DOJ-OGR-00013868.jpg
621 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
2
Locations
5
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
621 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022. Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues that a witness named 'Kate' is unreliable because she testified to events occurring at a Kinnerton Street property in 1994 and 1995, while land registry records show Ghislaine Maxwell did not take possession of the property until 1997. The discussion involves the complexities of UK leasehold titles and mentions the Duke of Westminster.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Everdell | Defense Attorney |
Arguing regarding the timeline of property ownership to impeach a witness.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Asking clarifying questions about the defense's proffer.
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the property ownership dispute (referred to as 'She' and 'Ms. Maxwell').
|
| Duke of Westminster | Landowner |
Mentioned as the historical owner of the land since 1500.
|
| Kate | Witness |
Testified to events occurring at the property in 1994 and 1995.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Court reporting service.
|
|
| Land Registry |
UK government department where property titles are registered.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (indicated in footer bates stamp).
|
Timeline (5 events)
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
The specific residence in question regarding when Maxwell took possession.
|
|
|
United Kingdom, mentioned in context of title laws.
|
Relationships (2)
Defense counsel is using property records to impeach Kate's testimony against Maxwell.
Maxwell owned the leasehold on land possessed by the Duke.
Key Quotes (3)
"We have a witness, Kate, who has testified to events that allegedly took place in the Kinnerton Street property in '94 and '95."Source
DOJ-OGR-00013868.jpg
Quote #1
"And these records show that she didn't own that"Source
DOJ-OGR-00013868.jpg
Quote #2
"It's effectively owning it, b.ut this land, I think, has been in the possession of the Duke of Westminster since, you know, 1500."Source
DOJ-OGR-00013868.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,604 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 9 of 246 2304
LCGVMAX1
LCGVMAX1
1 could, the cover letter. Do we know why it's dated 2010?
2 MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I think that's a separate
3 record. Because I think that record reflects that there was an
4 opportunity to purchase the leasehold outright in 2010. It's a
5 little bit of a complicated title. It's actually a leasehold.
6 She does own the lease; it's effectively owning it, b.ut this
7 land, I think, has been in the possession of the Duke of
8 Westminster since, you know, 1500. It's a very complicated
9 chain of title in the UK.
10 But the way it works is you pass the leasehold from
11 one person to another. And that is effectively ownership under
12 the land registry records. And that leasehold passed in -- the
13 contracts were exchanged in '96, and the deal closed in '97, in
14 January '97; and it was registered in a land registry as a
15 transfer of that title in March of '97.
16 THE COURT: And again, my question is not that it's to
17 prove when Ms. Maxwell purchased the home, but the defense's
18 proffer from counsel is that it is to prove that she did not
19 live there before 1996?
20 MR. EVERDELL: That's right. We have a witness, Kate,
21 who says -- she didn't live there before 1997, because that's
22 when she actually took possession of the property, right.
23 We have a witness, Kate, who has testified to events
24 that allegedly took place in the Kinnerton Street property in
25 '94 and '95. And these records show that she didn't own that
2 MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, I think that's a separate
3 record. Because I think that record reflects that there was an
4 opportunity to purchase the leasehold outright in 2010. It's a
5 little bit of a complicated title. It's actually a leasehold.
6 She does own the lease; it's effectively owning it, b.ut this
7 land, I think, has been in the possession of the Duke of
8 Westminster since, you know, 1500. It's a very complicated
9 chain of title in the UK.
10 But the way it works is you pass the leasehold from
11 one person to another. And that is effectively ownership under
12 the land registry records. And that leasehold passed in -- the
13 contracts were exchanged in '96, and the deal closed in '97, in
14 January '97; and it was registered in a land registry as a
15 transfer of that title in March of '97.
16 THE COURT: And again, my question is not that it's to
17 prove when Ms. Maxwell purchased the home, but the defense's
18 proffer from counsel is that it is to prove that she did not
19 live there before 1996?
20 MR. EVERDELL: That's right. We have a witness, Kate,
21 who says -- she didn't live there before 1997, because that's
22 when she actually took possession of the property, right.
23 We have a witness, Kate, who has testified to events
24 that allegedly took place in the Kinnerton Street property in
25 '94 and '95. And these records show that she didn't own that
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00013868
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document