Jurors want to scrutinize this FBI note from Carolyn's interview in 2007.
Here's the thing:
Notes from FBI interviews are NOT evidence. Jurors want to know the basis of Carolyn's cross-examination, showing they appear to be engaging with the defense here.
Here's the thing:
Notes from FBI interviews are NOT evidence. Jurors want to know the basis of Carolyn's cross-examination, showing they appear to be engaging with the defense here.
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1468300704431362055
Jurors appear also to have some confusion about the role about FBI 302s.
More on the background of FBI 302s and the law here, courtesy of @MitchellEpner.
More on the background of FBI 302s and the law here, courtesy of @MitchellEpner.
https://twitter.com/KlasfeldReports/status/1466087126102065160?s=20
NECESSARY DISCLAIMER:
It is generally counterproductive to read the tea leaves from jury notes, which represent snapshots from their deliberations.
We don't know what inside the note sparked the debate.
That said, they do provide a window into what they're scrutinizing.
It is generally counterproductive to read the tea leaves from jury notes, which represent snapshots from their deliberations.
We don't know what inside the note sparked the debate.
That said, they do provide a window into what they're scrutinizing.
Also, the phrasing of the court's instruction makes clear that the document that jurors requested is not an admitted exhibit, but the testimony alluding to it is before them.
Essentially, jurors want to scrutinize the FBI's notes of unrecorded interviews that are not verbatim transcripts, which are unable to be entered into evidence because they cannot be authenticated.
In fact, jurors called it an FBI "deposition" — which it isn't. They're unauthenticated notes. That confusion would appear to benefit the defense, suggesting at least one of them is giving it the weight of one.
After the proceedings regarding this note, Maxwell's lawyer Bobbi Sternheim appeared to be smiling ear to ear in a conversation with someone in the front of the gallery.
Maxwell also appeared to be more upbeat than when she entered.
Maxwell also appeared to be more upbeat than when she entered.
I unpack all of this on the @LawCrimeNetwork in this chat with @Angenette5
https://twitter.com/cathyrusson/status/1473393565560541186?s=20
Final note:
U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan sent back an instruction: "All admitted exhibits are before you," along with a reminder that the testimony about the FBI notes are before them.
Perhaps we'll see if that dispels any confusion.
U.S. District Judge Alison Nathan sent back an instruction: "All admitted exhibits are before you," along with a reminder that the testimony about the FBI notes are before them.
Perhaps we'll see if that dispels any confusion.
To be absolutely clear:
Jurors will not see those FBI notes, which are not in evidence.
Carolyn's testimony is key to the top count of sex trafficking.
Jurors will not see those FBI notes, which are not in evidence.
Carolyn's testimony is key to the top count of sex trafficking.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
