DOJ-OGR-00008317.jpg
590 KB
Extraction Summary
3
People
2
Organizations
1
Locations
1
Events
3
Relationships
2
Quotes
Document Information
Type:
Legal document
File Size:
590 KB
Summary
This document is a court transcript from a hearing on December 10, 2021, in case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE. The transcript captures a discussion between the judge (THE COURT), Mr. Pagliuca, and Ms. Comey regarding pre-trial motions. The judge rules that an attorney cannot be called as a witness without prior briefing, and the parties discuss the timing and content of jury instructions for witnesses who will be testifying under pseudonyms.
People (3)
| Name | Role | Context |
|---|---|---|
| PAGLIUCA | Mr. |
An attorney, likely for the defense, speaking to the court about defense strategy and witness procedures.
|
| COMEY | Ms. |
An attorney speaking to the court, asking about preliminary instructions regarding witnesses testifying under pseudon...
|
| Minor Victim 4 | Minor Victim |
Mentioned in the context of attorney-client privilege and right to representation of counsel.
|
Organizations (2)
| Name | Type | Context |
|---|---|---|
| THE COURT | government agency |
The presiding judicial authority in the hearing, making rulings and responding to attorneys' questions.
|
| SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. | company |
The court reporting agency that transcribed the proceedings, listed at the bottom of the page.
|
Locations (1)
| Location | Context |
|---|---|
|
Mentioned as part of the name of the court reporting agency, implying the location of the court proceedings.
|
Relationships (3)
Mr. Pagliuca, an attorney, addresses the judge as 'your Honor' and engages in legal arguments and discussions.
Ms. Comey, an attorney, addresses the judge as 'your Honor' and asks procedural questions about the trial.
MR. PAGLIUCA
→
professional
→
MS. COMEY
They are opposing counsel, referred to as 'the two sides having slightly different views' on jury instructions.
Key Quotes (2)
"There will be no -- without briefing, you will not call an attorney for a witness, period."Source
— THE COURT
(The judge's ruling on the matter of calling an attorney to testify.)
DOJ-OGR-00008317.jpg
Quote #1
"We had one other question for your Honor, which is whether the Court intends to, in its preliminary instruction, inform the jury that certain witnesses will be testifying under pseudonyms."Source
— MS. COMEY
(An attorney asking the judge for clarification on how the use of pseudonyms by witnesses will be handled with the jury.)
DOJ-OGR-00008317.jpg
Quote #2
Full Extracted Text
Complete text extracted from the document (1,448 characters)
Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 536 Filed 12/10/21 Page 7 of 43 7
LBNAMAXTps
LBNAMAXTps
because of the obvious issue that would arise with
attorney-client privilege and with Minor Victim 4's right to
representation of counsel.
attorney-client privilege and with Minor Victim 4's right to
representation of counsel.
MR. PAGLIUCA: Well, first, your Honor, I don't think
that it's appropriate for me to have to discuss defense
strategy in this context. However --
that it's appropriate for me to have to discuss defense
strategy in this context. However --
THE COURT: That's fine. There will be no -- without
briefing, you will not call an attorney for a witness, period.
I'm happy to see briefing, but until that happens, you won't.
briefing, you will not call an attorney for a witness, period.
I'm happy to see briefing, but until that happens, you won't.
MR. PAGLIUCA: That's fine, your Honor.
THE COURT: OK.
MS. COMEY: Thank you, your Honor.
We had one other question for your Honor, which is
whether the Court intends to, in its preliminary instruction,
inform the jury that certain witnesses will be testifying under
pseudonyms. We wanted to know that so that we understand how
to approach that issue in our opening statement.
whether the Court intends to, in its preliminary instruction,
inform the jury that certain witnesses will be testifying under
pseudonyms. We wanted to know that so that we understand how
to approach that issue in our opening statement.
THE COURT: I think we have a pending proposal, with
the two sides having slightly different views as to what
language to use for those instructions. I haven't dealt with
that yet, but I will. And then I guess the second question
you're asking is, will I include that in my preliminary
instructions as opposed to at the time the first witness is
called. It should come before opening, I presume, because
you'll refer to witnesses pursuant to pseudonyms during
the two sides having slightly different views as to what
language to use for those instructions. I haven't dealt with
that yet, but I will. And then I guess the second question
you're asking is, will I include that in my preliminary
instructions as opposed to at the time the first witness is
called. It should come before opening, I presume, because
you'll refer to witnesses pursuant to pseudonyms during
SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.
(212) 805-0300
(212) 805-0300
DOJ-OGR-00008317
Discussion 0
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document