This is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed Aug 10, 2022) recording a discussion between the prosecution (represented by Ms. Moe) and the defense (Ms. Menninger) regarding the timeline for redacting government and defense exhibits. The prosecution argues against a 'fire drill' urgency, proposing to resolve issues over the weekend, which the Court accepts. The discussion then pivots to an attorney-client privilege issue.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Moe | Attorney (Likely Government/Prosecution) |
Speaking to the court regarding redaction schedules and communications with the defense.
|
| Ms. Menninger | Attorney (Defense) |
Mentioned by Ms. Moe as having emailed the government; speaks at the end regarding attorney-client privilege stipulat...
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, setting the timeline for the weekend.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| Government |
Referred to as the recipient of Ms. Menninger's email.
|
|
| Defense |
Referred to as the party conferring with the government.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Indicated in the footer by the reporter's organization name.
|
"We don't understand the particular urgency with respect to these exhibits."Source
"I don't see the need for a fire drill redaction resolution this evening"Source
"We'll get all of that done this weekend."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,494 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document