DOJ-OGR-00005567.jpg
396 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
1
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal filing / court document (government brief)
File Size:
396 KB
Summary
This is page 13 of a legal filing (Document 383) from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on October 29, 2021. The visible text discusses 'Minor Victim-4,' arguing that the defense's attempts to attack her credibility based on statements made to the USAO-SDFL are irrelevant to her privacy interests regarding her upcoming testimony. Large portions of the page are redacted.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Minor Victim-4 | Victim/Witness |
Subject of section 3; defense is attacking her credibility; government is arguing for her privacy interests.
|
| The Defense | Legal Defense Team |
Mentioned as disparaging the victim's credibility in their motion.
|
| The Government | Prosecution |
Defending the victim's privacy and noting the defense overstated significance of past statements.
|
Timeline (2 events)
Prior to 2021-10-29
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied jurisdiction of the USAO-SDFL investigation.
|
Relationships (1)
Minor Victim-4 made statements during the USAO-SDFL’s investigation.
Key Quotes (3)
"Regarding Minor Victim-4, the defense motion largely focuses on disparaging her credibility."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005567.jpg
Quote #1
"[T]he Government notes that the defense motion overstates the significance of the particular statements Minor Victim-4 made during the USAO-SDFL’s investigation."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005567.jpg
Quote #2
"that issue is entirely orthogonal to her privacy interests at stake in her testimony."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005567.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (748 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 383 Filed 10/29/21 Page 13 of 40
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
3. Minor Victim-4
Regarding Minor Victim-4, the defense motion largely focuses on disparaging her
credibility. (See Def. Opp. at 12-15). Without relitigating the issue here (see Gov’t Opp. to Def.
Supp. Mots. at 21, Dkt. No. 295 (“[T]he Government notes that the defense motion overstates the
significance of the particular statements Minor Victim-4 made during the USAO-SDFL’s
investigation.”), that issue is entirely orthogonal to her privacy interests at stake in her testimony.
credibility. (See Def. Opp. at 12-15). Without relitigating the issue here (see Gov’t Opp. to Def.
Supp. Mots. at 21, Dkt. No. 295 (“[T]he Government notes that the defense motion overstates the
significance of the particular statements Minor Victim-4 made during the USAO-SDFL’s
investigation.”), that issue is entirely orthogonal to her privacy interests at stake in her testimony.
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
[REDACTED]
12
DOJ-OGR-00005567
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document