DOJ-OGR-00008531.jpg
307 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
0
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing / jury instructions
File Size:
307 KB
Summary
This document is page 75 of 82 from a court filing (Document 562) dated December 17, 2021, associated with Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). It contains Jury Instruction No. 56, which explains the definition of 'Redacted' items and instructs the jury to disregard reasons for redactions and focus only on admitted evidence.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Paul A. Engelmayer | Judge |
Inferred from case number suffix 'PAE' (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE)
|
| Jury | Recipient of Instructions |
Addressed implicitly as 'you' in the jury instructions
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Department of Justice |
Inferred from footer stamp 'DOJ-OGR'
|
|
| US District Court |
Implied by case filing header
|
Timeline (1 events)
Key Quotes (2)
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (679 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 562 Filed 12/17/21 Page 75 of 82
1 Instruction No. 56: Redaction Of Evidentiary Items
2 We have, among the exhibits received in evidence, some documents that are redacted.
3 "Redacted" means that part of the document has been taken out. Material may be redacted for any
4 number of reasons, including that it is not relevant to the issues you must decide in this case, among
5 other reasons. You are to concern yourself only with the part of the item that has been admitted
6 into evidence, and you should not consider any possible reason for the redactions.
74
DOJ-OGR-00008531
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document