This document is a page from the defense summation (closing argument) by Ms. Menninger in the trial of Ghislaine Maxwell (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on August 10, 2022. The attorney attacks the credibility of witness Mr. Alessi, citing his inconsistent memory regarding dates (1994 vs 1999) and disputing the frequency with which he drove 'Jane'. The text then transitions to discussing the defense's expert witness, Dr. Loftus, a memory scientist intended to challenge the reliability of memories presented in the case.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Menninger | Defense Attorney |
Delivering the summation/closing argument.
|
| Mr. Alessi | Witness |
Described by the defense as lacking credibility, having poor memory, and giving inconsistent testimony regarding date...
|
| Jane | Alleged Victim/Witness |
Subject of testimony; claimed to have been driven hundreds of times, though Alessi disputed this.
|
| Jane's Mom | Parent |
Mentioned as a potential person who drove Jane to the airport.
|
| Dr. Loftus | Expert Witness |
Prominent memory scientist called by the defense to explain how human memory works.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Footer information.
|
|
| The Government |
Mentioned as wanting to minimize Dr. Loftus's testimony.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location where Jane was allegedly driven.
|
"You cannot trust this man's word, certainly not as proof beyond a reasonable doubt, of anything."Source
"Mr. Alessi does not have credible or complete or accurate information."Source
"She [Dr. Loftus] gave us a user-friendly master class on how the brain works and how human memory works."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,571 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document