DOJ-OGR-00019135.pdf

Case 1:20-cr-00330-PAE Document 757 Filed 08/10/22 Page 11 of 49 1984 LC9VMAXT closing. MS. MODE: Your Honor, we often call summary witnesses who are not involved in the investigation who are just talking about their analysis of records. The purpose here isn't to have the summary witness talk through the investigation or investigative steps, but to talk about a review of exhibits. And I have called agents to do just that. THE COURT: But for the purposes of doing what 1006 permits, that's not what this is. I've seen it in two contexts: One, 1006 you've got a complicated, extensive set of records that are being summarized via a witness. And then you've got investigative summary witnesses who talk through factually what they did in a sense. And you're not doing either of those; you're providing essentially a closing argument or mini closing argument via a witness who has no personal involvement in the investigation and doing so, sounds like, with materials that don't require the type of 1006 summary. So you've created, I think, a little bit of a hybrid of certainly what I've seen those two exemplars, for them to be used. And so it just does sound like argument, summation, and the kind of thing that -- I mean, it's certainly true you could have done it with the witnesses. At some point I might have said, Save it for summation, counsel. But I can't say I've ever seen a version like this. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00019135