DOJ-OGR-00016906.jpg
552 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript (case 1:20-cr-00330-ajn)
File Size:
552 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 10, 2022, associated with Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (the Ghislaine Maxwell trial). Attorneys Ms. Menninger and Mr. Rohrbach argue before the judge regarding the admissibility of a prior deposition excerpt from Mr. Epstein. The defense (Rohrbach) objects to the evidence based on Rule 804, arguing that the government's motive in the current criminal case (determining where Epstein personally lived) differs from the motive in the prior civil litigation (determining if he had moved).
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Menninger | Attorney (Prosecution) |
Arguing for the admission of deposition excerpts under Rule 804(b)(1).
|
| Mr. Rohrbach | Attorney (Defense) |
Objecting to the admission of evidence regarding Epstein's deposition.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Ruling on objections regarding evidence admissibility.
|
| Mr. Epstein | Subject of Deposition |
His prior deposition testimony is the subject of the legal argument.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| The Government |
Referenced by Mr. Rohrbach regarding their motive in developing facts.
|
|
| DOJ |
Implied by footer stamp DOJ-OGR
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
Court hearing regarding Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Attorneys argue over the admissibility of Jeffrey Epstein's prior deposition testimony.
Southern District of New York (implied by reporter name)
Relationships (2)
Arguing different sides of an objection in court.
Discussion of the government's motive to determine where Epstein lived.
Key Quotes (3)
"I'm sustaining the objection. 201(a) has not been sufficiently established, in light of the posture of the litigation and what was materially in dispute."Source
DOJ-OGR-00016906.jpg
Quote #1
"The government's motive here is to determine where Mr. Epstein personally lived."Source
DOJ-OGR-00016906.jpg
Quote #2
"The government's motive in this deposition was to determine whether he had moved -- whatever that means"Source
DOJ-OGR-00016906.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,354 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-AJN Document 763 Filed 08/10/22 Page 177 of 197 2718
LCHVMAX6
LCHVMAX6
1 where the deposition excerpt was contained.
2 THE COURT: Okay.
3 MS. MENNINGER: And it's on that page 45. It's the
4 first question on that page.
5 THE COURT: All right.
6 I'm sustaining the objection. 201(a) has not been
7 sufficiently established, in light of the posture of the
8 litigation and what was materially in dispute.
9 What's next?
10 MS. MENNINGER: With respect to 804(b)(1), your Honor,
11 for the deposition excerpt for Mr. Epstein.
12 THE COURT: Okay. Okay. Mr. Rohrbach.
13 MR. ROHRBACH: It is the same objection here, your
14 Honor. Since this is a question about a fact that was the
15 precise -- sorry, let me --
16 THE COURT: It's not the same.
17 MR. ROHRBACH: It's not exactly the same. But let's
18 look at the language of 804, which is, in order for it to be
19 offered against a party, the party has to have had an
20 opportunity and similar motive to develop it.
21 The government's motive in developing this fact is
22 completely different than it was in the civil litigation. The
23 government's motive here is to determine where Mr. Epstein
24 personally lived. The government's motive in this deposition
25 was to determine whether he had moved -- whatever that means --
2 THE COURT: Okay.
3 MS. MENNINGER: And it's on that page 45. It's the
4 first question on that page.
5 THE COURT: All right.
6 I'm sustaining the objection. 201(a) has not been
7 sufficiently established, in light of the posture of the
8 litigation and what was materially in dispute.
9 What's next?
10 MS. MENNINGER: With respect to 804(b)(1), your Honor,
11 for the deposition excerpt for Mr. Epstein.
12 THE COURT: Okay. Okay. Mr. Rohrbach.
13 MR. ROHRBACH: It is the same objection here, your
14 Honor. Since this is a question about a fact that was the
15 precise -- sorry, let me --
16 THE COURT: It's not the same.
17 MR. ROHRBACH: It's not exactly the same. But let's
18 look at the language of 804, which is, in order for it to be
19 offered against a party, the party has to have had an
20 opportunity and similar motive to develop it.
21 The government's motive in developing this fact is
22 completely different than it was in the civil litigation. The
23 government's motive here is to determine where Mr. Epstein
24 personally lived. The government's motive in this deposition
25 was to determine whether he had moved -- whatever that means --
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00016906
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document