This document is a transcript of a rebuttal argument by Ms. Comey in a criminal case against a defendant named Maxwell. Ms. Comey argues against the defense's theory that lawyers fabricated stories about Maxwell for financial gain. She presents evidence that three victims—Jane, Carolyn, and Annie—had reported Maxwell's involvement to friends, boyfriends, and the FBI years prior (in 2006 and 2007), long before any compensation fund or financial incentive existed, thus making the defense's theory untenable.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Comey |
Speaker delivering the rebuttal argument.
|
|
| Jane | Victim |
Mentioned as a victim who talked about Maxwell long ago.
|
| Carolyn | Victim |
Mentioned as a victim who talked about Maxwell long ago.
|
| Annie | Victim |
Mentioned as a victim who talked about Maxwell long ago.
|
| Maxwell | Defendant |
The defendant in the case, accused by Jane, Carolyn, and Annie.
|
| Dave Mulligan | Annie's high school boyfriend |
Annie mentioned Maxwell to him.
|
| Matt | Jane's boyfriend |
Jane told him about the woman who would make her feel comfortable.
|
| Sean |
Carolyn told him that she saw Maxwell at the house.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| FBI | government agency |
Annie and Carolyn reported information to the FBI in 2006 and 2007, respectively.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page, likely the court reporting service.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Carolyn told Sean that she saw Maxwell at the house.
|
"Remember, the payments have all been made, the lawyers got their money long before this trial started."Source
"They all included her in their accounts before there was some supposed incentive for a payday."Source
"And that timing is crucial here because it completely guts the whole defense theory."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,610 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document