This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a discussion between a judge and a lawyer, Ms. Moe. The judge expresses concern that a witness, Brian, may have been coached by another person, Jane, during a recent conversation. Ms. Moe refutes this by arguing that Brian's testimony is consistent with statements he provided to the government long before the trial, which are documented in '3500 material', thus proving his testimony was not recently influenced.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaker in the transcript, expressing concern about potential witness coaching. Addressed as 'your Honor'.
|
| MS. MOE | Lawyer |
Speaker in the transcript, arguing against the suggestion of witness coaching by pointing to prior consistent stateme...
|
| Brian | Witness |
A witness whose testimony is being discussed. He allegedly had a conversation with Jane and had previously provided s...
|
| Jane |
A person who had a recent conversation with Brian during the trial, prompting concerns about witness coaching.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Appears in the footer of the document, likely the court reporting agency that transcribed the proceedings.
|
| the government | government agency |
Mentioned as the entity to which the witness Brian had relayed the substance of his testimony prior to the trial.
|
"Needless to say, the point that's concerning is whether she coached him on her responses so that his testimony regarding prior consistent statements would show consistency."Source
"On the subject of the prior consistent statement, I would note -- and the 3500 material reflects this -- that Brian had relayed the substance of his testimony to the government and it's memorialized in 3500 long before this conversation happened."Source
"And so to the extent there is any suggestion that his testimony is prompted by a recent conversation with Jane during the trial, that's belied by the record here, which is that he has relayed to us those prior consistent statements substantially in advance of the trial."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,487 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document