DOJ-OGR-00011545.jpg
616 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript / legal filing
File Size:
616 KB
Summary
This is page 26 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on July 22, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues that the conspiracy charge cannot extend to 2005 because the individual named Carolyn was no longer a minor at that time (her birthday being in early January). Everdell also challenges the reliability and admissibility of an undated 'message pad' used as evidence, arguing it cannot be properly authenticated or dated.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Everdell | Defense Attorney |
Arguing regarding the admissibility of evidence and the timeline of the conspiracy charge.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing; acknowledges Everdell's point about the date.
|
| Carolyn | Subject/Alleged Victim |
Mentioned in the context of her age in 2005; defense argues she was not a minor at that time.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| DOJ |
Implied by Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR'
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Likely Southern District of New York (SDNY), implied by court reporters and case number format.
|
Relationships (1)
Attorney addressing the Judge ('your Honor').
Key Quotes (4)
"Carolyn is not a minor in 2005."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011545.jpg
Quote #1
"So what we're really talking about is one message pad that is undated, unverified, and not even in evidence."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011545.jpg
Quote #2
"So as of 2005, she is not a minor any more."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011545.jpg
Quote #3
"Her birthday is January -- I don't know if I can say that, I'm sorry, but you understand it's at the beginning."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011545.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,585 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 737 Filed 07/22/22 Page 26 of 101 26
M6SQmax1
M6SQmax1
1 with the point, which is we're focusing on the record evidence.
2 The conspiracy as charged requires there be to be a minor
3 involved. Carolyn is not a minor in 2005. Her birthday is
4 January -- I don't know if I can say that, I'm sorry, but you
5 understand it's at the beginning.
6 THE COURT: It's early.
7 MR. EVERDELL: It's early. So as of 2005, she is not
8 a minor any more. So if we're looking to the end date of the
9 conspiracy that's charged in the indictment, that does not
10 exist in 2005, and Carolyn is not a minor in 2005, that
11 evidence can't be used to support the end date of the
12 conspiracy that is charged.
13 So what we're really talking about is one message pad
14 that is undated, unverified, and not even in evidence. It's
15 not even properly authenticated. I would also point out --
16 it's not reliable, your Honor. But I would also point out that
17 I think we did have testimony that there were multiple message
18 pads going on at any one time. The surrounding message pads
19 are not a perfect indicator of when that message would have
20 been taken if it's undated. It could have been weeks, months
21 afterwards that someone decided to use that message pad to take
22 that message instead of another of message pad that was ongoing
23 at the same time. So there is no reliable credible evidence
24 that's the date of that message pad.
25 And so, your Honor, we cited a number of cases in our
2 The conspiracy as charged requires there be to be a minor
3 involved. Carolyn is not a minor in 2005. Her birthday is
4 January -- I don't know if I can say that, I'm sorry, but you
5 understand it's at the beginning.
6 THE COURT: It's early.
7 MR. EVERDELL: It's early. So as of 2005, she is not
8 a minor any more. So if we're looking to the end date of the
9 conspiracy that's charged in the indictment, that does not
10 exist in 2005, and Carolyn is not a minor in 2005, that
11 evidence can't be used to support the end date of the
12 conspiracy that is charged.
13 So what we're really talking about is one message pad
14 that is undated, unverified, and not even in evidence. It's
15 not even properly authenticated. I would also point out --
16 it's not reliable, your Honor. But I would also point out that
17 I think we did have testimony that there were multiple message
18 pads going on at any one time. The surrounding message pads
19 are not a perfect indicator of when that message would have
20 been taken if it's undated. It could have been weeks, months
21 afterwards that someone decided to use that message pad to take
22 that message instead of another of message pad that was ongoing
23 at the same time. So there is no reliable credible evidence
24 that's the date of that message pad.
25 And so, your Honor, we cited a number of cases in our
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. .
.
.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011545
.
.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011545
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document