DOJ-OGR-00005821.jpg
446 KB
Extraction Summary
2
People
2
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing (legal brief/motion)
File Size:
446 KB
Summary
This is page 38 of a heavily redacted court filing from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. The text argues for the admissibility of certain exhibits as direct evidence of the defendant's intent, motive, and charged crimes, or alternatively under Rule 404(b)(2). Footnotes reference a Government letter from October 11, 2021, regarding the identification of parties in emails.
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| The Government |
Prosecution; author of the October 11, 2021 letter mentioned in footnotes.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (indicated by footer DOJ-OGR).
|
Relationships (1)
Government arguing for admissibility of evidence against the defendant.
Key Quotes (4)
"But the jury could easily draw different inferences from these exhibits."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005821.jpg
Quote #1
"The exhibits go directly to the defendant’s intent and motive, because they show [REDACTED]"Source
DOJ-OGR-00005821.jpg
Quote #2
"Accordingly, these exhibits are probative of the issues the jury will be asked to resolve at trial and should be admitted as direct evidence of the charged crimes."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005821.jpg
Quote #3
"In the alternative, this evidence is probative of the defendant’s motive, intent, plan, and knowledge, and should be admitted pursuant to Rule 404(b)(2)."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005821.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (948 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 397 Filed 10/29/21 Page 38 of 84
[REDACTED BLOCK]
[REDACTED BLOCK]
But the jury could easily draw different inferences from these exhibits. The exhibits go directly to the defendant’s intent and motive, because they show [REDACTED]
[REDACTED BLOCK]
[REDACTED BLOCK]
Accordingly, these exhibits are probative of the issues the jury will be asked to resolve at trial and should be admitted as direct evidence of the charged crimes.9 In the alternative, this evidence is probative of the defendant’s motive, intent, plan, and knowledge, and should be admitted pursuant to Rule 404(b)(2). [REDACTED]
____________________
8 The remaining exhibits identified in the Government’s October 11, 2021 letter are necessary to identify the parties to the emails.
9 This evidence would also be admissible to rebut defense arguments concerning similar topics, and in cross-examination of the defendant.
8 The remaining exhibits identified in the Government’s October 11, 2021 letter are necessary to identify the parties to the emails.
9 This evidence would also be admissible to rebut defense arguments concerning similar topics, and in cross-examination of the defendant.
37
DOJ-OGR-00005821
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document