DOJ-OGR-00011648.jpg
598 KB
Extraction Summary
7
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
598 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, involving a discussion between the Judge, defense counsel (Pagliuca, Menninger), and the government (Rohrbach). The primary topic is whether potential expert witnesses LaPorte and Naso will testify; the defense suggests it is unlikely and was done out of caution related to a document concerning 'Accuser No. 2,' while the government expresses concern about being surprised mid-trial.
People (7)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Menninger | Attorney |
Addressed by the Court regarding expert opinion notices.
|
| LaPorte | Potential Expert Witness |
Discussed regarding potential testimony and evidence analysis.
|
| Naso | Potential Expert Witness |
Discussed alongside LaPorte regarding potential testimony.
|
| Mr. Pagliuca | Defense Attorney |
States it is unlikely experts LaPorte and Naso will testify; mentions Accuser No. 2.
|
| Accuser No. 2 | Victim/Witness |
Referenced in relation to a specific document potentially at issue.
|
| Mr. Rohrbach | Government Attorney (Prosecutor) |
Expresses concern about late notice if the defense calls experts mid-trial.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the proceedings, questioning counsel.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| The Government |
Referenced by Mr. Rohrbach regarding the difficulty of mid-trial filings.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
Court hearing regarding pre-trial motions and expert witness disclosures.
Courtroom
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by the court reporter name (likely SDNY given case number format and area code).
|
Relationships (3)
Pagliuca discusses endorsing them out of caution.
Pagliuca discusses endorsing them out of caution.
Rohrbach speaks on behalf of the government's interests.
Key Quotes (3)
"The only document that was potentially at issue relates to Accuser No. 2."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011648.jpg
Quote #1
"We endorsed them just out of an abundance of caution, and I don't really see it playing out."Source
DOJ-OGR-00011648.jpg
Quote #2
"The concern is that if the defense decides mid trial that they would like to call these experts, it's going to create a difficult situation for the government"Source
DOJ-OGR-00011648.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,534 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 739 Filed 08/10/22 Page 27 of 43 27
LBNAMAXTps
LBNAMAXTps
1 THE COURT: So, Ms. Menninger, with respect to
2 Saturday, if there's anything in the notice that's suggested
3 that your expert has different expert opinions on, please
4 provide notice. Otherwise we'll see how it plays out.
5 MS. MENNINGER: Of course. Thank you, your Honor.
6 THE COURT: And then LaPorte and Naso, I don't have
7 any sense, based on the disclosures, what evidence this will go
8 to, and the defense says that's because they don't know what
9 evidence the government will produce. What documents do you
10 imagine you would have these experts analyze?
11 MR. PAGLIUCA: I think it's unlikely that they will
12 testify, your Honor. The only document that was potentially at
13 issue relates to Accuser No. 2. And I doubt that that -- I
14 doubt that that's going to become an issue during trial. We
15 endorsed them just out of an abundance of caution, and I don't
16 really see it playing out. But I think if it -- if it comes
17 up, if it becomes an issue, certainly I'll give as much notice
18 as I can. But I don't really think they're going to be
19 testifying at trial.
20 THE COURT: Good enough for me.
21 Mr. Rohrbach.
22 MR. ROHRBACH: I'd like to say it's good enough, your
23 Honor. The concern is that if the defense decides mid trial
24 that they would like to call these experts, it's going to
25 create a difficult situation for the government to file the
2 Saturday, if there's anything in the notice that's suggested
3 that your expert has different expert opinions on, please
4 provide notice. Otherwise we'll see how it plays out.
5 MS. MENNINGER: Of course. Thank you, your Honor.
6 THE COURT: And then LaPorte and Naso, I don't have
7 any sense, based on the disclosures, what evidence this will go
8 to, and the defense says that's because they don't know what
9 evidence the government will produce. What documents do you
10 imagine you would have these experts analyze?
11 MR. PAGLIUCA: I think it's unlikely that they will
12 testify, your Honor. The only document that was potentially at
13 issue relates to Accuser No. 2. And I doubt that that -- I
14 doubt that that's going to become an issue during trial. We
15 endorsed them just out of an abundance of caution, and I don't
16 really see it playing out. But I think if it -- if it comes
17 up, if it becomes an issue, certainly I'll give as much notice
18 as I can. But I don't really think they're going to be
19 testifying at trial.
20 THE COURT: Good enough for me.
21 Mr. Rohrbach.
22 MR. ROHRBACH: I'd like to say it's good enough, your
23 Honor. The concern is that if the defense decides mid trial
24 that they would like to call these experts, it's going to
25 create a difficult situation for the government to file the
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00011648
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document