DOJ-OGR-00005858.jpg
567 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
1
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
0
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
567 KB
Summary
This legal document is a court filing from October 29, 2021, detailing the defense's motion to exclude evidence seized from Epstein's Palm Beach home in 2005. The defense argues the evidence is inauthentic and unreliable, partly because the original custodian, Detective Recarey, is deceased. The Government counters that it will use other live witnesses to establish the evidence's authenticity at trial.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Epstein |
Mentioned in relation to a 2005 search of his home in Palm Beach, Florida.
|
|
| Detective Recarey | Detective |
Identified as the original custodian of seized evidence, who is now deceased. Also mentioned as a co-author of Govern...
|
Organizations (1)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Government | government agency |
A party in the legal case, intending to call witnesses and offer exhibits at trial.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2005
A search of Epstein's home in Palm Beach, Florida, during which items were seized.
Palm Beach, Florida
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location of Epstein's home which was searched in 2005.
|
Key Quotes (2)
"no witness has sufficient personal knowledge about the proposed exhibits"Source
— The defense
(A claim made by the defense to argue against the authenticity of evidence.)
DOJ-OGR-00005858.jpg
Quote #1
"the evidence collection and retention in this matter is an unreliable mess."Source
— The defense
(A claim made by the defense to argue against the authenticity of evidence.)
DOJ-OGR-00005858.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,484 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 397 Filed 10/29/21 Page 75 of 84
maintained a contact book containing what purports to be this list of names and associated contact information.
Second, the defendant moves to preclude any items seized during the 2005 search of Epstein’s home in Palm Beach, Florida. The defense claims, in a conclusory fashion, that “no witness has sufficient personal knowledge about the proposed exhibits” to demonstrate authenticity, because “the evidence collection and retention in this matter is an unreliable mess.” (Def. Mot. 8 at 3-5). The defense further speculates that the Government intends to offer these exhibits without any testimony about their authenticity, in part because the original custodian—Detective Recarey—is dead. (Id. at 4-5). The defense is mistaken. The Government intends to call live witnesses to establish the authenticity of the evidence at trial.18
Third, the defendant argues that [REDACTED] Government Exhibit 251 and 288 are irrelevant. (Def. Mot. 13 at 2).
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
18 As to Government Exhibit 295 specifically, that exhibit was written by both Detective Recarey and another witness who is expected to testify at trial. The exhibit is primarily marked for identification, although portions of that document may be offered as a past recollection recorded by that other witness. See Fed. R. Evid. 803(5). The Government will not offer statements from Detective Recarey.
74
DOJ-OGR-00005858
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document