This document is a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a dialogue between the judge and attorneys after the jury has been dismissed, focusing on procedural matters such as the government's review of transcripts and the defense's readiness to proceed. The judge also outlines instructions for contacting the alternate jurors to inform them that deliberations are ongoing.
This document is a court transcript in which a judge gives instructions to the jury. The judge addresses the jury's schedule, the procedure for beginning deliberations, a potential deliberation date of December 23rd, and reminds them of the courthouse mask policy and the strict rule against discussing the case outside of formal deliberation.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It details a sidebar or open court discussion during jury deliberations where the Judge addresses a question from the jury, confirms the schedule for dismissal at 5:00 PM, and arranges lunch for the following day. The Judge also notes a directive from the Chief Judge requiring masks to be worn in the jury room due to a COVID-19 variant.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a debate between attorneys (Ms. Comey and Mr. Everdell) and the judge regarding a jury question. The core issue is whether the testimony of a witness named Annie can be considered for conspiracy counts, given a prior instruction that it did not describe illegal sexual activity. The judge rules that the testimony is relevant and permissible for the jury to consider in relation to the conspiracy counts.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, capturing a legal discussion between a judge, Mr. Everdell, and Ms. Comey. The central issue is whether a limiting instruction should be given to the jury regarding the testimony of a witness named Annie, and how her testimony relates to specific counts (One, Two, Three, and Four) in an indictment. The parties disagree on the necessity and scope of such an instruction, with the judge ultimately asserting that the answer to the underlying question is 'yes'.
This court transcript from August 10, 2022, captures a discussion between a judge and multiple counsel regarding a note from the jury. The jury, via Court Exhibit 9, asks if they can consider 'Annie's testimony' as evidence of conspiracy for two specific counts. The government's counsel, Ms. Comey, affirms this, while another counsel, Mr. Everdell, requests time to confer on the matter.
This document is a court transcript from a case (1:20-cr-00330-PAE) filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a discussion between two attorneys, Ms. Comey and Ms. Sternheim, and the Judge regarding the jury's deliberation schedule around the Christmas holiday. The main point of discussion is whether to offer the jury the option to deliberate on Thursday, December 23rd, and the importance of informing them promptly to allow for personal arrangements, such as childcare.
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It captures a discussion between the judge and several attorneys (Mr. Pagliuca, Ms. Menninger, Ms. Sternheim) regarding the scheduling of jury deliberations. The judge sets the hours for the following day and considers the possibility of the jury working on an upcoming Thursday, noting that the court is not always closed before Christmas Eve.
A court transcript page (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) documenting a discussion between the Judge ('The Court') and attorneys (Ms. Sternheim, Ms. Menninger, Ms. Comey) regarding the handling and redaction of jury notes. The parties discuss that counsel knows the identity of jurors, allowing them to see unredacted notes, but public exhibits must be redacted. The transcript ends with the Court reading a note from the jury requesting to end deliberations at 5 p.m.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a legal argument between attorneys Mr. Pagliuca and Ms. Comey. They are debating whether the testimony of Special Agent Jason Richards is a relevant response to a jury note concerning an FBI deposition and the cross-examination of a person named Carolyn. The Court ultimately overrules the request to include the testimony but agrees to redact the jury foreperson's name from the notes before making them public.
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022. It details a conversation between the judge and several individuals, likely attorneys, regarding testimony from 'Carolyn' and 'Special Agent Jason Richards' concerning an exhibit. The discussion concludes with a request for court notes, which the judge agrees to provide after redacting the jury foreperson's signature.
This document is a court transcript from a case filed on August 10, 2022, capturing a discussion between counsel (Ms. Comey and Mr. Pagliuca) and the judge. The main topic is how to properly respond to a jury's request for a specific document that has not been admitted into evidence, although testimony about the document has been presented. The lawyers and judge debate the precise wording of the response to avoid confusing the jury or improperly influencing their view of the existing evidence.
