DOJ-OGR-00018300.jpg
579 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
1
Organizations
4
Locations
4
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
579 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, detailing the cross-examination of a witness named Parkinson. The questioning centers on the witness's knowledge of a house's interior, specifically comparing its appearance in a video from October 20, 2005, to how it might have looked in the mid-1990s. The witness states they were only in the house on two occasions, in 2003 and 2005, and were limited to the kitchen, office, and garden room.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Parkinson | Witness |
Mentioned in the header as the person being cross-examined.
|
| Unidentified Questioner (Q) | Attorney (implied) |
Conducting the cross-examination of the witness.
|
| Unidentified Witness (A) | Witness |
Answering questions during a cross-examination, identified as Parkinson in the header.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the transcript, likely the court reporting agency that created the document.
|
Timeline (4 events)
2005-10-20
A video was recorded showing the inside of the house, including framed photos.
A house
Locations (4)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The central subject of the testimony, discussing its appearance at different times.
|
|
|
One of three rooms the witness was in.
|
|
|
One of three rooms the witness was in.
|
|
|
One of three rooms the witness was in.
|
Relationships (1)
The document is a transcript of a cross-examination, an adversarial legal proceeding where the questioner is examining the witness, Parkinson.
Key Quotes (3)
"I'm just simply saying that the video shows a certain date, October 20th, 2005. It wouldn't show what the house looked like 10, 15 years, 20 years beforehand; correct?"Source
— Q (Unidentified Questioner)
(Questioning the witness about the limitations of what a video from 2005 can prove about the house's appearance in the 1990s.)
DOJ-OGR-00018300.jpg
Quote #1
"That was the only time I was in the house up to that date in 2003 or 2005. The second time I was in it."Source
— A (Parkinson)
(Responding to a question about the house's appearance, clarifying their limited experience inside the property.)
DOJ-OGR-00018300.jpg
Quote #2
"On the first working the case, that was in 2003 as opposed to 2005, which was totally new to me, except for the kitchen, the office, and the garden room."Source
— A (Parkinson)
(Detailing their first visit to the house in 2003 and specifying the only rooms they entered.)
DOJ-OGR-00018300.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,499 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 749 Filed 08/10/22 Page 199 of 236 1103
LC3Cmax7
Parkinson - cross
LC3Cmax7
Parkinson - cross
1 the house looked like in 1995, '96, or '97; correct?
2 A. I have no way of knowing that.
3 Q. I understand. Exactly right. It seems like an obvious
4 question. I'm just simply saying that the video shows a
5 certain date, October 20th, 2005. It wouldn't show what the
6 house looked like 10, 15 years, 20 years beforehand; correct?
7 A. I'd only have to guess on that. That was the only time I
8 was in the house up to that date in 2003 or 2005. The second
9 time I was in it. Other than that, it's hard to compare
10 because you're only in three rooms, one of which is a kitchen.
11 On the first working the case, that was in 2003 as opposed to
12 2005, which was totally new to me, except for the kitchen, the
13 office, and the garden room.
14 Q. Correct. I think we understand each other perfect.
15 Now, we saw in the video and in the photographs that
16 there were a number of framed photos around the house; is that
17 right?
18 A. True.
19 Q. But the video and the photographs of those photos don't
20 show how long any of those particular photos were in those
21 locations in the house; right?
22 A. I don't know how we'd determine that.
23 Q. Well, I think you'd agree with me that the video shows that
24 they were there on October 20th, 2005; right?
25 A. I will agree with that.
2 A. I have no way of knowing that.
3 Q. I understand. Exactly right. It seems like an obvious
4 question. I'm just simply saying that the video shows a
5 certain date, October 20th, 2005. It wouldn't show what the
6 house looked like 10, 15 years, 20 years beforehand; correct?
7 A. I'd only have to guess on that. That was the only time I
8 was in the house up to that date in 2003 or 2005. The second
9 time I was in it. Other than that, it's hard to compare
10 because you're only in three rooms, one of which is a kitchen.
11 On the first working the case, that was in 2003 as opposed to
12 2005, which was totally new to me, except for the kitchen, the
13 office, and the garden room.
14 Q. Correct. I think we understand each other perfect.
15 Now, we saw in the video and in the photographs that
16 there were a number of framed photos around the house; is that
17 right?
18 A. True.
19 Q. But the video and the photographs of those photos don't
20 show how long any of those particular photos were in those
21 locations in the house; right?
22 A. I don't know how we'd determine that.
23 Q. Well, I think you'd agree with me that the video shows that
24 they were there on October 20th, 2005; right?
25 A. I will agree with that.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00018300
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document