| 1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950515253545556 |
- {
- "document_metadata": {
- "page_number": "77",
- "document_number": "767",
- "date": "08/10/22",
- "document_type": "court transcript",
- "has_handwriting": false,
- "has_stamps": false
- },
- "full_text": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 77 of 257 2910 LCKVMAX4 in 2004 during the sex trafficking conspiracy. THE COURT: All right. Overruled. Anything else? MR. PAGLIUCA: Yes, your Honor. This relates to Exhibit 52, which are the pages from the book that were admitted. The Court admitted those over our hearsay objection with the limiting instruction. And the government assured the Court, when the Court was making this decision, that they weren't going to argue the truth of the matter contained in any of the books. And what we heard in closing argument was exactly that, that there are names in the books. And you can then infer from those names that those might be the people that were being discussed by Jane as having the sexualized massages; that they were reading the words mom, dad, phone numbers, and suggesting that that's how Ms. Maxwell had to have known that these individuals were minors. Again, that's the truth of the matter asserted; it's not for the limited purpose that the Court instructed the jury. My request, your Honor, my application, first, is that the Court declare a mistrial based on the misuse of that evidence. If the Court is not inclined to do that, I believe the Court should reinstruct the jurors about the limited purpose, instruct the jurors that they can't infer what the government was suggesting they could infer from that argument. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00014477",
- "text_blocks": [
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 767 Filed 08/10/22 Page 77 of 257 2910 LCKVMAX4",
- "position": "header"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "in 2004 during the sex trafficking conspiracy. THE COURT: All right. Overruled. Anything else? MR. PAGLIUCA: Yes, your Honor. This relates to Exhibit 52, which are the pages from the book that were admitted. The Court admitted those over our hearsay objection with the limiting instruction. And the government assured the Court, when the Court was making this decision, that they weren't going to argue the truth of the matter contained in any of the books. And what we heard in closing argument was exactly that, that there are names in the books. And you can then infer from those names that those might be the people that were being discussed by Jane as having the sexualized massages; that they were reading the words mom, dad, phone numbers, and suggesting that that's how Ms. Maxwell had to have known that these individuals were minors. Again, that's the truth of the matter asserted; it's not for the limited purpose that the Court instructed the jury. My request, your Honor, my application, first, is that the Court declare a mistrial based on the misuse of that evidence. If the Court is not inclined to do that, I believe the Court should reinstruct the jurors about the limited purpose, instruct the jurors that they can't infer what the government was suggesting they could infer from that argument.",
- "position": "main content"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300",
- "position": "footer"
- },
- {
- "type": "printed",
- "content": "DOJ-OGR-00014477",
- "position": "footer"
- }
- ],
- "entities": {
- "people": [
- "Jane",
- "Ms. Maxwell",
- "PAGLIUCA"
- ],
- "organizations": [
- "SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C."
- ],
- "locations": [],
- "dates": [
- "2004",
- "08/10/22"
- ],
- "reference_numbers": [
- "1:20-cr-00330-PAE",
- "767",
- "52",
- "DOJ-OGR-00014477",
- "(212) 805-0300"
- ]
- },
- "additional_notes": "The document appears to be a court transcript with a clear and legible format. There are no visible redactions or damage."
- }
|