This document is a page from a court transcript dated August 10, 2022. It captures a discussion between two attorneys, Ms. Comey and Mr. Pagliuca, and the judge regarding how to instruct the jury about a document used for impeachment but not admitted into evidence. The parties debate the appropriate wording to avoid confusion while acknowledging the testimony related to the document.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE) dated August 10, 2022, during jury deliberations. The jury sent notes requesting testimony transcripts for witnesses Jane, Annie, and Carolyn, as well as an FBI deposition (3505-005) related to Carolyn. Counsel (Ms. Comey and Ms. Sternheim) discuss preparing these documents with necessary redactions.
This document is the cover page of a court transcript for the jury trial of Ghislaine Maxwell, held on December 21, 2021, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. It identifies the case number, the presiding judge (Hon. Alison J. Nathan), and lists the appearances of the legal counsel for both the prosecution (United States of America) and the defense, as well as other individuals present from the FBI and NYPD.
This document is the final page of a court transcript from case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. The transcript captures the end of a day's proceedings, where the judge (THE COURT) confirms with counsel (Ms. Moe for the government and Ms. Sternheim) that there are no further matters. The court is then adjourned until 9:00 a.m. on December 21, 2021.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It records the end of a trial day during the jury deliberation phase, where the judge acknowledges a note from the jury to leave at 5:30 PM and provides strict instructions not to discuss the case or consume outside information. The judge instructs the jury to resume deliberations the following morning at 9:00 AM once all 12 jurors are present.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between the judge and two attorneys, Ms. Moe and Ms. Menninger, regarding a juror seating chart. The judge then reads a note from the deliberating jury stating they are leaving at 5:30 PM. The judge announces the note will be marked as an exhibit and that the jury will be given instructions to resume deliberations in the morning.
This document is a page from a court transcript (Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell) filed on August 10, 2022. It records the final moments of the trial before jury deliberations began, including the dismissal of alternate jurors, the swearing-in of a U.S. Marshal to safeguard deliberations, and the official start of deliberations at 4:49 p.m. Ms. Williams is identified as a court official managing logistics for the jurors and exhibits.
This document is a court transcript from August 10, 2022, detailing a conversation between a judge and several attorneys (Ms. Sternheim, Mr. Pagliuca, Mr. Everdell) about the procedures for jury deliberations. The judge outlines the schedule, including a 9:00 a.m. start time, and clarifies that exhibits will be provided automatically to the jury. The discussion also covers the roles of court staff like the deputy and marshal in managing the jury process.
This document is a court transcript from a sidebar conversation on August 10, 2022. The judge discusses with counsel the procedures for alternate jurors, deciding they can be on-call due to the pandemic, rather than remaining at the courthouse. The judge also confirms the specific numbers of the five alternate jurors with the agreement of all counsel present.
This document is page 250 of 257 from a court transcript for Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (USA v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. The brief text records the presiding official asking the courtroom to remain quiet for a final sidebar during the 'Charge' phase of the proceedings. The page contains significant whitespace as the proceedings continued on the next page.
This document is page 3082 of a court transcript from Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE (United States v. Ghislaine Maxwell), filed on August 10, 2022. It contains the judge's charge to the jury, instructing them to reach a verdict based solely on evidence and the law, without being swayed by sympathy or consequences. The text also outlines the protocol for deliberations, emphasizing that every juror should be heard, no one should dominate the room, and jurors should be open to changing their views while maintaining honest convictions.
This document is a transcript of a judge's charge to the jury in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE, filed on August 10, 2022. The judge provides final instructions before deliberations, covering communication protocols with the court, the proper use of personal notes, and the jury's duty to weigh the evidence. The core task outlined is for the jury to determine if the government has proven its case against the defendant, Ms. Maxwell, beyond a reasonable doubt.
This document is a court transcript of a judge's instructions to a jury in the criminal case against Ms. Maxwell. The judge outlines the procedures for deliberation, including the election of a foreperson, the method for communicating with the court via written notes, and the process for requesting testimony. Crucially, the judge explicitly instructs the jury not to consider punishment in their deliberations, focusing solely on the evidence to determine guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein entity