines too,
as the government concedes.
Let's just talk a bit about Sarah Kellen. I don't
think it is a fair inference to say from the trial record that
Ms. Maxwell was supervising Sarah Kellen. In fact, the
inference is exactly the opposite. And you can rely on
Carolyn's testimony alone for that; that she herself testified
that there was a clear break between when she says that
Ms. Maxwell was calling her to schedule for massage
appointments versus when Sarah Kellen took over and scheduled
for massage appointments. They did not overlap. There was a
break. That is corroborated by Juan Alessi no less, who said
the same thing. He said Sarah Kellen came at the end of my
employment, to his recollection, and as soon as she got there,
she took over the responsibility of scheduling the massage
appointments. Again, a clear break.
What the record shows is that there was a replacement.
Sarah Kellen replaced Ms. Maxwell, at least according to the
trial testimony; not that there was some sort of ongoing
supervision by Ms. Maxwell over Sarah Kellen. It couldn't be
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
•
•
•
(212) 805-0300
•
•
•
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011551
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document