DOJ-OGR-00016282.jpg
616 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
1
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
616 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument between attorneys (Ms. Pomerantz, Ms. Menninger, Ms. Sternheim) and the judge. The core issue is the admissibility of a witness's prior statement, specifically the use of the word 'rape', with one side arguing it is highly prejudicial and the judge ultimately overruling the objection. The discussion highlights the strategic use of witness statements and the legal standards for evidence in a trial.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| MS. POMERANTZ | Attorney |
Speaker in a court proceeding, arguing a point to the judge.
|
| A. Farmer | Witness |
Mentioned in the header as being under direct examination.
|
| your Honor | Judge |
Addressed by Ms. Pomerantz and Ms. Sternheim. Referred to as THE COURT when speaking.
|
| MS. MENNINGER | Attorney |
Speaker in a court proceeding, quoting a witness statement from discovery.
|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaker in a court proceeding, making a ruling.
|
| MS. STERNHEIM | Attorney |
Speaker in a court proceeding, arguing against the use of a specific word.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the transcript, likely the court reporting agency.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
A legal argument during a trial regarding the use of the word 'rape' in witness testimony. Attorneys discuss a witness's prior statements and the potential prejudicial effect on the jury, with the judge ultimately overruling an objection.
Courtroom
Relationships (3)
Ms. Pomerantz addresses the judge as 'your Honor' and presents her legal argument.
They are presenting opposing viewpoints and arguments during a court proceeding.
Ms. Sternheim addresses the judge directly to argue a point of law.
Key Quotes (4)
"The quote in discovery is, I told her I wasn't raped, and I don't want this to ruin my life."Source
— MS. MENNINGER
(Quoting a witness statement found during the discovery phase of the trial.)
DOJ-OGR-00016282.jpg
Quote #1
"I'm overruling."Source
— THE COURT
(The judge's ruling on the objection being discussed.)
DOJ-OGR-00016282.jpg
Quote #2
"A statement that she wasn't raped is not suggesting that she was raped; that's suggesting the opposite."Source
— THE COURT
(Explaining the reasoning for the ruling on the admissibility of the witness's statement.)
DOJ-OGR-00016282.jpg
Quote #3
"Judge, if I might add, it's the use of the word and knowing how inflammatory it is and the restrictions put on it to now allow them to even suggest, that is extremely loaded and extraordinarily prejudicial."Source
— MS. STERNHEIM
(Arguing against allowing the use of the word 'rape' in testimony due to its inflammatory nature.)
DOJ-OGR-00016282.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,574 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 759 Filed 08/10/22 Page 66 of 267 2094
LCAVMAX2
A. Farmer - direct
LCAVMAX2
A. Farmer - direct
1 MS. POMERANTZ: My understanding, your Honor, of what
2 she's going to say is that she didn't want to talk about it;
3 that something had happened. There are times where she has
4 used that word. In our several last meetings she has not used
5 that word. But she has said, I didn't want to get into details
6 with my mom. I told her something had happened.
7 MS. MENNINGER: The quote in discovery is, I told her
8 I wasn't raped, and I don't want this to ruin my life.
9 So I'm a little worried about the "rape" word being
10 used by the witness in this context, especially because we've
11 litigated extensively that consent and --
12 MS. POMERANTZ: Your Honor, the defense has put the
13 memory of the witnesses, of the victims, at issue from the
14 start at their opening, and they are incentives.
15 THE COURT: I'm overruling.
16 It's an anticipated prior consistent statement based
17 on the clear attack on the credibility of the allegations of
18 all of the alleged victims. We'll see what comes. A statement
19 that she wasn't raped is not suggesting that she was raped;
20 that's suggesting the opposite.
21 MS. STERNHEIM: Judge, if I might add, it's the use of
22 the word and knowing how inflammatory it is and the
23 restrictions put on it to now allow them to even suggest, that
24 is extremely loaded and extraordinarily prejudicial.
25 This has nothing to do with the opening with regard to
2 she's going to say is that she didn't want to talk about it;
3 that something had happened. There are times where she has
4 used that word. In our several last meetings she has not used
5 that word. But she has said, I didn't want to get into details
6 with my mom. I told her something had happened.
7 MS. MENNINGER: The quote in discovery is, I told her
8 I wasn't raped, and I don't want this to ruin my life.
9 So I'm a little worried about the "rape" word being
10 used by the witness in this context, especially because we've
11 litigated extensively that consent and --
12 MS. POMERANTZ: Your Honor, the defense has put the
13 memory of the witnesses, of the victims, at issue from the
14 start at their opening, and they are incentives.
15 THE COURT: I'm overruling.
16 It's an anticipated prior consistent statement based
17 on the clear attack on the credibility of the allegations of
18 all of the alleged victims. We'll see what comes. A statement
19 that she wasn't raped is not suggesting that she was raped;
20 that's suggesting the opposite.
21 MS. STERNHEIM: Judge, if I might add, it's the use of
22 the word and knowing how inflammatory it is and the
23 restrictions put on it to now allow them to even suggest, that
24 is extremely loaded and extraordinarily prejudicial.
25 This has nothing to do with the opening with regard to
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00016282
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document