DOJ-OGR-00005772.jpg
814 KB
Extraction Summary
5
People
3
Organizations
2
Locations
1
Events
1
Relationships
4
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Court filing / legal motion
File Size:
814 KB
Summary
This document is page 7 of a legal filing (Document 395) from the Ghislaine Maxwell trial (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE), filed on October 29, 2021. The text presents legal arguments citing various case precedents to contend that the prosecution and the Court should not refer to accusers as 'victims' or 'minor victims.' The filing argues that such terminology improperly influences the jury, implies guilt before a verdict, and specifically prejudices the charge regarding whether Maxwell knew the accusers were underage.
People (5)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Ms. Maxwell | Defendant |
The document argues that referring to accusers as 'minor victims' prejudices the case against her regarding knowledge...
|
| Young | Case Citation Subject |
Referenced in United States v. Young regarding prosecutorial conduct.
|
| Devey | Case Citation Subject |
Referenced regarding improper vouching for credibility.
|
| Philpot | Case Citation Subject |
Referenced in State v. Philpot regarding jury influence.
|
| Fritzinger | Case Citation Subject |
Referenced in Fritzinger v. State regarding judicial reference to witnesses as victims.
|
Organizations (3)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| ABA |
American Bar Association, cited for Criminal Justice Standards.
|
|
| United States District Court |
Implied by header Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE.
|
|
| DOJ |
Department of Justice, indicated in the footer stamp.
|
Timeline (1 events)
Relationships (1)
Text refers to 'Ms. Maxwell knew the accusers were less than eighteen years old'
Key Quotes (4)
"The prosecutor should not argue in terms of counsel’s personal opinion, and should not imply special or secret knowledge of the truth or of witness credibility."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005772.jpg
Quote #1
"When the government uses the term “victim,” however, it improperly vouches for the credibility of the accusers."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005772.jpg
Quote #2
"A judicial reference to the jury that a complaining witness is a ‘victim’ implicitly tells the jury that the judge believes that a crime has been committed."Source
DOJ-OGR-00005772.jpg
Quote #3
"Referring to the accusers as “minor victims” not only supposes the accusers were victims at all, but it also conveys the speaker’s belief that Ms. Maxwell knew they were “minors.”"Source
DOJ-OGR-00005772.jpg
Quote #4
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (2,521 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 395 Filed 10/29/21 Page 7 of 9
In view of this special role, “The prosecutor should not argue in terms of counsel’s
personal opinion, and should not imply special or secret knowledge of the truth or of witness
credibility.” ABA Criminal Justice Standards, Prosecution Function, Standard 3-6.8, Closing
Arguments to the Trier of Fact (4th ed. 2017). To do otherwise poses two distinct dangers:
personal opinion, and should not imply special or secret knowledge of the truth or of witness
credibility.” ABA Criminal Justice Standards, Prosecution Function, Standard 3-6.8, Closing
Arguments to the Trier of Fact (4th ed. 2017). To do otherwise poses two distinct dangers:
such comments can convey the impression that evidence not present to the jury, but
known to the prosecutor, supports the charges against the defendant and can thus
jeopardize the defendant’s right to be tried solely on the basis of the evidence
presented to the jury; and the prosecutor’s opinion carries with it the imprimatur of
the Government and may induce the jury to trust the Government’s judgment rather
than its own view of the evidence.
known to the prosecutor, supports the charges against the defendant and can thus
jeopardize the defendant’s right to be tried solely on the basis of the evidence
presented to the jury; and the prosecutor’s opinion carries with it the imprimatur of
the Government and may induce the jury to trust the Government’s judgment rather
than its own view of the evidence.
United States v. Young, 470 U.S. 1, 18-19 (1985). When the government uses the term “victim,”
however, it improperly vouches for the credibility of the accusers. E.g., Devey, 138 P.3d at 95.
however, it improperly vouches for the credibility of the accusers. E.g., Devey, 138 P.3d at 95.
It is even more important for the Court to refrain from referring to the accusers as
“victims” or “minor victims.” This Court serves as the neutral arbiter of the law. And
“victims” or “minor victims.” This Court serves as the neutral arbiter of the law. And
it is a matter of common knowledge that jurors hang tenaciously upon remarks
made by the court during the progress of the trial, and if, perchance, they are
enabled to discover the views of the court regarding the effect of a witness’
testimony or the merits of the case, they almost invariably follow them.
made by the court during the progress of the trial, and if, perchance, they are
enabled to discover the views of the court regarding the effect of a witness’
testimony or the merits of the case, they almost invariably follow them.
State v. Philpot, 66 N.W. 730, 732 (Iowa 1896). Thus,
A judicial reference to the jury that a complaining witness is a ‘victim’ implicitly
tells the jury that the judge believes that a crime has been committed. For a judge
to communicate to the jury that witnesses were victimized, in a case where the
defense is that the conduct about which the complaining witness testifies never
occurred, prejudices that defendant unfairly.
tells the jury that the judge believes that a crime has been committed. For a judge
to communicate to the jury that witnesses were victimized, in a case where the
defense is that the conduct about which the complaining witness testifies never
occurred, prejudices that defendant unfairly.
Fritzinger v. State, 10 A.3d 603, 610 (Del. 2010).
There is a final reason no trial participant should refer to the accusers as “minor victims.”
Several charges in this case require proof that Ms. Maxwell knew the accusers were less than
eighteen years old at the time of the alleged conduct. Referring to the accusers as “minor
victims” not only supposes the accusers were victims at all, but it also conveys the speaker’s
belief that Ms. Maxwell knew they were “minors.” In this other way, referring to the accusers as
Several charges in this case require proof that Ms. Maxwell knew the accusers were less than
eighteen years old at the time of the alleged conduct. Referring to the accusers as “minor
victims” not only supposes the accusers were victims at all, but it also conveys the speaker’s
belief that Ms. Maxwell knew they were “minors.” In this other way, referring to the accusers as
4
DOJ-OGR-00005772
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document