DOJ-OGR-00018933.jpg
606 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
2
Events
2
Relationships
3
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
606 KB
Summary
This page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, likely US v. Ghislaine Maxwell) details a legal argument between the prosecution (Ms. Moe) and the Judge regarding the admissibility of phone message logs. The prosecution argues these logs are business records that corroborate victim testimony about calling 'the house' to schedule massage appointments. The document specifically notes that the name of a victim who testified the previous day appears in these messages.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Moe | Attorney (Prosecution) |
Arguing for the admissibility of phone message logs as business records.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the hearing, questioning the legal basis (hearsay/business records) for admitting evidence.
|
| Hesse | Witness |
Mentioned in the header 'Hesse - direct', indicating this is during the direct examination of a witness named Hesse.
|
| Unnamed Victim | Victim/Witness |
Referenced as a victim who 'testified yesterday' whose name appears in the phone messages.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. |
Creator of the transcript.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice (indicated by DOJ-OGR stamp).
|
Timeline (2 events)
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Location where victims called to schedule massage appointments (likely an Epstein property).
|
Relationships (2)
Testimony describes victims 'calling the house' and being involved in 'scheduling massage appointments.'
Ms. Moe states 'this witness has testified that they would receive these calls, memorialize it at the same time'.
Key Quotes (3)
"That is consistent with the testimony of victims who described calling the house and the name of a victim who testified yesterday is in these messages."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018933.jpg
Quote #1
"The names are also consistent with the names of other individuals who witnesses have testified about contacting the house and being involved in scheduling massage appointments."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018933.jpg
Quote #2
"So it's confirming that a person identifying themselves that way contacted the house at that time."Source
DOJ-OGR-00018933.jpg
Quote #3
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,510 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 755 Filed 08/10/22 Page 71 of 262 1776
LC8Cmax3 Hesse - direct
LC8Cmax3 Hesse - direct
1 way we offered similar messages through a previous witness.
2 THE COURT: So you have to take the objection when it
3 comes. I don't think there is a waiver theory as to future
4 objections.
5 Are you seeking to offer the names and phone numbers
6 for their truth?
7 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. And here, this witness has
8 testified that they would receive these calls, memorialize it
9 at the same time the person was recording it. And here, we're
10 not offering this for the truth of the particular phone number,
11 but that a person identifying themselves that way had called
12 and left a message on that date. That is consistent with the
13 testimony of victims who described calling the house and the
14 name of a victim who testified yesterday is in these messages.
15 The names are also consistent with the names of other
16 individuals who witnesses have testified about contacting the
17 house and being involved in scheduling massage appointments.
18 So with respect to the business records issue, here,
19 this witness has testified --
20 THE COURT: So the contention is that it's a business
21 record?
22 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. In addition, it's
23 memorializing the statement of the person calling at the time
24 they made it. So it's confirming that a person identifying
25 themselves that way contacted the house at that time.
2 THE COURT: So you have to take the objection when it
3 comes. I don't think there is a waiver theory as to future
4 objections.
5 Are you seeking to offer the names and phone numbers
6 for their truth?
7 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. And here, this witness has
8 testified that they would receive these calls, memorialize it
9 at the same time the person was recording it. And here, we're
10 not offering this for the truth of the particular phone number,
11 but that a person identifying themselves that way had called
12 and left a message on that date. That is consistent with the
13 testimony of victims who described calling the house and the
14 name of a victim who testified yesterday is in these messages.
15 The names are also consistent with the names of other
16 individuals who witnesses have testified about contacting the
17 house and being involved in scheduling massage appointments.
18 So with respect to the business records issue, here,
19 this witness has testified --
20 THE COURT: So the contention is that it's a business
21 record?
22 MS. MOE: Yes, your Honor. In addition, it's
23 memorializing the statement of the person calling at the time
24 they made it. So it's confirming that a person identifying
25 themselves that way contacted the house at that time.
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00018933
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document