This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a discussion between the Judge ('The Court'), defense attorney Mr. Everdell, and prosecutor Ms. Moe regarding jury instructions and the legal definition of the word 'entice,' citing cases such as Almonte, Dupigny, and Broxmeyer. Mr. Everdell notes a technical difficulty with internet access during the proceeding.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Everdell | Defense Attorney |
Addressing the court regarding legal definitions and noting technical issues with internet access.
|
| Ms. Moe | Prosecutor (Government) |
Stating the government has no objection to specific jury instructions.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the discussion regarding jury instructions and legal definitions.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Listed in the footer.
|
|
| The Government |
Represented by Ms. Moe.
|
|
| Department of Justice (DOJ) |
Implied by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied jurisdiction based on case number format and reporter name.
|
""Entice" means to attract, induce, or lure using hope or desire."Source
"Broxmeyer, which is 616 F.3d 120, defined "entice" as "to draw on by exciting hope or desire; allure.""Source
"Because I don't have internet access, so I can't pull it up on my computer."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,307 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document