DOJ-OGR-00014779.jpg
640 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
3
Organizations
0
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
640 KB
Summary
This document is page 32 of a court transcript from the Ghislaine Maxwell case (filed Aug 22, 2022). The defense counsel argues against a sentencing enhancement for a leadership role by claiming Maxwell did not supervise Sarah Kellen. Instead, citing testimony from witnesses Carolyn and Juan Alessi, the defense asserts that Sarah Kellen replaced Maxwell in the specific task of scheduling massage appointments, with a clear break between their tenures in that role.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ghislaine Maxwell | Defendant |
Referred to as 'Ms. Maxwell' and 'the defendant'. The defense is arguing she did not supervise Sarah Kellen.
|
| Sarah Kellen | Associate/Employee |
Subject of the argument regarding supervision. Described as replacing Maxwell in scheduling massage appointments.
|
| Carolyn | Witness |
Provided trial testimony regarding who called her to schedule massages (Maxwell vs. Kellen).
|
| Juan Alessi | Witness |
Former employee whose testimony corroborated the timeline of Sarah Kellen taking over scheduling duties.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Second Circuit |
Court of Appeals referenced for legal standards regarding supervision of criminal participants.
|
|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Transcription service listed in the footer.
|
|
| The Government |
Prosecution, mentioned as conceding a point regarding guidelines.
|
Timeline (2 events)
August 22, 2022
Filing of court transcript Document 779 in Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE.
Southern District of New York (implied by case number and reporter)
Defense Counsel
Court
Past (Trial)
Testimony given by Carolyn and Juan Alessi regarding the roles of Maxwell and Kellen.
Courtroom
Relationships (2)
Counsel argues Kellen replaced Maxwell in scheduling duties rather than being supervised by her.
Alessi testified Kellen arrived at the end of his employment and took over scheduling.
Key Quotes (2)
"I don't think it is a fair inference to say from the trial record that Ms. Maxwell was supervising Sarah Kellen."Source
DOJ-OGR-00014779.jpg
Quote #1
"Sarah Kellen replaced Ms. Maxwell, at least according to the trial testimony; not that there was some sort of ongoing supervision by Ms. Maxwell over Sarah Kellen."Source
DOJ-OGR-00014779.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,628 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 779 Filed 08/22/22 Page 32 of 101 32
M6SQmax1
M6SQmax1
1 already been decided or conceded by the defendant. The court
2 found they were leader or the defendant didn't contest that, so
3 the issue was only about whether the criminal activity was
4 otherwise extensive. So that is not -- that is clear under
5 Second Circuit law, that they have to supervise another
6 criminal participant, and it's clear from the guidelines too,
7 as the government concedes.
8 Let's just talk a bit about Sarah Kellen. I don't
9 think it is a fair inference to say from the trial record that
10 Ms. Maxwell was supervising Sarah Kellen. In fact, the
11 inference is exactly the opposite. And you can rely on
12 Carolyn's testimony alone for that; that she herself testified
13 that there was a clear break between when she says that
14 Ms. Maxwell was calling her to schedule for massage
15 appointments versus when Sarah Kellen took over and scheduled
16 for massage appointments. They did not overlap. There was a
17 break. That is corroborated by Juan Alessi no less, who said
18 the same thing. He said Sarah Kellen came at the end of my
19 employment, to his recollection, and as soon as she got there,
20 she took over the responsibility of scheduling the massage
21 appointments. Again, a clear break.
22 What the record shows is that there was a replacement.
23 Sarah Kellen replaced Ms. Maxwell, at least according to the
24 trial testimony; not that there was some sort of ongoing
25 supervision by Ms. Maxwell over Sarah Kellen. It couldn't be
2 found they were leader or the defendant didn't contest that, so
3 the issue was only about whether the criminal activity was
4 otherwise extensive. So that is not -- that is clear under
5 Second Circuit law, that they have to supervise another
6 criminal participant, and it's clear from the guidelines too,
7 as the government concedes.
8 Let's just talk a bit about Sarah Kellen. I don't
9 think it is a fair inference to say from the trial record that
10 Ms. Maxwell was supervising Sarah Kellen. In fact, the
11 inference is exactly the opposite. And you can rely on
12 Carolyn's testimony alone for that; that she herself testified
13 that there was a clear break between when she says that
14 Ms. Maxwell was calling her to schedule for massage
15 appointments versus when Sarah Kellen took over and scheduled
16 for massage appointments. They did not overlap. There was a
17 break. That is corroborated by Juan Alessi no less, who said
18 the same thing. He said Sarah Kellen came at the end of my
19 employment, to his recollection, and as soon as she got there,
20 she took over the responsibility of scheduling the massage
21 appointments. Again, a clear break.
22 What the record shows is that there was a replacement.
23 Sarah Kellen replaced Ms. Maxwell, at least according to the
24 trial testimony; not that there was some sort of ongoing
25 supervision by Ms. Maxwell over Sarah Kellen. It couldn't be
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00014779
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00014779
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document