DOJ-OGR-00011630.jpg
617 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
617 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a debate between two attorneys, Ms. Moe and Ms. Sternheim, before the judge regarding a potential conflict of interest with a juror. The juror works at the same financial institution as a witness, and Ms. Moe proposes questioning the juror, while Ms. Sternheim argues against it as unnecessary and potentially prejudicial.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| THE COURT | Judge |
Speaker in the transcript, presiding over the case and asking questions to the counsel.
|
| MS. MOE | Counsel |
Speaker in the transcript, addressing the court as 'Your Honor' and proposing to question a juror about a potential c...
|
| MS. STERNHEIM | Counsel |
Speaker in the transcript, addressing the court as 'Judge' and arguing against Ms. Moe's proposal.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
Listed at the bottom of the page as the court reporting service.
|
| The government | government agency |
Mentioned by Ms. Sternheim as having the ability to 'exercise a challenge if it wishes'.
|
| financial institution | company |
Mentioned multiple times as the workplace for both a juror and witnesses, creating a potential conflict of interest.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
A discussion took place regarding a potential conflict of interest involving a juror and a witness who both work at the same financial institution.
courtroom
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned as the place where the juror and witness might recognize one another.
|
Relationships (3)
Ms. Moe addresses the Court as 'Your Honor' and presents a legal proposal for the Court's consideration.
Ms. Sternheim addresses the Court as 'Judge' and presents a counter-argument to a legal proposal.
They are opposing counsel in a legal proceeding, presenting conflicting arguments to the judge on the same issue.
Key Quotes (3)
"Your Honor, I think at a minimum we propose some additional follow-up guess for the juror about her role, whether she interfaces with folks dealing with compliance, which is within the scope of what this witness does, whether there would be any issues about hearing testimony about the financial institution where she works."Source
— MS. MOE
(Proposing a line of questioning for a juror to address a potential conflict of interest.)
DOJ-OGR-00011630.jpg
Quote #1
"I think it is a little late. The publicly available information would have revealed that there are other people who are in that same institution or have been affiliated with that institution, some of which were excused, and at least one that is still here."Source
— MS. STERNHEIM
(Arguing against questioning the juror, suggesting the issue could have been addressed earlier.)
DOJ-OGR-00011630.jpg
Quote #2
"But I think it's unnecessary. And it flags something inappropriately at this stage of the game."Source
— MS. STERNHEIM
(Stating her belief that questioning the juror would be improper and unnecessary.)
DOJ-OGR-00011630.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,747 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 9 of 43 9
LBNAMAX1ps
LBNAMAX1ps
1 THE COURT: What do you propose?
2 MS. MOE: Your Honor, I think at a minimum we propose
3 some additional follow-up guess for the juror about her role,
4 whether she interfaces with folks dealing with compliance,
5 which is within the scope of what this witness does, whether
6 there would be any issues about hearing testimony about the
7 financial institution where she works.
8 We have not flagged for our witness that there is a
9 juror, of course, who works with the institution, so it's hard
10 for us to gauge whether they may have overlapped or whether
11 they would recognize one another in the courtroom. So I
12 recognize it would be difficult to probe this issue without
13 creating an issue, but we think at a minimum a question about
14 sort of her role and any issues about being fair or discomfort
15 about witnesses who are testifying from the financial
16 institution might address this issue.
17 THE COURT: Who will I hear from?
18 MS. STERNHEIM: You'll hear from me, Judge.
19 I think it is a little late. The publicly available
20 information would have revealed that there are other people who
21 are in that same institution or have been affiliated with that
22 institution, some of which were excused, and at least one that
23 is still here. The government can exercise a challenge if it
24 wishes. But I think it's unnecessary. And it flags something
25 inappropriately at this stage of the game. It will highlight
2 MS. MOE: Your Honor, I think at a minimum we propose
3 some additional follow-up guess for the juror about her role,
4 whether she interfaces with folks dealing with compliance,
5 which is within the scope of what this witness does, whether
6 there would be any issues about hearing testimony about the
7 financial institution where she works.
8 We have not flagged for our witness that there is a
9 juror, of course, who works with the institution, so it's hard
10 for us to gauge whether they may have overlapped or whether
11 they would recognize one another in the courtroom. So I
12 recognize it would be difficult to probe this issue without
13 creating an issue, but we think at a minimum a question about
14 sort of her role and any issues about being fair or discomfort
15 about witnesses who are testifying from the financial
16 institution might address this issue.
17 THE COURT: Who will I hear from?
18 MS. STERNHEIM: You'll hear from me, Judge.
19 I think it is a little late. The publicly available
20 information would have revealed that there are other people who
21 are in that same institution or have been affiliated with that
22 institution, some of which were excused, and at least one that
23 is still here. The government can exercise a challenge if it
24 wishes. But I think it's unnecessary. And it flags something
25 inappropriately at this stage of the game. It will highlight
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011630
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document