This document is a court transcript from a summation given by Ms. Moe on August 10, 2022. Ms. Moe argues to the jury that the defense's attempt to discredit a witness named Jane by calling other women named Michelle and Ava to testify is a meaningless distraction. She emphasizes that Jane never identified the specific individuals Michelle Healey or Eva Dubin, and points out that Epstein and Maxwell's contact book contained multiple people with those common first names.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Moe | Speaker (likely prosecutor) |
The speaker delivering the summation to the jury.
|
| Michelle | Witness |
One of two people with a common first name brought in by the defense to testify.
|
| Ava | Witness |
One of two people with a common first name brought in by the defense to testify.
|
| Jane | Witness/Victim |
A key witness whom the defense is attempting to discredit. She was allegedly abused.
|
| Michelle Healey |
A specific individual whom Jane never testified was in the room during her abuse.
|
|
| Eva Dubin |
A specific individual whom Jane never testified was in the room during her abuse.
|
|
| Epstein |
Mentioned as a co-owner of a 'black contact book' which contained names of other Michelles and Evas.
|
|
| Maxwell |
Mentioned as a co-owner of a 'black contact book' with Epstein.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
| Government | government agency |
Referenced in the context of 'Government Exhibit 52'.
|
"Jane never testified that Michelle Healey and Eva Dubin were in the room when she was abused. She did not say that."Source
"Calling these women to testify was completely meaningless and it was a total sideshow. Don't be distracted by that. It was meaningless."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,629 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document