DOJ-OGR-00018057.jpg
565 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
565 KB
Summary
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed August 10, 2022) during the direct examination of a witness named Alessi. A procedural discussion occurs between the Judge (The Court), Defense Attorney Mr. Pagliuca, and Prosecutor Ms. Comey regarding an objection to the foundation of the witness's knowledge about a specific 'book' created after the witness left employment in 2002. The Court decides to allow the question provisionally, noting the testimony will be stricken if proper foundation is not established.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Alessi | Witness |
Name appears in header 'Alessi - Direct', presumably the witness whose testimony is being discussed (likely Juan Ales...
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the procedural discussion regarding objections and evidence foundation.
|
| Mr. Pagliuca | Defense Attorney |
Raises an objection regarding the witness's foundation of knowledge concerning a 'book' dated after the witness left ...
|
| Ms. Comey | Prosecutor |
Responding to the Court regarding witness authentication.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Listed in footer.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice, implied by Bates stamp 'DOJ-OGR-00018057'.
|
|
| Southern District of New York |
Implied by the Case number format and reporter name.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2022-08-10
Court proceedings in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (US v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Discussion regarding witness foundation and authentication of a book.
Southern District Court
Relationships (2)
Pagliuca is challenging Alessi's ability to authenticate a document.
Argue different sides of the objection in court.
Key Quotes (3)
"MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, I guess if he left in 2002 and the book is after 2002, I don't think there can be a basis for knowledge."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018057.jpg
Quote #1
"THE COURT: Well, I'll allow the question to be asked. And if there's not, then I will agree with you and I'll strike the testimony."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018057.jpg
Quote #2
"MS. COMEY: Yes, your Honor. That other witness we believe could also authenticate it, but --"Source
DOJ-OGR-00018057.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,584 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 747 Filed 08/10/22 Page 184 of 228 860
LC2VMAX6 Alessi - Direct
LC2VMAX6 Alessi - Direct
1 THE COURT: So I want to ask, there was an objection
2 to a question on foundation. The question was, is this -- do
3 you know if this is the same book or a later book. I wanted to
4 hear the answer to that. But looking at it, I don't know what
5 his basis for knowledge is for saying that it's the later book.
6 So you can inquire into that or I'll -- yes?
7 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, I guess if he left in 2002 and
8 the book is after 2002, I don't think there can be a basis for
9 knowledge.
10 THE COURT: Well, I'll allow the question to be asked.
11 And if there's not, then I will agree with you and I'll strike
12 the testimony.
13 MR. PAGLIUCA: Okay.
14 MS. COMEY: Understood, your Honor.
15 THE COURT: So that's one.
16 And then two, I just want to make sure I understand,
17 because the letter indicated this witness, sort of a new person
18 to authenticate, as opposed to the original witness who you
19 indicated would authenticate; correct?
20 MS. COMEY: Yes, your Honor. That other witness we
21 believe could also authenticate it, but --
22 THE COURT: Right. So it seems to me when you're
23 finished here and after the voir dire, I can sustain the
24 objection, overrule the objection, or reserve until I hear
25 additional. Any reason not to do it that way?
2 to a question on foundation. The question was, is this -- do
3 you know if this is the same book or a later book. I wanted to
4 hear the answer to that. But looking at it, I don't know what
5 his basis for knowledge is for saying that it's the later book.
6 So you can inquire into that or I'll -- yes?
7 MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, I guess if he left in 2002 and
8 the book is after 2002, I don't think there can be a basis for
9 knowledge.
10 THE COURT: Well, I'll allow the question to be asked.
11 And if there's not, then I will agree with you and I'll strike
12 the testimony.
13 MR. PAGLIUCA: Okay.
14 MS. COMEY: Understood, your Honor.
15 THE COURT: So that's one.
16 And then two, I just want to make sure I understand,
17 because the letter indicated this witness, sort of a new person
18 to authenticate, as opposed to the original witness who you
19 indicated would authenticate; correct?
20 MS. COMEY: Yes, your Honor. That other witness we
21 believe could also authenticate it, but --
22 THE COURT: Right. So it seems to me when you're
23 finished here and after the voir dire, I can sustain the
24 objection, overrule the objection, or reserve until I hear
25 additional. Any reason not to do it that way?
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00018057
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document