DOJ-OGR-00013358.jpg
632 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
632 KB
Summary
A page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) featuring a legal argument regarding the admissibility of evidence under Rule 803.6 (Business Records). Defense attorney Mr. Pagliuca argues that record-keeping practices were inconsistent after Mr. Alessi left in 2002, contradicting testimony by Alessi and Ms. Hesse. The discussion specifically concerns the admissibility of Western Union money transfer records.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Pagliuca | Defense Attorney |
Arguing against the admissibility of certain records, stating practices were not followed consistently.
|
| Mr. Alessi | Former Employee/Witness |
Mentioned as having left employment in 2002; his testimony is being compared to the records.
|
| Ms. Hesse | Witness |
Mentioned in the header ('Hesse - direct') and in the text regarding her testimony about record-keeping.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Interjecting to clarify that practices were 'Not followed in every instance.'
|
| Lieberman | Legal Reference |
Referenced in 'Lieberman-related issue', likely referring to a legal precedent.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Western Union |
Mentioned in relation to money transfer records being discussed.
|
|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Court reporting agency listed in the footer.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice, referenced in the footer stamp DOJ-OGR-00013358.
|
Timeline (2 events)
2022-08-10
Court hearing regarding Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), specifically discussing the admissibility of business records and Western Union transfers.
Southern District of New York
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Referenced by Mr. Pagliuca, likely referring to the specific residence where the records/books were kept.
|
Relationships (1)
Defense counsel compares the records to 'what either Mr. Alessi or Ms. Hesse said.'
Key Quotes (3)
"Mr. Alessi left in 2002."Source
DOJ-OGR-00013358.jpg
Quote #1
"It's clear from looking at these records that whatever the practice was, was not followed going forward."Source
DOJ-OGR-00013358.jpg
Quote #2
"all the Western Union money transfer records for the truth of the content"Source
DOJ-OGR-00013358.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,643 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 755 Filed 08/10/22 Page 80 of 262 1785
LC8Cmax3 Hesse - direct
LC8Cmax3 Hesse - direct
1 Circuit made clear, quote, the term custodian or other
2 qualified witness in Rule 803.6 is generally given a very broad
3 interpretation. A witness need not be a custodian or have
4 personal knowledge of the actual creation of the document to be
5 qualified within the meaning of Rule 803.6. And that's exactly
6 the foundation here under the business rules exception and for
7 that reason, your Honor, we offer these exhibits.
8 MR. PAGLIUCA: Your Honor, factually, Mr. Alessi left
9 in 2002. It's clear from looking at these records that
10 whatever the practice was, was not followed going forward.
11 Assuming for a moment that this house --
12 THE COURT: Not followed in every instance.
13 MR. PAGLIUCA: In most, in my review of these records.
14 We don't have -- I didn't do a percentages here, but there is a
15 substantial number of items in that book that don't follow what
16 either Mr. Alessi or Ms. Hesse said. And so, I don't think,
17 factually, you can say that these records were regularly --
18 well -- so this goes to --
19 I think there are two issues. First, is there a
20 business practice in effect during the time that these
21 particular exhibits are collected. That's the first question.
22 Then the second question is sort of a Lieberman-related issue,
23 and that is the content of what's in these messages, the actual
24 words themselves, all the Western Union money transfer records
25 for the truth of the content of what was written in the money
2 qualified witness in Rule 803.6 is generally given a very broad
3 interpretation. A witness need not be a custodian or have
4 personal knowledge of the actual creation of the document to be
5 qualified within the meaning of Rule 803.6. And that's exactly
6 the foundation here under the business rules exception and for
7 that reason, your Honor, we offer these exhibits.
8 MR. PAGLIUCA: Your Honor, factually, Mr. Alessi left
9 in 2002. It's clear from looking at these records that
10 whatever the practice was, was not followed going forward.
11 Assuming for a moment that this house --
12 THE COURT: Not followed in every instance.
13 MR. PAGLIUCA: In most, in my review of these records.
14 We don't have -- I didn't do a percentages here, but there is a
15 substantial number of items in that book that don't follow what
16 either Mr. Alessi or Ms. Hesse said. And so, I don't think,
17 factually, you can say that these records were regularly --
18 well -- so this goes to --
19 I think there are two issues. First, is there a
20 business practice in effect during the time that these
21 particular exhibits are collected. That's the first question.
22 Then the second question is sort of a Lieberman-related issue,
23 and that is the content of what's in these messages, the actual
24 words themselves, all the Western Union money transfer records
25 for the truth of the content of what was written in the money
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00013358
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document