DOJ-OGR-00018989.jpg

542 KB

Extraction Summary

6
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
3
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Court transcript
File Size: 542 KB
Summary

This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving the examination of a witness named Rodgers. The proceedings involve a discussion between the Court, Ms. Comey, and Mr. Everdell regarding the redaction of a name ('Carolyn') and phone numbers from evidence. Mr. Everdell also coordinates the placement of folders for the jury ahead of cross-examination, and the parties agree to discuss an 'in limine instruction' after the lunch break.

People (6)

Name Role Context
Rodgers Witness
Mentioned in header as 'Rodgers - direct', indicating this is during direct examination.
Carolyn Subject of discussion
Name mentioned regarding redactions of phone numbers and last names.
Ms. Comey Attorney (Prosecution)
Discussing redactions and requesting time over the weekend.
The Court Judge
Presiding over the discussion regarding redactions and jury instructions.
Mr. Everdell Attorney (Defense)
Discussing logistics for cross-examination materials (folders for jury).
Mr. Rohrbach Attorney (Government)
Stating the government has no objection to the in limine instruction.

Organizations (2)

Name Type Context
Southern District Reporters, P.C.
DOJ
Indicated by footer stamp DOJ-OGR

Timeline (3 events)

Filed 08/10/22
Court hearing discussion regarding redactions of names and phone numbers.
Courtroom
Filed 08/10/22
Discussion regarding jury logistics for upcoming cross-examination.
Courtroom
Filed 08/10/22
Lunch break mentioned.
Courtroom
All parties

Locations (1)

Location Context
Implied by reporter name and case context (SDNY).

Relationships (1)

Ms. Comey Colleagues Mr. Rohrbach
Both appear to be representing the Government side (Rohrbach explicitly speaks for 'the government').

Key Quotes (3)

"We could do redactions of the last four, for example. Again, I understand it's labor, but do it now or do it later and, it seems to me, better to do it now."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00018989.jpg
Quote #1
"May we have the long weekend coming up as well to complete those redactions please?"
Source
DOJ-OGR-00018989.jpg
Quote #2
"One other choreography point just for purposes of cross, we do have folders for the jury."
Source
DOJ-OGR-00018989.jpg
Quote #3

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (1,326 characters)

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 755 Filed 08/10/22 Page 127 of 262 1832
LC8VMAX4 Rodgers - direct
1 the -- for example -- sometimes, for example, it said just
2 Carolyn, so that doesn't need to be redacted at all. In other
3 instances, the last name would need to be redacted.
4 MS. COMEY: So, your Honor, the thinking was that
5 there's phone numbers for not only Carolyn, but also a number
6 of third parties.
7 THE COURT: We could do redactions of the last four,
8 for example. Again, I understand it's labor, but do it now or
9 do it later and, it seems to me, better to do it now.
10 MS. COMEY: Yes, your Honor.
11 May we have the long weekend coming up as well to
12 complete those redactions please?
13 THE COURT: Yes.
14 MS. COMEY: Thank you, your Honor.
15 MR. EVERDELL: One other choreography point just for
16 purposes of cross, we do have folders for the jury. I could
17 put it under their chairs now, as long as they are instructed
18 not to look at them.
19 MS. COMEY: No objection.
20 THE COURT: Okay.
21 Have you looked at the in limine instruction?
22 MR. ROHRBACH: Yes, the government has no objection.
23 MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, actually if we could take
24 that up when we return from the lunch break.
25 THE COURT: Okay. That's fine.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00018989

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document