This document is a page from a court transcript filed on August 22, 2022, for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell). Defense attorney Mr. Everdell argues that a 'bequest' listed in the defendant's financial affidavit should not be considered an asset for the purpose of calculating fines because the source estate is in bankruptcy and paying out victims' claims, making the asset 'tenuous.' The Court questions the status of the bequest and asks Ms. Moe (likely the prosecution) for a response.
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Mr. Everdell | Defense Attorney |
Argues that a bequest listed in financial documents should not be calculated for fines due to the bankruptcy of the e...
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, questioning the status of the bequest assets.
|
| Ms. Moe | Prosecutor/Attorney |
Asked by the court to respond to Mr. Everdell's argument.
|
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Listed in footer.
|
|
| The Estate |
Refers to the estate (implied Epstein estate) undergoing bankruptcy and dealing with victims' claims.
|
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Implied by 'Southern District Reporters' and case number format.
|
"the estate is undergoing bankruptcy proceedings."Source
"I think the estate is still dealing with victims' claims and other claims against the estate."Source
"we don't know if there will be any money left at the end of that proceeding to honor the bequest."Source
"that's one of the many reasons why I think this is such a tenuous asset that it shouldn't be considered for purposes of fines."Source
Complete text extracted from the document (1,543 characters)
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document