DOJ-OGR-00005600.jpg
684 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
1
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
684 KB
Summary
This legal document is a filing by Ms. Maxwell's defense team arguing that the government has violated a court order regarding pre-trial disclosure. The defense claims that instead of identifying specific co-conspirator statements as ordered, the government has improperly directed them to sift through hundreds of thousands of statements from devices seized from Epstein. This tactic, they argue, makes it impossible to prepare for trial and subverts the Court's intention to have such issues litigated in advance.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein | Alleged co-conspirator |
Mentioned as the individual from whom the government seized multiple electronic devices containing hundreds of thousa...
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
The subject of the legal filing, who the defense argues is being unfairly burdened by the government's disclosure tac...
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Court | Government agency |
The judicial body that ordered the government to make specific disclosures, an order which the defense claims is bein...
|
| The government | Government agency |
The prosecuting party in the case, accused of violating a court order by failing to specifically identify co-conspira...
|
| Defense | Legal team |
The legal representation for Ms. Maxwell, arguing that they would not be surprised at trial if the government followe...
|
Timeline (2 events)
2021-10-11
The deadline set by the Court for the government to provide its witness list, Rule 404(b) notice, exhibits, and 3500 materials.
A trial for which the defense is preparing. The defense argues that the government's actions are preventing them from litigating co-conspirator issues in advance of this trial.
Relationships (1)
The document refers to electronic devices seized from "alleged co-conspirator Epstein" in the context of the case against Ms. Maxwell.
Key Quotes (1)
"the need for the parties to litigate co-conspirator issues in advance of trial...."Source
— The Court
(Quoted from a previous court document (Dkt. 335 at 3) to state the reason for the Court's disclosure order, which the defense argues the government is now violating.)
DOJ-OGR-00005600.jpg
Quote #1
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,981 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 384 Filed 10/29/21 Page 6 of 12
rejected by the Court which ordered disclosure at the same time as the government’s witness list, Rule 404(b) notice, exhibits, and 3500 materials no later than October 11, 2021, so that the Defense would not be surprised at trial and because of “the need for the parties to litigate co-conspirator issues in advance of trial....” Dkt. 335 at 3.
The government seized multiple electronic devices, including computers and servers from alleged co-conspirator Epstein. These devices contain hundreds of thousands of statements spanning decades. The emails on the devices are to and from many other individuals. Many of the emails are cryptic, subject to interpretation, and appear to be outside of the scope of either conspiracy alleged in the S2 Indictment. It is impossible for Ms. Maxwell to identify any statement that she may need to litigate in advance of trial and, even if she wanted to do so, any attempt would be futile because the government could avoid any issue by simply picking some other statement. Absent pre-trial identification of any alleged co-conspirator statement, Ms. Maxwell will be forced to, during trial, object to any proffered statement, request a recess, identify whether the purported statement was actually produced in discovery, and at some point, litigate the admissibility of the statement. Of course, this is precisely what the Court’s Order was intended to avoid.
Given the amount of discourse over this topic, the government must understand what the Court ordered it to disclose. It has chosen, however, to avoid and violate the Court’s Order by attempting to overstuff an already full sandbag by ignoring both the plain language and spirit of the Order mandating disclosure. Instead of simply disclosing the purported statements the government has directed Ms. Maxwell back to the hundreds of thousands of “statements” produced or to be produced in the case.
The government seized multiple electronic devices, including computers and servers from alleged co-conspirator Epstein. These devices contain hundreds of thousands of statements spanning decades. The emails on the devices are to and from many other individuals. Many of the emails are cryptic, subject to interpretation, and appear to be outside of the scope of either conspiracy alleged in the S2 Indictment. It is impossible for Ms. Maxwell to identify any statement that she may need to litigate in advance of trial and, even if she wanted to do so, any attempt would be futile because the government could avoid any issue by simply picking some other statement. Absent pre-trial identification of any alleged co-conspirator statement, Ms. Maxwell will be forced to, during trial, object to any proffered statement, request a recess, identify whether the purported statement was actually produced in discovery, and at some point, litigate the admissibility of the statement. Of course, this is precisely what the Court’s Order was intended to avoid.
Given the amount of discourse over this topic, the government must understand what the Court ordered it to disclose. It has chosen, however, to avoid and violate the Court’s Order by attempting to overstuff an already full sandbag by ignoring both the plain language and spirit of the Order mandating disclosure. Instead of simply disclosing the purported statements the government has directed Ms. Maxwell back to the hundreds of thousands of “statements” produced or to be produced in the case.
3
DOJ-OGR-00005600
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document