DOJ-OGR-00013880.jpg
594 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
594 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022, from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). The transcript details a discussion between the Judge and prosecutor Mr. Rohrbach regarding the admissibility of remote testimony for a witness who may have tested positive for COVID-19, referencing Ms. Sternheim's proffer and the standards of Rule 15. The government indicates it would not resist a finding of unavailability if a positive test is confirmed.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Rohrbach | Prosecutor / Government Attorney |
Addressing the court regarding Rule 15 and witness unavailability due to COVID.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, questioning the government about remote testimony precedents.
|
| Ms. Sternheim | Attorney (likely Defense) |
Made a proffer regarding a positive COVID test.
|
| Unnamed Witness | Witness |
Subject of discussion regarding remote testimony due to potential COVID unavailability.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Court reporting service listed in footer.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (implied by footer stamp DOJ-OGR).
|
|
| The Government |
Prosecution team in the case.
|
Timeline (1 events)
08/10/22
Court hearing in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell).
Courtroom (Southern District)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied location of the court (Southern District of New York) based on the reporter service.
|
Relationships (2)
Speaks on behalf of the government ('We would not resist...').
Context of the discussion implies adversarial roles regarding the record of the COVID test.
Key Quotes (4)
"Ms. Sternheim's proffer that she has a positive COVID test"Source
DOJ-OGR-00013880.jpg
Quote #1
"My understanding is in general that the courts follow the factors in Rule 15 for depositions in order to make this determination"Source
DOJ-OGR-00013880.jpg
Quote #2
"We would not resist that the witness is unavailable if there's a positive COVID test, your Honor."Source
DOJ-OGR-00013880.jpg
Quote #3
"I don't think the government is resisting on any of those factors."Source
DOJ-OGR-00013880.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,515 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 21 of 246 2316
LCGVMAX1
LCGVMAX1
1 necessary to make it part of a public record.
2 THE COURT: All right.
3 Why don't you work out -- Mr. Rohrbach, you think a
4 finding other than Ms. Sternheim's -- you think a record beyond
5 Ms. Sternheim's proffer that she has a positive COVID test,
6 would the government -- you said the court has done this
7 before; you mean a colleague has done it. I haven't done it.
8 MR. ROHRBACH: My understanding is that before the
9 COVID era, the Court may have done -- taken -- permitted a
10 witness to testify remotely or at least considered the issue
11 before. Maybe not permitted actually, your Honor.
12 My understanding is in general that the courts follow
13 the factors in Rule 15 for depositions in order to make this
14 determination; and so the Court would have to find that witness
15 is unavailable, that it's in the interest of justice before
16 permitting it.
17 THE COURT: Okay. And the government wants -- well,
18 it seems to me if there's a positive COVID test --
19 MR. ROHRBACH: We would not resist that the witness is
20 unavailable if there's a positive COVID test, your Honor.
21 THE COURT: Okay.
22 MR. ROHRBACH: To be clear, I don't think the
23 government is resisting on any of those factors. Under Rule 15
24 we would -- and we could come back at a break and elaborate on
25 exactly what the stretches are. We just would ask the Court to
2 THE COURT: All right.
3 Why don't you work out -- Mr. Rohrbach, you think a
4 finding other than Ms. Sternheim's -- you think a record beyond
5 Ms. Sternheim's proffer that she has a positive COVID test,
6 would the government -- you said the court has done this
7 before; you mean a colleague has done it. I haven't done it.
8 MR. ROHRBACH: My understanding is that before the
9 COVID era, the Court may have done -- taken -- permitted a
10 witness to testify remotely or at least considered the issue
11 before. Maybe not permitted actually, your Honor.
12 My understanding is in general that the courts follow
13 the factors in Rule 15 for depositions in order to make this
14 determination; and so the Court would have to find that witness
15 is unavailable, that it's in the interest of justice before
16 permitting it.
17 THE COURT: Okay. And the government wants -- well,
18 it seems to me if there's a positive COVID test --
19 MR. ROHRBACH: We would not resist that the witness is
20 unavailable if there's a positive COVID test, your Honor.
21 THE COURT: Okay.
22 MR. ROHRBACH: To be clear, I don't think the
23 government is resisting on any of those factors. Under Rule 15
24 we would -- and we could come back at a break and elaborate on
25 exactly what the stretches are. We just would ask the Court to
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00013880
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document