DOJ-OGR-00017326.jpg
588 KB
Extraction Summary
4
People
2
Organizations
2
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court transcript
File Size:
588 KB
Summary
A page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) involving legal arguments over jury instructions for 'Count Four' (a transportation count). Attorneys Ms. Moe and Ms. Sternheim debate how to address a jury question concerning whether flights to New Mexico can be considered for a charge based on New York Penal Law Section 130.55. The defense (Sternheim) argues the jury is confused about jurisdiction.
People (4)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Moe | Attorney (Prosecution) |
Arguing regarding jury instructions and New York Penal Law.
|
| Ms. Sternheim | Attorney (Defense) |
Bobbi Sternheim, raising concerns about the jury's confusion regarding New Mexico/New York jurisdiction.
|
| The Court | Judge |
Presiding over the discussion.
|
| She | Defendant |
Implicitly Ghislaine Maxwell, referred to regarding 'can she be found guilty'.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Southern District Reporters, P.C. | ||
| DOJ |
Timeline (1 events)
2022-08-10
Court proceedings regarding jury questions on Count Four (transportation count) and jurisdiction issues between New York and New Mexico.
Courtroom (Southern District of New York)
Locations (2)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Jurisdiction for Count Four; location of relevant laws.
|
|
|
Location of flights mentioned by the jury.
|
Relationships (1)
Arguing different positions regarding how to answer the jury's question.
Key Quotes (4)
"can she be found guilty on the second element of Count Four regarding these flights to New Mexico."Source
DOJ-OGR-00017326.jpg
Quote #1
"violations of New York law, which wouldn't occur in New Mexico"Source
DOJ-OGR-00017326.jpg
Quote #2
"we're talking about New York Penal Law, Section 130.55."Source
DOJ-OGR-00017326.jpg
Quote #3
"I think the fact that the jury has mentioned New Mexico regarding a count that pertains to New York is not just cleared up by referring them to the"Source
DOJ-OGR-00017326.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,485 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 773 Filed 08/10/22 Page 22 of 29 3139
LCRVMAXT
LCRVMAXT
1 which is the substantive transportation count, which, as we
2 know, has to deal with the violation of New York law. And they
3 are talking about flights to New Mexico; and can she be found
4 guilty on the second element of Count Four regarding these
5 flights to New Mexico.
6 So I think we may have to respond to the jury on that
7 score as well, which is the fact that they have to be
8 considering New York events for Count Four, rather than -- or
9 violations of New York law, which wouldn't occur in New Mexico
10 for there to be a conviction on Count Four.
11 MS. MOE: Your Honor, I think that's exactly why we
12 proposed directing the jurors to the entirety of the
13 instruction, which says just that. The second paragraph of
14 that same instruction reminds the jury, as the instruction does
15 throughout, that we're talking about New York Penal Law,
16 Section 130.55. And so I think our proposal remains the same
17 that they be referred to the entirety of the instruction, which
18 includes that language, among other aspects of this particular
19 element.
20 THE COURT: Yes.
21 MS. STERNHEIM: Judge, may I be heard for a moment?
22 THE COURT: Sure.
23 MS. STERNHEIM: I think the fact that the jury has
24 mentioned New Mexico regarding a count that pertains to New
25 York is not just cleared up by referring them to the
2 know, has to deal with the violation of New York law. And they
3 are talking about flights to New Mexico; and can she be found
4 guilty on the second element of Count Four regarding these
5 flights to New Mexico.
6 So I think we may have to respond to the jury on that
7 score as well, which is the fact that they have to be
8 considering New York events for Count Four, rather than -- or
9 violations of New York law, which wouldn't occur in New Mexico
10 for there to be a conviction on Count Four.
11 MS. MOE: Your Honor, I think that's exactly why we
12 proposed directing the jurors to the entirety of the
13 instruction, which says just that. The second paragraph of
14 that same instruction reminds the jury, as the instruction does
15 throughout, that we're talking about New York Penal Law,
16 Section 130.55. And so I think our proposal remains the same
17 that they be referred to the entirety of the instruction, which
18 includes that language, among other aspects of this particular
19 element.
20 THE COURT: Yes.
21 MS. STERNHEIM: Judge, may I be heard for a moment?
22 THE COURT: Sure.
23 MS. STERNHEIM: I think the fact that the jury has
24 mentioned New Mexico regarding a count that pertains to New
25 York is not just cleared up by referring them to the
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00017326
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document