["MR. EVERDELL"]
PersonRelationship Network
Ruling on objections
The Court overrules objections to paragraphs 9, and 30 through 38, concerning the inclusion of Kate's name and the characterization of the defendant grooming Jane.
Sentencing arguments
The judge invites Mr. Everdell to make additional arguments beyond his written submissions regarding sentencing.
Procedure for displaying electronic evidence to a witness...
The Court expresses concerns about using electronic evidence that might identify a witness testifying under a pseudonym, especially with screens viewable by the gallery. The Court agrees to the proposed method of using specific screens (judge's, witness's, deputy's) as long as the government can clearly see what the witness is being shown and paper backups are available.
Evidence and witnesses
The Court questions whether the information about the files is already in evidence and asks about the witness who extracted the data.
Admissibility of testimony
The Court asks for the basis for the government not to admit testimony.
Admitting exhibits
The Court addresses Mr. Everdell regarding the admission of exhibits.
Courtroom procedure for handling documents and witness an...
The judge (THE COURT) and an attorney (MR. EVERDELL) discuss the logistics of using paper binders for jurors and witnesses. The judge emphasizes the need to protect the anonymity of witnesses, ensuring their names are not published to the wider courtroom, while Mr. Everdell outlines the plan to place binders in the witness box and under jurors' chairs.
Government objection to an exhibit
The Court discusses a government objection to an exhibit, which is a 1996 sale agreement for a house in London, and asks Mr. Everdell if it has a trial mark for identification.
Procedure for displaying electronic evidence to a witness...
The Court expresses concerns about accidentally identifying a witness testifying under a pseudonym due to courtroom screen visibility. The Court agrees to a proposal to show evidence only on the judge's, witness's, and deputy's screens, on the condition that the government is clear on what is being shown and that paper backups are available.
Timeline of Ms. Maxwell's property ownership and residency
The Court questions Mr. Everdell to confirm that the purpose of the evidence is to prove Ms. Maxwell did not live at the property before 1996.
Time Estimate for Questioning
The Court asks Mr. Everdell for a time estimate for his questioning of the witness.
Relevance of ownership vs. residence
The Court questions the relevance of ownership records, stating that the key issue is Ms. Maxwell's residence, which the government has testimony about from 1992.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity