DOJ-OGR-00005513.jpg
657 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
657 KB
Summary
This legal document is a filing on behalf of the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, arguing that the Court should deny the government's motion to compel her to provide pre-trial notice of certain evidence. The defense asserts there is no legal authority for this demand and that the relevant rules, specifically Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), place the burden of providing such notice on the prosecution, not the defendant. The document aims to prevent the defendant from having to disclose her evidence strategy concerning her alleged absence when Epstein committed abuse.
People (2)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
The subject of a government motion requiring her to provide pre-trial notice of evidence she intends to offer at trial.
|
| Epstein |
Mentioned in the context of abusing victims, in relation to evidence Ms. Maxwell might present about her "absence" du...
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Government | government agency |
The prosecuting party in the criminal case, whose motion for pre-trial notice from the defendant is being opposed.
|
| Court | judicial body |
The entity being addressed in the legal filing, which is being asked to deny the government's motion.
|
Timeline (1 events)
The upcoming trial for which the government is seeking pre-trial notice of evidence from the defendant, Ms. Maxwell.
Relationships (2)
The document is a legal filing in which Ms. Maxwell's defense argues against a motion filed by the government, indicating they are opposing parties in a criminal case.
The document discusses potential evidence regarding Ms. Maxwell's "absence when Epstein abused victims," implying a connection between them relevant to the case.
Key Quotes (2)
"explain the evidence she plans to offer and why such evidence would be admissible."Source
— The Government (paraphrased)
(A description of what the government's motion is demanding from Ms. Maxwell, which the document argues is not required by the Rules of Criminal Procedure.)
DOJ-OGR-00005513.jpg
Quote #1
"In a criminal case, the prosecutor must: (A) provide reasonable notice of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial, so that the defendant has a fair opportunity to meet it; (B) articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose; and (C) do so in writing before trial – or in any form during trial of the court, for good cause, excuses lack of pretrial notice."Source
— Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(3)
(Quoted in a footnote to demonstrate that the legal rule (Rule 404(b)) places the burden of providing notice of 'other-acts' evidence on the prosecutor, not the defendant.)
DOJ-OGR-00005513.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,984 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 382 Filed 10/29/21 Page 58 of 69
purpose or agreement with any co-conspirator to facilitate an illegal objective. The ill-founded motion should be denied.
A. The Government Cites No Authority for Requiring Pre-trial Notice of Such Evidence.
At the outset, this Court can deny the government’s motion for a simple reason: There is no authority requiring Ms. Maxwell to provide the government with notice of the evidence she intends to offer at trial. To the contrary, when such notice is required, the Rules of Evidence or Procedure make the requirement express. Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(b), for example, imposes a duty on Ms. Maxwell to make certain disclosures, particularly as they regard expert witnesses and opinions. But the Rule does not require her to identify evidence of her “absence when Epstein abused victims who are not part of the government’s case-in-chief” and then “explain the evidence she plans to offer and why such evidence would be admissible.”
Nor does Rule of Evidence 404(b) require notice from the defendant. In fact, the government’s invocation of Rule 404(b) actually undermines its motion. In a criminal case, that Rule imposes on the government a duty to provide advance notice of any other-acts evidence it desires to admit at trial. Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(3).³⁹ The Rule does not impose a similar obligation on a defendant.
____________________
³⁹ The Rule says:
³⁹ The Rule says:
In a criminal case, the prosecutor must:
(A) provide reasonable notice of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial, so that the defendant has a fair opportunity to meet it;
(B) articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose; and
(C) do so in writing before trial – or in any form during trial of the court, for good cause, excuses lack of pretrial notice.
(A) provide reasonable notice of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial, so that the defendant has a fair opportunity to meet it;
(B) articulate in the notice the permitted purpose for which the prosecutor intends to offer the evidence and the reasoning that supports the purpose; and
(C) do so in writing before trial – or in any form during trial of the court, for good cause, excuses lack of pretrial notice.
Fed. R. Evid. 404(b)(3) (emphasis added).
50
DOJ-OGR-00005513
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document