EpsteinProject.org

House Oversight — DOJ production

DOJ-OGR-00008395

Format
pdf
File
549-01.pdf
Set
House Oversight (DOJ)
Pages
24
Text
Searchable
Text confidence
91%

View at the original source

Text as released

Machine-read from the scan. Names, dates and numbers can be misread — check anything you rely on against the original page.

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 549-1 Filed 12/17/21 Page1of 24 Exhibit A DOJ-OGR-00008395 

be No Ww ws Ol OY ~] oe) WO   a ie) 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 549-1 Filed 12/17/21 Page 2 of 24 LB1TMAX1         eq ed) = ‘D STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK                             Gq Z =   'D STATES OF AMERICA,   Vv. 20 CR 330 (AJN)         GHISLAINE MAXWELL, Defendant.   New York, N.Y. November 1, 2021 11:05 a.m. Before: HON. ALISON J. NATHAN, District Judge APPEARANCES DAMIAN WILLIAMS United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York ALISON MOE MAURENE COMEY ANDREW ROHRBACH LARA POMERANTZ Assistant United States Attorney   COHEN & GRESSER Attorneys for Defendant CHRISTIAN EVERDELL     HADDON MORGAN FOREMAN Attorneys for Defendant JEFFREY PAGLIUCA LAURA MENNINGER     =               BOBBI C. STERNHEIM Attorney for Defendant   SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300     1 DOJ-OGR-00008396

be No Ww ws Ol OY ~] oe) WO   a ie) 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 549-1 Filed 12/17/21 Page 3 of 24 15 LB1TMAX1     to rehabilitate a witness attacked on another ground. It's 801 (d) (1) (B) (ii). For example, the statement could be admitted     to explain what would otherwise appear to be an inconsistency     in the witness's statement and rebut a charge of faulty memory.   United States v. Purcell, 967 F.3d 159, (2d Cir. 2020).             If it becomes relevant, the government may offer prior statements before the witness testifies if the defense attacks the credibility in opening statements and it's clear that the     witness will be subject to cross-examination. United States v. Flores, 945 F.3d 687, (2d Cir. 2019). That's restating the applicable law here that the parties appear to agree to in the briefs. The government doesn't anticipate any such effort to offer such statements at this time and won't mention any in opening beyond that. Is there anything specific to flag or discuss here, from the

[…]

Open in the archive