DOJ-OGR-00008343.jpg
592 KB
Extraction Summary
6
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
592 KB
Summary
This document is page 33 of a court transcript from the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated December 10, 2021. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues that testimony regarding Accuser 2 and Accuser 3 might lead the jury to convict Maxwell on an improper basis because their allegations do not relate to New York law violations. The Court acknowledges the need to clarify to the jury that while evidence may be relevant to enticement charges, sexual activity in New Mexico cannot be considered as the illegal conduct charged in the indictment itself.
People (6)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of potential conviction; defense is arguing to prevent conviction on an 'improper basis'.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the case, discussing jury instructions and the relevance of evidence regarding enticement charges.
|
| Mr. Everdell | Defense Attorney |
Arguing on behalf of the defense regarding the scope of testimony and jury instructions.
|
| Accuser 2 | Accuser/Witness |
Mentioned by defense as being added by the government; defense claims they have nothing to do with NY law violations.
|
| Accuser 3 | Accuser/Witness |
Mentioned by defense as being added by the government.
|
| Witness 3 | Witness |
Referenced by the Court for comparison to the current witness's position.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Provider of the official court transcript.
|
|
| The Government |
Referenced by defense as the party that chose to add Accuser 2 and Accuser 3.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2021-12-10
Court proceedings in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (US v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Discussion regarding jury instructions related to New York law vs. New Mexico activity.
Southern District of New York (implied by case number and reporter)
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction mentioned regarding specific laws and conspiracy charges.
|
|
|
Location of specific sexual activity mentioned by the Court, distinguished from the charged conduct in the indictment.
|
Relationships (2)
Mr. Everdell is arguing for the defense to protect Ms. Maxwell from improper conviction.
Defense states the government has chosen to add Accuser 2.
Key Quotes (3)
"unless they're instructed otherwise by the Court, they may convict Ms. Maxwell on an improper basis"Source
DOJ-OGR-00008343.jpg
Quote #1
"the government has chosen to add Accuser 2, Accuser 3, people who have nothing to do with violations of New York law"Source
DOJ-OGR-00008343.jpg
Quote #2
"what they can't take it into account for is itself the New Mexico activity -- sexual activity as itself illegal conduct charged in the indictment."Source
DOJ-OGR-00008343.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,514 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 536 Filed 12/10/21 Page 33 of 43 33
LBNAMAXTps
LBNAMAXTps
1 purpose of this testimony is that these are illegal acts that
2 they're talking about, and unless they're instructed otherwise
3 by the Court, they may convict Ms. Maxwell on an improper
4 basis, which is that this witness's testimony is talking about
5 illegal sexual activity, as that's charged in the indictment.
6 So there has to be a clarification on this point.
7 And I just would note, your Honor, the reason why
8 we're here in this position is because the government has
9 chosen to add Accuser 2, Accuser 3, people who have nothing to
10 do with violations of New York law, in this conspiracy, and if
11 they're going to do that and you try to use that as evidence of
12 a violation of New York law --
13 THE COURT: Well, the charge is enticement. And, in
14 my mind, this witness is in a very different position than
15 witness 3.
16 MR. EVERDELL: Yes.
17 THE COURT: But it's certainly relevant evidence to
18 the enticement charge with respect to New York law. There's no
19 doubt about that.
20 But I agree, we have to make sure that the jury
21 understands, though it can be relevant evidence for that, if
22 they want to take it into account for whatever they want to
23 take it into account for, what they can't take it into account
24 for is itself the New Mexico activity -- sexual activity as
25 itself illegal conduct charged in the indictment.
2 they're talking about, and unless they're instructed otherwise
3 by the Court, they may convict Ms. Maxwell on an improper
4 basis, which is that this witness's testimony is talking about
5 illegal sexual activity, as that's charged in the indictment.
6 So there has to be a clarification on this point.
7 And I just would note, your Honor, the reason why
8 we're here in this position is because the government has
9 chosen to add Accuser 2, Accuser 3, people who have nothing to
10 do with violations of New York law, in this conspiracy, and if
11 they're going to do that and you try to use that as evidence of
12 a violation of New York law --
13 THE COURT: Well, the charge is enticement. And, in
14 my mind, this witness is in a very different position than
15 witness 3.
16 MR. EVERDELL: Yes.
17 THE COURT: But it's certainly relevant evidence to
18 the enticement charge with respect to New York law. There's no
19 doubt about that.
20 But I agree, we have to make sure that the jury
21 understands, though it can be relevant evidence for that, if
22 they want to take it into account for whatever they want to
23 take it into account for, what they can't take it into account
24 for is itself the New Mexico activity -- sexual activity as
25 itself illegal conduct charged in the indictment.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00008343
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document