DOJ-OGR-00018532.jpg
626 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
626 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument over the admissibility of a schoolgirl outfit as evidence. The prosecution argues the outfit corroborates a witness's testimony about Epstein's 'practice' of asking people to wear such costumes. The defense, represented by Mr. Everdell, contends the evidence is highly prejudicial, based on a single witness, and insufficient to establish a pattern, a position with which the judge seems to agree.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein |
Mentioned as the individual who allegedly possessed schoolgirl outfits and had a practice of asking people to wear them.
|
|
| MR. EVERDELL | Attorney |
Speaker arguing against the admission of evidence, claiming it is prejudicial and based on a single witness.
|
| Your Honor | Judge |
Addressed by the speakers in the courtroom.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaker who indicates agreement with Mr. Everdell's argument.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
A legal argument took place regarding the admissibility of a schoolgirl outfit as evidence under Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403.
Courtroom
Relationships (2)
Mr. Everdell addresses 'Your Honor' and presents a legal argument, to which 'THE COURT' responds, indicating a standard lawyer-judge interaction in a legal proceeding.
The transcript discusses the witness's testimony that Epstein asked her to wear a schoolgirl outfit, which was his alleged 'practice'.
Key Quotes (4)
"The point is not to identify these as the particular outfits, but to corroborate the fact that that was, in fact, his practice and, thus, that her testimony on that score was credible."Source
— Unnamed prosecutor
(Arguing for the admission of evidence to establish Epstein's pattern of behavior.)
DOJ-OGR-00018532.jpg
Quote #1
"Your Honor, the government is really trying to bootstrap here. This is the one witness who's going to say anything about a schoolgirl outfit. There's no practice."Source
— MR. EVERDELL
(Arguing against the admission of evidence, stating it's based on a single person's experience.)
DOJ-OGR-00018532.jpg
Quote #2
"When an item is found 15 years after the fact, I mean, it doesn't establish a practice certainly. And it's extraordinarily prejudicial to show these items to the jury when they are not even linked up to the witness..."Source
— MR. EVERDELL
(Further arguing that the evidence is prejudicial and lacks a direct link to the witness or a pattern of behavior.)
DOJ-OGR-00018532.jpg
Quote #3
"I'm inclined to agree."Source
— THE COURT
(Responding to Mr. Everdell's argument against admitting the evidence.)
DOJ-OGR-00018532.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,632 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 751 Filed 08/10/22 Page 195 of 261 1356
LC6VMAX6
LC6VMAX6
1 she was asked to wear a schoolgirl outfit. And the jury will
2 know that that's true because Epstein did, in fact, possess
3 such outfits; that it was his practice to maintain them, to ask
4 people to wear them; that what she told the jury was true; that
5 that is a very specific type of costume, and that was his
6 practice. It corroborates her testimony.
7 The point is not to identify these as the particular
8 outfits, but to corroborate the fact that that was, in fact,
9 his practice and, thus, that her testimony on that score was
10 credible. That's why we're offering this evidence, your Honor.
11 MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, the government is really
12 trying to bootstrap here. This is the one witness who's going
13 to say anything about a schoolgirl outfit. There's no
14 practice. There's one person's experience. And I would think
15 that they are also ignoring the 403 issue. It's not just some
16 sort of weight issue; it goes to prejudice. When an item is
17 found 15 years after the fact, I mean, it doesn't establish a
18 practice certainly. And it's extraordinarily prejudicial to
19 show these items to the jury when they are not even linked up
20 to the witness who actually is the one person who has a story
21 about a schoolgirl outfit.
22 THE COURT: I'm inclined to agree.
23 I'll look at the specific testimony, but I think, as I
24 sit here, 401/403 grounds -- well, first -- yes, 401/403
25 grounds, I think it's probably out. I don't know whether -- I
2 know that that's true because Epstein did, in fact, possess
3 such outfits; that it was his practice to maintain them, to ask
4 people to wear them; that what she told the jury was true; that
5 that is a very specific type of costume, and that was his
6 practice. It corroborates her testimony.
7 The point is not to identify these as the particular
8 outfits, but to corroborate the fact that that was, in fact,
9 his practice and, thus, that her testimony on that score was
10 credible. That's why we're offering this evidence, your Honor.
11 MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, the government is really
12 trying to bootstrap here. This is the one witness who's going
13 to say anything about a schoolgirl outfit. There's no
14 practice. There's one person's experience. And I would think
15 that they are also ignoring the 403 issue. It's not just some
16 sort of weight issue; it goes to prejudice. When an item is
17 found 15 years after the fact, I mean, it doesn't establish a
18 practice certainly. And it's extraordinarily prejudicial to
19 show these items to the jury when they are not even linked up
20 to the witness who actually is the one person who has a story
21 about a schoolgirl outfit.
22 THE COURT: I'm inclined to agree.
23 I'll look at the specific testimony, but I think, as I
24 sit here, 401/403 grounds -- well, first -- yes, 401/403
25 grounds, I think it's probably out. I don't know whether -- I
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00018532
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document