DOJ-OGR-00016634.jpg
570 KB
Extraction Summary
7
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
570 KB
Summary
This document is a page from the court transcript of the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), dated August 10, 2022. Attorneys Sternheim and Rohrbach argue before the Judge regarding the admissibility of a statement allegedly made by 'Kate' claiming the case against Maxwell was strengthening because accusers were 'strengthening their stories.' The prosecution argues against its admission as an inconsistent statement because Kate was not challenged on it during cross-examination, while the defense appears to argue for its admission under a bias framework.
People (7)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Sternheim | Defense Attorney |
Arguing for the inclusion of a statement regarding Kate.
|
| Mr. Rohrbach | Prosecutor/Attorney |
Raising concerns about the admissibility of the statement attributed to Kate.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the evidentiary argument (Judge Paul A. Engelmayer based on case number PAE).
|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
Subject of the case being discussed.
|
| Kate | Witness/Subject |
Allegedly made a statement about the case against Maxwell getting stronger.
|
| Mr. Hamilton | Individual mentioned in testimony |
Mentioned in relation to 'mental impressions' or as the recipient of the statement.
|
| Loftus | Witness |
Name appearing in the header 'Loftus - direct' (likely Dr. Elizabeth Loftus, memory expert).
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Footer information.
|
|
| DOJ |
Implied by Bates stamp DOJ-OGR.
|
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
Court proceedings regarding evidentiary objections (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE).
Courtroom
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction implied by court reporter and case number.
|
Relationships (2)
Kate commented on the case against Maxwell strengthening.
Kate commented that 'the women were strengthening their stories'.
Key Quotes (4)
"There is the statement that Kate told him that the case against Ms. Maxwell was getting stronger because the women were strengthening their stories."Source
DOJ-OGR-00016634.jpg
Quote #1
"This one sort of doesn't attempt to be a quotation from Kate, so we don't know the sense in which it's going to be viewed with mental impressions from."Source
DOJ-OGR-00016634.jpg
Quote #2
"If they're offering it as an inconsistent statement with her other statements that she did give on direct, that would not be available since they didn't challenge her with a statement."Source
DOJ-OGR-00016634.jpg
Quote #3
"So then we have the 401 question."Source
DOJ-OGR-00016634.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,425 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 761 Filed 08/10/22 Page 151 of 246 2446
LCGCmax4 Loftus - direct
LCGCmax4 Loftus - direct
1 THE COURT: So what else beyond that?
2 MS. STERNHEIM: There is the statement that Kate told
3 him that the case against Ms. Maxwell was getting stronger
4 because the women were strengthening their stories.
5 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Rohrbach.
6 MR. ROHRBACH: So a few concerns about this one, your
7 Honor. This one sort of doesn't attempt to be a quotation from
8 Kate, so we don't know the sense in which it's going to be
9 viewed with mental impressions from. Mr. Hamilton is not a
10 statement that Kate was asked about on cross examination.
11 THE COURT: Pause on that point. Tell me the legal
12 basis for the pertinence of that.
13 MR. ROHRBACH: Well, to the extent that they are -- I
14 guess if they're offering it solely to show bias or motive,
15 then that wouldn't be necessary. If they're offering it as an
16 inconsistent statement with her other statements that she did
17 give on direct, that would not be available since they didn't
18 challenge her with a statement.
19 THE COURT: This is why I keep asking what's the
20 framework, because --
21 MR. ROHRBACH: If this is the bias framework again, it
22 wouldn't matter --
23 THE COURT: Is that the same contention?
24 MS. STERNHEIM: Yes, Judge.
25 THE COURT: So then we have the 401 question.
2 MS. STERNHEIM: There is the statement that Kate told
3 him that the case against Ms. Maxwell was getting stronger
4 because the women were strengthening their stories.
5 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Rohrbach.
6 MR. ROHRBACH: So a few concerns about this one, your
7 Honor. This one sort of doesn't attempt to be a quotation from
8 Kate, so we don't know the sense in which it's going to be
9 viewed with mental impressions from. Mr. Hamilton is not a
10 statement that Kate was asked about on cross examination.
11 THE COURT: Pause on that point. Tell me the legal
12 basis for the pertinence of that.
13 MR. ROHRBACH: Well, to the extent that they are -- I
14 guess if they're offering it solely to show bias or motive,
15 then that wouldn't be necessary. If they're offering it as an
16 inconsistent statement with her other statements that she did
17 give on direct, that would not be available since they didn't
18 challenge her with a statement.
19 THE COURT: This is why I keep asking what's the
20 framework, because --
21 MR. ROHRBACH: If this is the bias framework again, it
22 wouldn't matter --
23 THE COURT: Is that the same contention?
24 MS. STERNHEIM: Yes, Judge.
25 THE COURT: So then we have the 401 question.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00016634
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document