DOJ-OGR-00016961.jpg
622 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
622 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between an attorney, Mr. Everdell, and the Court. Mr. Everdell requests that the jury instructions be updated to explicitly state that individuals named Kate and Annie were over the age of consent under New York law, so their testimony cannot be considered evidence of illegal sexual activity. The Court is also noted as agreeing to change references from 'the defendant' to 'Ms. Maxwell'.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaker in the transcript, making a ruling on a change in language.
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Mentioned as the defendant, whose name will be used instead of the title 'the defendant'.
|
| MR. EVERDELL | Attorney |
Speaker in the transcript, making a request for additional jury instructions.
|
| Kate |
Mentioned as a person who was above the age of consent according to Mr. Everdell's argument.
|
|
| Annie |
Mentioned in relation to her testimony, which Mr. Everdell argues was not a violation of New York law.
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | Company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned in the context of 'New York law' regarding the age of consent and testimony.
|
Relationships (2)
Mr. Everdell, an attorney, is addressing the Court (the judge) in a formal legal proceeding.
Ms. Maxwell is identified as the defendant in a case being presided over by the Court.
Key Quotes (2)
"So instead of "the defendant," "Ms. Maxwell.""Source
— THE COURT
(The Court is adopting a change to refer to the defendant by her name in the proceedings.)
DOJ-OGR-00016961.jpg
Quote #1
"I think it's time to reiterate in the charge to them that Kate was over the age of consent and was not involved -- it cannot be considered illegal sexual activity, because this is where the illegal sexual activity is defined."Source
— MR. EVERDELL
(Mr. Everdell is arguing for a specific jury instruction to clarify the legal status of actions involving a person named Kate.)
DOJ-OGR-00016961.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,640 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 765 Filed 08/10/22 Page 35 of 95
LCI1MAX1
2773
LCI1MAX1
2773
1 THE COURT: All right. Page 24, line 19, I'll adopt
2 that change. So instead of "the defendant," "Ms. Maxwell."
3 Just one moment.
4 Okay.
5 MR. EVERDELL: Okay. So the additional request is --
6 this is where the issue of the fact that Kate was above the age
7 of consent and about the fact that -- well, Annie's testimony
8 was not a violation of New York law. That's what the Court
9 gave the limiting instruction to the jury on. We think that it
10 is appropriate to incorporate those limiting instructions into
11 the jury charge and that this is the place where it should be
12 given. Because it's one thing to give the limiting instruction
13 at the time of the testimony -- that is what we asked for and
14 we appreciate the Court doing that -- but I think that they
15 need to be instructed again before they go into deliberations,
16 now having heard 12 plus days of testimony, that what those
17 considerations -- that testimony they are allowed to consider
18 for what purpose, because if they're given an instruction on
19 New York law, I think it's time to reiterate in the charge to
20 them that Kate was over the age of consent and was not
21 involved -- it cannot be considered illegal sexual activity,
22 because this is where the illegal sexual activity is defined.
23 And same with Annie. I have a proposed instruction to add
24 here, but it tracks the language of the limiting instruction
25 the Court gave, so I don't think it's adding any language. I
2 that change. So instead of "the defendant," "Ms. Maxwell."
3 Just one moment.
4 Okay.
5 MR. EVERDELL: Okay. So the additional request is --
6 this is where the issue of the fact that Kate was above the age
7 of consent and about the fact that -- well, Annie's testimony
8 was not a violation of New York law. That's what the Court
9 gave the limiting instruction to the jury on. We think that it
10 is appropriate to incorporate those limiting instructions into
11 the jury charge and that this is the place where it should be
12 given. Because it's one thing to give the limiting instruction
13 at the time of the testimony -- that is what we asked for and
14 we appreciate the Court doing that -- but I think that they
15 need to be instructed again before they go into deliberations,
16 now having heard 12 plus days of testimony, that what those
17 considerations -- that testimony they are allowed to consider
18 for what purpose, because if they're given an instruction on
19 New York law, I think it's time to reiterate in the charge to
20 them that Kate was over the age of consent and was not
21 involved -- it cannot be considered illegal sexual activity,
22 because this is where the illegal sexual activity is defined.
23 And same with Annie. I have a proposed instruction to add
24 here, but it tracks the language of the limiting instruction
25 the Court gave, so I don't think it's adding any language. I
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00016961
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document